Ludovico Einaudi, Minimalism and Contemporary

Feldman wrote:

But in fact Donatoni doesn't have to go down in History, sorry... he has already gone!

...in effect twenty years is "enough", but it would be nice to wait for the generational change of his students...

Feldman wrote:

sorry, I know that many students of the person you named do not transcribe. It is not a matter of transcribing or imitating, it is a matter of remaining extremely faithful to one's own Teacher's line instead of distancing oneself.

It seems to me that Frank explained it very well: if you are an aspiring composer and you have ideas, go to lessons to make them credible and develop them... there is no need to distance yourself if your teacher doesn't hover over you or breathe down your neck or tell you that it is written exactly like this and that's it... if he doesn't take your material and tell you to throw it away and makes you use something made to his measure and image and likeness.

If instead he has no ideas... or the aspiring composer is a performer who wants to study composition to understand what lies behind the notes, or will be a failed composer, it's better to tell him immediately.

Where is the problem? It seems crystal clear to me...

Natan wrote:

Just to close the circle a bit: there are few Haydns and Beethovens, just as there are few Messiaens and Grisey. There are few like Donatoni... those after him are not his equal, it is useless even to list them.

Haydn, Beethoven, and all the others are giants, without a doubt. But they were men like us.

By this I do not mean that we must convince ourselves of having musicality and abilities equal or superior to theirs, but we must not allow ourselves to be subjugated by their greatness; if anything, even if we remain second-rate composers, we must always take example from them and aspire to the first rate! And taking example means understanding how they related to music and to their time; in this sense, I was referring to "distancing oneself."

History is a continuous cycle that repeats itself, a "panel form" where a tangle of relationships is iterated over the centuries with an ever-changing reinterpretation, ups and downs: the avant-garde of the second half of the 1900s (I am referring to Donatoni, Berio, Boulez, Cage, Maderna, Nono, Penderecki, Stockhausen, Ligeti, etc.) was not only important but fundamental in purging music from late-Romantic stylistic tropes that had run their course; the dodecaphony of the Second Viennese School was a good starting point to "distance oneself," wasn't it? From there (from the famous "Schoenberg is dead") came the aesthetics of the European avant-garde of the second half of the 1900s: structuralism (Boulez), Alea (the negative, with Cage), Spectralism, Stochastic Music (Xenakis), minimalism as a reaction. All this was beautiful, a progressivism against the reactionaries of the era who represented academicism. Now the cycle repeats: the students of those who created the avant-garde have gathered the legacy of their masters, transforming it into a new academicism; this legacy has the same function that late-Romantic style music had in Boulez's time—an academic closure, relegated to the niches of conservatories, to the so-called "Reserves" (if Donatoni used this term, it means he was aware of how things were going).

Natan wrote:

Usually the student surpasses the master... in Donatoni's case, the Master was not surpassed; on the contrary... perhaps he passed his little anti-didactic vices on to his students... that is how a sect, a caste, is born.

You expressed my thought in a line and a half, thank you.

Donatoni brought anti-academicism into the academy; the evening lessons he held at the Milan Conservatory open to young composers are the example. The same was done by Sciarrino when he taught in conservatories (he, an anti-academic coming from a self-taught educational path). The same can be said of Messiaen... so what happened by doing so? Within academic institutions, the students of these great composers refounded a "new academicism." In Italy, at the end of the 1800s, the scores of Verdi, the anti-academic par excellence, were an example for composition students. Novelty is the cause of academicism and academicism is the cause of novelty; it is a chain reaction.

The fracture with the audience is not a prerogative of today's music; it was a prerogative of the avant-gardes and it was right so, as it was an extremely important, indispensable revolution (not evolution). Today, instead, recovering direct contact with the audience is fundamental (not cunningly catering to the audience, which is the prerogative of Festivalbar).

Unfortunately, the composers of the "reserves" do not have the courage to present themselves to an audience. It costs nothing: let them take their pieces to be performed in a normal cultural event. Perhaps they are afraid of boos—nothing could be more wrong! Every honest composer should be prepared for any reaction from listeners, whether it be applause or tomatoes. Instead, it is better to remain closed in one's own niche, "nice and cozy," sheltered from the judgment of mere mortals. Come on! Beethoven took the boos; he was a free composer (even from the limits imposed by commissions, limits that still exist in certain "contemporary" music commissions... and these people have the courage to take Beethoven and Stravinsky as examples for their poetics!) but he never refused to propose his music to the public (fine, we can skip the late period, okay. But it is a period, not a rule to follow. Every artist should take an ever-changing path, with always different stimuli, situations, and conditions, a path in which it is possible to trace an evolution, right?)"

Ludovica wrote:

It seems to me that Frank explained it perfectly: if you are an aspiring composer and you have ideas, go to lessons to make them credible and develop them... there is no reason to take offense if your teacher doesn't hover over you or breathe down your neck or tell you that it must be written exactly like this and that's it... if he doesn't take your material and tell you to throw it away and makes you use something tailored to his own measure, image, and likeness.

