Denis Fodor wrote:

>I've just made a point of listening to the sounds around me. The only sound
>even vaguely suggestive to me of music was the far-away hoohaw of a
>(Munich) police car klaxon. Small wonder, then, that my reaction to 4'33"
>is of the same order: background noise. There's about as much justification
>to pay admission for that as there would be to pay for a breath of air
>(unless immured in a pyramid--in which case I might even settle for a
>Cage).

This seems to me a debate among people claiming that music is what they
think it is, and if they don't think the same way neither is going to
convince the other.

I'm willing to give Cage the benefit of the doubt re 4'33".  I would have
felt more dubious if he had followed up his success w/ 4'34", 5'18", or
possibly 47'22.9.  One such piece made his point.  Attempts at repetition
would be silly or simply a hoax.

Silence has always been an element of music.  The young Mozart used it
effectively when, at age 9, he composed his K.19d Piano Sonata for two
players in its concluding rondo (which incidentally foreshadowed the final
rondo in his Serenade Gran Partita).  I understand that Mahler intended
a pause significantly longer than is usual between symphonic movements
between two movements of one of his symphonies (which I'm sure the many
Mahler mavens on this list will recognize instanter).

If silence w/in a musical work are an acceptable part of music, why can't
a relatively brief period of silence of specified duration, admittedly a
bit longer than the rests or pauses usually encountered as parts of
conventional musical works, be accepted as an integral musical work in
its own right?

Walter Meyer