[NewMusic] Cage's Sixth Chord

Sat Jul 12 08:35:02 PDT 2008

> It's more important to get cage's message (if you like his message) out to
more people, not
just put on some publicity stunt.

Call it a publicity stunt if you want to, but I think it's certainly getting
his message out.

>I don't think that kind of "Legacy" was really even Cage's intent either.
He wanted us to think about these ideas, not be put on some pedestal.

First, it's hard not to create some kind of "Legacy" while supporting the
goal of getting the word out about his music.  I'm sure Cage, being the
Zenist he is, realized that he had no real control over his "legacy" after
his death, and probably wasn't too worried about it.  IANACE (I am not a
Cage Expert), so I'll shut up now, but that's my ignorant opinion and I'm
sticking by it!

Second, it's a performance of a piece of his music, nothing more.  It's not
like a golden temple was built in his honor or anything.  It may never
finish, but I admire the enthusiasm for performing it, and we can only hope
that it will be finished.  It's like an eternal flame of hope for the next
631 years.  It's every bit as groundbreaking as Silence was in my opinion.

Who cares what the town's motivation is in performing it, and what a crappy
way to try to sell tourism to your town if that was their intent!  Couldn't
their CVB think of something much more effective?  :^)

Brady

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 2:11 AM, Alicia Byer <aliciabyer at gmail.com> wrote:

> Why not celebrate the legacy of John Cage for 600 years?
>
> -That's what you say now, but like somebody else said, human society may
> be totally different then and maybe it won't even be relevant. who
> knows. It's a nice lofty idea but just fantasy. you think you're being
> devoted by standing by the 600-year thing but I don't think that kind of
> "Legacy" was really even Cage's intent either. He wanted us to think
> about these ideas, not be put on some pedestal.
>
> alicia
>
>
> andrew wilshusen wrote:
> > I've sat through some shit that seemed like it lasted 600 years, and I've
> also left some pieces wondering if in 600 years I'd ever come to appreciate
> it.  But hell, if you're gonna do something, why not at least ask that it
> lasts 600 years?  How silly and small-minded a 20 minute or 20 year piece
> seems by comparison.
> > Why not celebrate the legacy of John Cage for 600 years?  Think about
> this contextually- if I wrote a piece and requested it be played over the
> span of 600 years, nobody would pay any mind whatsoever.  I can't play a
> piece for 2 minutes and keep anyone's interest.  But he had the clout and
> balls to dare push the boundries of music well beyond what anyone dare
> attempt.  And, he fucking pulled it off; at least so far.  You short-sighted
> nay-sayers who insist the piece can't last 600 years are the same ones who
> said nobody would break DiMaggio's hit streak, and true nobody has, but
> what's it hurt to try?
> > Music is nothing more than a concept.  Why be reasonable?  One or more
> underemployed philosophers with nothing to say?  Fuck you, dipshit.  the
> fact that you imply monetary success validates worth shows your ignorance.
>  If you think "just being" is a shallow pit, why not stop being for the sake
> of the rest of us, whom you presumably treat as "just beings?"
> > Oops, guess I've has too many martinis this evening.
> > Andrew
> >
> >  Ev oida oti oudev oida
> >
> >
> > http://www.andrewwilshusen.com
> > http://oudevoida.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Alicia Byer <aliciabyer at gmail.com>
> > To: Bay Area New Music Discussion Group <newmusic at music.mills.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2008 6:33:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: [NewMusic] Cage's Sixth Chord
> >
> > it seems more likely to me that it's at least partially a publicity
> > stunt for the town.. maybe that's what you mean. To get tourists. And
> > maybe that's a little shallow... but it's just an organ sitting in a
> > church somewhere, droning on. It's a nice concept and I really don't see
> > how it hurts anybody.
> >
> > The only thing I don't like about it is that it is just going to be
> > abandoned at some point, which seems a little offensive to the composer.
> > I mean why bother putting on a work that you intend to just abandon?
> > They don't actually think it's going to go on for 600 years or whatever.
> > Jeez, the organ wouldn't even last that long. They're just "Using" the
> > piece for shock value or cachet or whatever you want to call it. They
> > should choose a more reasonable time-frame like 10-20 years and then it
> > would actually be completed. Maybe that seems too pragmatic, but I think
> > just discontinuing the piece really robs it of a lot of power and that
> > kind of abandonment is going to hang around the feeling of the piece
> > afterward too.
> >
> > Alicia
> >
> > lx rudis wrote:
> >
> >> boy howdy.
> >>
> >> there's something horribly fatalistic about this piece, and the way it's
> >> being memorialized.
> >>
> >> ...can't really call this a 'performance'.  'management exercise' seems
> a
> >> bit more accurate, although i've no idea how they intend to manage it to
> its
> >> conclusion.  how's it being financed?
> >>
> >> and after considering its original brisk 29minutes [original playtime of
> the
> >> piece in question], i defy most 'casual listeners' to 'know' a piece of
> >> music...of course, cage gets the last laugh; his own definitions seem to
> me
> >> to exclude the notion of anyone knowing much of anything, ever.
> >>
> >> i suppose there's justification in its 'just being'....but that is such
> a
> >> shallow pit to mine, and i believe it was already well mined-out back in
> the
> >> 60s when people like lamonte young and terry riley were working on 'long
> >> time' pieces.
> >>
> >> somehow i can't see this application of this piece being a 'labor of
> love'.
> >> it smells like an administrative stunt to me.  the work of one or more
> >> underemployed would-be philosophers with nothing to say.
> >>
> >> it just doesn't sit right with me.  there, i've said it.  anyone else
> feel
> >> this way?
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> >> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> >> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> > NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> > http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> > NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> > http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>