Brought to you this hour by

Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org!

Doublereed Archive - Posting 000034.txt from 2003/11

From: "jennifer devey" <sjdev@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [DR-L] Morons Versus Quality; Counterpoint
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:46:37 -0500

Most of the discussion here has been to defend Telemann, but I'd like to
toss out some other ideas. Bear made a few good points in his treatise:
1. Pop music very rarely offers anything "new."
2. Modern composition techniques offer many new ideas for writers,
performers and audiences.

However, I think we should consider the scope of 20th century music to
include pop music, even if we don't especially like some of it, or even if
doesn't have many elements that are truly "new." My reasoning is simple but
important: The recording industry has made millions of copies of all kinds
of music during that century, whereas Bach and Telemann relied on the
written page and live performers. We have room in the world for both the
daringly creative and the comfortably familiar.
I personally have great fondness for both Bach and Telemann. But there
are many kinds of music written in the 1900s that will be studied and
performed by university students - if Bear thinks it will all be from note
rows, he should think again. And if Bear thinks that 20th century jazz
artists have no background in music history and music theory, he is GROSSLY
mistaken and has not done his homework.

Questions about Bear's composition:
1) why is he using row techniques that have been around since the early
1900s?
2) why does he use the ancient format of fugue, set in traditional
movements?
3) why does he write for instruments that have been around for centuries?

why not something even newer? If he really believes only in the
cutting-edge, avant-garde, let's hear about something really new. Till
then, he could be more respectful of traditional ways of doing things (like
using key signatures and familiar harmonies).