Re: [microsound] context

[Randal Davis <randal_davis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

A deep question, this.

Yes, context is, inescapably, what we bring to any experience, it is why we
were where we were which is, to a greater or lesser extent, why we are here.

That said, there is no single history, nor is there a singular mode of
historical understanding.

Was Varese "aware" of musical history?  Of course.  His "silence" was simply
the result of an inability to actualize, technologically, the means to a
vision of what music could be.

Was Cage "aware" of musical history?  Of course.  Witness the familiar
anecdote about his studies with Schoenberg, and his inability to understand
harmony.

Then, too, there are the "accidents," e.g., Reich's discovery of phasing in
tape loops.

And, then, too, there are the unexpected influences.  Consider Riley's early
tape works, and then the continuing redefinition of his conceptions as
shaped by his exposure to Indian classical music.  And, perhaps even moreso,
by his collaboration with Kronos, to write in the idiom of the string
quartet.

Consider Subotnick, who invented a music built around an instrument of which
he was one of the inventors (with Don Buchla & Ramon Sender).

Before this becomes a string of posts about whether or not "knowledge" of
"history" is "good" or "bad," let's try and premise the discussion on
"history" as inevitably multiple.

So, too, its understandings.

What we call "innovation" or "invention" may, I suspect, as frequently occur
from within the tradition as from without.  It may also occur in the
presence of some "understanding" or, to paraphrase Bloom, a creative
misunderstanding.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "tony higgins" <tony.higgins2@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [microsound] context


> On 9/16/06, Kim Cascone <kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > If I never saw a painting by Picasso, or any cubist painting, even
> > > a poor knock off would probably seem pretty amazing. Unfrotunately,
> > > there's no way to get rid of the role that context plays, when making
> > > artistic judgements.
> >
> > very interesting comment...
> > I would add to this the role of history...and/or historical context -
> > which you imply by invoking Picasso...
> > the question becomes: how can an artist build on the past, i.e.
> > innovate, if s/he doesn't know about it?
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Does innovation have to be built on the past? Isn't innovation more
> defined for its departures from what has gone before rather than
> similarities? Other people define what innovative is. I reckon for the
> people doing it, it's just what they did.
>
>
>
>
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > website: http://www.microsound.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org