What does this have to do with anything, excuse me? We aren't talking about lessons here, but about the musical situation of that era. Lessons are important, so what?

Ludovica wrote:

If instead they have no ideas... or if the aspiring composer is a performer who wants to study composition to understand what lies behind the notes, or will end up being a failed composer, it's better to tell them right away.

The Maestro can never tell a student whether they will be a failed composer (except in cases where the student fails to demonstrate even a minimum of creative ability).

Ludovica wrote:

Where is the problem? It seems crystal clear to me...

You are talking about pedagogy, not composition.

Since the starting point of this topic is Ludovico Einaudi, one often comes across stupid interviews where journalists ask "what did you have for breakfast this morning?" or "do you also eat chocolate cake like Allevi?" or even "do you like playing?"...

Finally, a proper interview from ONDAROCK in which Einaudi speaks about his poetics, his influences and, pay close attention, the musical situation today. Practically his thoughts regarding what we have been talking about these days. Very interesting.

http://www.ondarock....vicoeinaudi.htm

I quote one of his answers that reflects my thoughts exactly:

In what way has his music acquired those "popular" connotations that make it appreciated even by audiences refractory to "classical" music?

In this case as well, the turning point was at the end of my composition studies. At that moment, I found myself squeezed within the framework of contemporary "classical" music: a closed place, for industry insiders only, in which my musical passions would have been excluded. I felt suffocated. I then decided to take another path, opening the doors to what I have always loved, all those musical experiences that formed me and then accompanied me throughout my life: starting from the French folk songs my mother used to let me listen to as a child; then the Beatles and Rolling Stones which I discovered thanks to my sister; subsequently the approach to jazz music, the deepening of other cultures thanks to my trip to Africa; electronic music which I explored collaborating with the Lippok brothers; up to the most recent experience of "La notte della Taranta", in Puglia, in which I invited many artists coming from different cultures. My musical alphabet feeds on all of this: popular music is the blood that flows through my veins.

Is your thought then contamination?

Feldman wrote:

You are talking about teaching, not composition.

...and indeed it seems to me that one goes (to lessons) to a composition teacher to learn. More teaching than this ... if the student is already "learned" or has finished acquiring what there is to know in terms of technique... it is good that they show off what they can do without the mommy taking care of them until age 40 (Perhaps there was even a Valkyrie topic regarding this...)

Furthermore, teaching is usually the mother of all problems; you are talking about caste, about closed circles, where one is promoted if one writes like the master... and not if one is autonomous or professes one's own faith, a faith (a line, as you call it) different from your teacher

micamahler wrote:

So your thought then is contamination?

In several of Feldman's posts, the desire to hunt for an emblem to follow comes through... Einaudi has found his own way of making music, and it's not as if "contamination" is this stroke of genius....

The real question is: "why insist on copying others?", can't one be oneself? Feldman, do you want to surpass your master? Write your music and force him to help you make it credible.

micamahler wrote:

So your thought then is contamination?

I am convinced that this is the era of contamination, also because if you notice musical genres are more than fragmented. While before it was possible to make clear distinctions, now we have genres and subgenres, and even smaller subgenres! This fragmented world no longer allows us to put labels on everything; on the contrary, it is the prerequisite for a "condensation" of everything through contamination. Luciano Berio had intuited that after his historical period, contamination would gain more and more ground, this is also demonstrated by the fact that Jazz is absorbing musical experiences of every kind, unlike before.

I took Einaudi only as an example; of course, I don't think he is the savior of the fatherland or anything like that! I am only saying that his path and his thought are those which, in my opinion, create the profile of the composer of 2013 (whereas other composers strive to write in 2013 and simultaneously in 1985).

So the answer is yes, my thought is contamination.

Ludovica wrote:

...and indeed it seems to me that one goes (to lessons) to a composition teacher to learn. More didacticism than this ... if the student is already "learned" or has finished acquiring what there is to know in terms of technique... it is good that they show off what they can do without the mommy looking after them until age 40 (Perhaps there was even a topic by Valchiria regarding this...)

Furthermore, teaching is usually the mother of all problems; you are talking about caste, about closed circles, where one is promoted if one writes like the teacher... and not if one is autonomous or professes one's own faith, a faith (a line, as you call it) different from your teacher

From the Teacher, one learns techniques and learns a method of study, research, and work. The rest must be done in total autonomy. Since composition is a creative and artisanal activity, the didactic experience with the Teacher is a bit like the apprenticeship of every good artisan.

Ludovica wrote:

In several of Feldman's posts, the desire to chase an emblem to follow is apparent... Einaudi has found his own way of making music, and it's not as if "contamination" is some stroke of genius....

The real question is: "why insist on copying others?", can't one be oneself? Feldman, do you want to surpass your master? Write your own music and force him to help you make it credible.

I don't have to force anyone or surpass anyone, but are we joking? I must follow a path, like everyone else. I have my ideas and I follow them. Teaching experience is something different from the actual activity of a composer; in the latter case, the formative aspect is always present but in a decidedly more complex manner.

