Björk

Thanks guys, I am passionately following the developments of the discussion.

Enlightening video clip, I understood several things

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Here we are still at the idea that "The Composer" ...

Look, I had opened this topic

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/6074-chi-è-il-compositore-oggi/

... but strangely no one showed up.

I would love to see John Williams dancing!

the world is multifaceted even musically, one must come to terms with it and not expect the same things from everyone. As far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't be interested in seeing a video of Lachenmann dancing (Or maybe I would!!) or anyway a video of him, it's enough for me to hear what he does, and if I can see an orchestra performing it live, even better.

Nevertheless, who knows, video art could be very effective and indeed a nice video on Feldman's The viola in my life might be something I'd like to see.

But Feldman's music (for me) is no less than Björk's just because she has impressive productions and makes videos in virtual reality. Besides, I have never seen any videos of Herbie Hancock either (I'm not talking about live videos) and I have never seen him dance, but I understand that there are, precisely, different situations and settings.

Or would you like to see Beyoncé writing a beautiful string quartet while Ferneyhough does a live set in some London club...?

Videoclip wrote:

Look, I opened this topic

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/6074-chi-è-il-compositore-oggi/

... but strangely no one showed up.

You are a whiner.

Do you know who has never written about Björk, besides RedScharlach? You. And I still haven't read you write anything about Björk; you have only complained about what others have done or what others haven't done.

What do you know about Björk? What do you love about Björk? Make a contribution to this discussion rather than just complaining. So far, you haven't written anything interesting, in my opinion.

micamahler wrote:

I would love to see John Williams dancing!

It was a provocation, just to say that we are all too often tied to a 19th-century idea of the composer. It's a bit like painting: it no longer makes much sense to talk about paintings, but about "visual art". Van Gogh or Cezanne didn't care at all where their paintings would be hung: their work was the painting; today, instead, contextualization and the mode of enjoyment are inseparable parts of the artistic idea. This is the novelty of 20th-century art. I think whoever wrote (it was Thallo) that Björk wouldn't call herself a composer for this very reason is right.

I usually avoid participating in these discussions. Sterile is actually the best definition: their basis is ideological, as they do not stem from a comparison of ideas but from the defense of one's own positions.

I am intervening because I am being directly called into question: what I propose and what I do not propose. To be brief: it is my habit to speak about what I know. As much as Björk's music may interest me, I am sure there is someone in the forum who can speak about it with much more knowledge than I (this very topic confirms this for me, and it is welcome).

I tried to search for your proposals, Videoclip, in this section: I found nothing. Neither Björk nor anything else. My proposals have no pedagogical purpose: I would find it puerile to have to worry about informing "the youth" about "dead ends," telling them that Composition with a capital C does not exist but rather infinite types of music. First of all, I am sure I have no authority over them, except for what may eventually derive from the interest aroused by a proposal (and even that granted, what are we talking about?). Secondly, I do not like to take "the youth" (whoever they may be) for fools. Finally, no music excludes others (unless one wants to fall back into ideology).

I would add that when I propose something, I invest the time to write a few words about it, not necessarily because I am in love with it (for me, music could very well start and end with Bach), but because at that moment, for one reason or another, it has entered the horizon of my interests, and because it is probably not very well known (it is certainly much less known than Björk's). It never even crossed my mind to see something exclusive in it: "listen to this and forget the rest." On the contrary, I have the utmost respect for those who intelligently listen to many things that are very far apart from each other.

All things considered, since there is no sense in justifying myself for what I do not propose (and in reality, I don't think I am even required to justify myself for what I do propose!), if my proposals offend you in some way, there are two possibilities: 1) you can ignore them, thus saving your time; 2) I can avoid writing them, thus saving mine.

But if I express a concept, I do not like to see it distorted: my "80/90% of the kids who go to Darmstadt listen to Björk's music, and some of them find a point of reference in it" has become "80/90% of the kids who go to Darmstadt have Björk's music as a point of reference." Even in this case, the Italian language is not an opinion.

Furthermore, I do not take part in discussions of the type "who is the composer today?" because ontological drifts (who is a composer? what is music?) almost inevitably lead to indifference (Cromadibrera's first intervention is a demonstration of this).

RedScharlach wrote:

Inoltre non prendo parte a discussioni del tipo “chi è il compositore oggi?” perché le derive ontologiche (chi è un compositore? cosa è la musica?) sfociano quasi inevitabilmente nel qualunquismo (ne è una dimostrazione il primo intervento di Cromadibrera).

Tanto sforzo per spiegare che non prendi parte alle discussioni? Mica è obbligatorio. Non so perché il mio intervento sia qualunquista, ma ti prego di non spiegarmelo; non vorrei che ti pigliasse uno sturbo.

thallo wrote:

You are a whiner.

As you yourself taught in a recent post, irony is part of my comment. And as for those who complain, to me, the absence of participation is already an answer.

RedScharlach wrote:

I usually avoid participating in these discussions.

And you are wrong, because now the nature of your interventions is clearer to me and I can better understand the selection criteria.