[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] Re: blowing up boulez



On 08/07/03 14:10, K. Scott Handley said in living color:

> -----Guillaume G. wrote:
>> Are you remotely aware of the colossal impact "that crusty bureaucrat", =
as
>> you call him, has had (and is still having) on contemporary music and on
>> music in general? Both as a composer and as a conductor? How many pieces=
 of
>> his have you heard/are you familiar with?
>=20
> It's been years since I've analyzed LE MARTEAU (which has dated like milk=
,
> YMMV), but I am excruciatingly aware of the man's effects, positive and
> negative, on the culture industry and the regulation of sound-research fr=
om
> the Ivory Bunker of IRCAM.

I'm glad to see that you are an exception to the "rule" I had enounced.

> His accomplishments are titanic, but suspending critique due to awe is no=
 way
> to progress=20

Agreed...

I was actually looking for said critique, whether about Boulez's oeuvre or
writing... or about the politics of government funding in the field of new
music in France or elsewhere... or about...

> beyond the avant-garde garden/ghetto that he has cultivated. Which, sorry=
 to
> say, is not remotely avant-garde anymore, the beauties of R=C9PONS are no l=
onger
> avant-garde,=20

I hope so, seeing as the piece dates back to the early eighties... ;)

It does remain vibrant, rich and challenging, though, which is ultimately
what matters, I think.

> the context has changed, and as Jim O'Rourke, Georgina Born, and
> Anthony Braxton (among so many others) have variously observed, IRCAM is =
a
> bloated, overfunded, and redundant agency of cultural prestige.

I'm not "in the know" enough to discuss in depth (or even in surface...) th=
e
vices and virtues of IRCAM. But that would seem like a potentially
interesting discussion. Your depiction of IRCAM does indeed seem to match
that of various musicians I've heard... From what I can gather, the biggest
problem with IRCAM seems to be that it assumes more or less the form of a
monopolistic government-money-sucking machine. Care to expand on this,
maybe?

Still, wasn't it at IRCAM that Max was invented? Wasn't it at IRCAM that th=
e
bases (Max/FTS, I think it was called) for MSP/pure data were developed? In
a sense, a great proportion of the music discussed on this list wouldn't
exist as we know it without IRCAM...

>> How familiar are you with his (enormous) recorded output? Are you aware =
of
>> the level of devotion and the drive with which he promoted music of this
>> century, even under sustained fire (his years at the NYPO, for example)?=
 Etc.
>=20
> Awareness really isn't the issue here; you're presuming that intimacy wit=
h the
> man's oeuvre would necessarily pre-empt critique, or for that matter cont=
empt.

Of course, anybody can critique anything, as the old saying about opinions
and human anatomy explains eloquently. But a very slight intimacy with the
subject matter does preempt informed critique.

Anyway, my complaint was actually more targeted towards the fact that the
critique seemed unsubstantiated to me -- thus bringing the sentiments
expressed in the message closer to the form of an ad hominem attack than to
that of a critique. The "awareness" issue was a subsequent/tangential
interrogation of mine. (And as I've said, I'm pleasantly surprised to hear
that you don't fit the pattern I was describing.)
 =20
> Boulez is as subject to time as the rest of us, he's just managed to crea=
te a
> black hole for limited and precious funding, and not only in his home cou=
ntry.

I suppose you're referring to IRCAM here...? BTW, is he still at the helm o=
f
the organization?

>> ...but to disparage a man like him with blanket statements such as those=
 one
>> can read in the quoted message strikes me as disrespectful and cowardly.
>=20
> The Ivory Bunker is cowardice itself.  Among Boulez's
> mountains of accomplishment there are festering boils
> of corruption.

I'm intrigued... Also referring to IRCAM?

> The more undeniable a person's contributions, the more likely that their
> shadow will overcome any future progress, and quelch badly-needed critiqu=
e.

I agree.
 =20
> Darmstadt and its wake are last century's news, and have everything to do=
 with
> history that's worth waking up from.

I agree again (!)

g.

--=20
Guillaume Grenier - grenier.g@xxxxxxxxxxxx

in space there is no north  in space there is no south
in space there is no east   in space there is no west

------------------------------