Re: [microsound] Cage and buddhism

["Timothy W. Duncan" <insite@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>To me Cage, by virtue of his study and to quite clear 
>commitment both in words and in sound, was certainly respectful, and 
>the ways in which he adapted Eastern forms, instruments, and ideas to 
>the western academic tradition demonstrated the profundity and 
>uniqueness of his grasp of all of these.

I don't think Cage used either Eastern instruments or forms. He was totally
Western in this respect.

I agree that he was respectful in his use of Eastern ideas and I don't use
appropriation here to mean 
otherwise. In the original question that I responded to, someone asked what
was the relationship of his music to Buddhism. My point is to suggest that
by looking at Cage's work, one cannot get a very clear sense of what
Buddhism is about.

In contrast, Messiaen's music can tell one a lot about Catholicism (I am
glossing over some unique and innovative features of his work here) and in
Bach's music one can learn a lot about the 18th century Lutheranism. 

The problem in Cage's case is in part his willingness to mix disparate
systems such as Zen and Taoism. 

This factor does not invalidate his music (how could it?). But in response
to the original question, it blurs the relationship of his work to Buddhism
in particular.

-- Tim