As Bartók used to say, "competition is for horses, not for composers"

Feldman wrote:

History is a continuous cycle that repeats itself, a "panel form" where a tangle of relationships is iterated over the centuries with an ever-changing reinterpretation, recurrences and returns: the avant-garde of the second half of the 1900s (I am referring to Donatoni, Berio, Boulez, Cage, Maderna, Nono, Penderecki, Stockhausen, Ligeti, etc.) was not only important but fundamental in purging music from late-Romantic stylisms that had run their course; the dodecaphony of the Second Viennese School was a good starting point to "distance oneself," wasn't it? From there (from the famous "Schoenberg is dead") came the aesthetics of the European avant-garde of the second half of the 1900s: structuralism (Boulez), Alea (the negative, with Cage), Spectralism, Stochastic Music (Xenakis), minimalism as a reaction. All this was beautiful, a progressivism against the reactionaries of the era who represented academicism.

Forgive me, but you list everyone except those outside the lobbies: Stravinsky, Messiaen, Britten, Bettinelli, etc. ...it must be a coincidence...

Natan wrote:

Forgive me, but you list everyone except those outside the lobbies: Stravinsky, Messiaen, Britten, Bettinelli, etc. ...it must be a coincidence...

I wrote etc. if you noticed. I named Messiaen anyway. Stravinsky comes before.

Re-read: all those I named were not part of any lobby! They were the avant-garde, at the time. Their students are the lobby. What coincidence, excuse me?

Feldman wrote:

Stravinsky is prior.

Well, anyway... he died in the '70s, bringing dodecaphony to the stars. Oh well.

Feldman wrote:

All those I mentioned were not part of any lobby!

Are you sure Darmstadt wasn't a lobby... tell that to poor Britten, or Messiaen himself who founded it and (de facto) authorized a certain type of music.

Feldman wrote:

Their students are the lobby. What kind of case is that, excuse me?

More than their students... their children.

When have we ever seen Britten, Bettinelli, etc. go to Darmstadt? But when would they have ever wanted to.

Because, good old Nono who doesn't shake hands with Britten... why do you think he didn't shake it? Because he was outside the clique.

Have you ever seen a jazz musician at Darmstadt?

You see that music is one: the 'A' series, of the clique... and that of the others is 'B' series. And it has already been decided. Someone has decided... and not time.

Feldman wrote:

I am convinced that this is the era of contamination, also because if you notice musical genres are more than fragmented. While before it was possible to make clear distinctions, now we have genres and subgenres, and even smaller subgenres! This fragmented world no longer allows us to put labels on everything; on the contrary, it is the prerequisite for a "condensation" of everything through contamination.

I took Einaudi only as an example, of course I don't think he is the savior of the fatherland or anything like that! I am only saying that his path and his thought are those which, in my opinion, create the profile of the 2013 composer (whereas other composers strive to write in 2013 and simultaneously in 1985).

So the answer is yes, my thought is contamination.

Well, if that were the case, Romitelli, whom you spoke of previously, he certainly did contaminate, and yet if I remember correctly, you placed him in a caste. So?

Am I the only one who doesn't like the term contamination; it has a very negative connotation. There are more specialized terms to define the act of synthesizing multiple "origins.".

Frank wrote:

Sorry, but the teacher must provide technique and not ideas...

Because, can you manage to separate technique from ideas? Can any technique be split from its own history and from the multitude of aesthetic connotations that it carries with it?

Feldman wrote:

... to the so-called "Reserves" (if Donatoni used this term, it means he was aware of how things were going).

Anyway, without wanting to stretch this metaphor too far, I remember that Donatoni had been vividly impressed by Alce Nero parla, and therefore... I hope you will agree on the fact that the Indians were the victims!

In the dynamics of Feldman, the biennale is a lobby, so that what is called Contemporary music today, a label to define experimental or avant-garde music, is a lobby.

Music is made of much more. Who said that to be composers one must experiment? Who said that to be GREAT composers one must experiment? Poor Bach, Brahms, Berg, etc.

... as you can see, there are many gradations of Lobby

RedScharlach wrote:

Why, are you able to separate technique from ideas?

You can't?

RedScharlach wrote:

Can any technique be split from its own history and the multitude of aesthetic connotations that it carries with it?

Keyword: "history"

Here is where the student arrives with their draft or project idea and you support them in reaching realization ... it is different to show one's own ideas and one's own aesthetic connotation and say: this is my craft.

In this case, it is a matter of collaboration and no longer a lesson. If the student really wants to write like you, you are free to refer them to a colleague... for Frank, or Red, one is enough

As for the rest, how boring it would be if Chopin had written only fugues due to his dedication to Bach's TWC..

I will repeat myself, if you truly want to support your students, show them the music of the greats and not your own; if you consider yourselves great and are right, there is a good probability of stifling talents of various measures (see Donatonini): not everyone must become Beethoven after passing through Haydn... so it is precisely the flawed method.... ah, I forgot, if you are not right... you have made them waste a lot of precious time