Category Archives: Music

Short Response to a Boulez Quote

“[A]ny musician who has not experienced — I do not say understood, but truly experienced — the necessity of dodecaphonic music is USELESS. For his whole work is irrelevant to the needs of his epoch.”
Pierre Boulez (“Eventuellement…”, 1952, translated as “Possibly…”)
(Wikipedia)

“No, it means the epoch rather than the musician is USELESS. Majority adoption justifies NOTHING.”
–My response.

There seems to be something about the training at the Paris Conservatory of Music since Messiaen that (a) encourages atonality and (b) discourages the free thought necessary to critically evaluate a musical paradigm, because every composer I’ve encountered or read about that spent a significant amount of time there has been absolutely intolerant of tonality for the simple reason that it isn’t the way “modern” classical music is composed. They see tonality as something archaic, to be discarded without even evaluating the idea.

And as anyone following my blog knows, I think discarding ideas without evaluating them is nearly always a very stupid thing to do.

They are also not content to simply hold their own views, but determined to impose them upon others despite resistance, with conviction born of either aesthetic absolutism or a lack of individual thought. In essence, like so many other people, they’ve subjugated themselves to the social demands on their eras rather than defining their own styles and writing music (or doing whatever) for the sake of its own existence (luckily, this nearly guarantees that they will fade when those eras are over, because social demand is nothing if not capricious and they have no other leg to stand upon).

It is also worth noting that classical music began to decline in popularity right around the time that Modernist atonality emerged. It isn’t a coincidence, and to say that atonal music is socially demanded is to ignore the very forces that marginalized classical music to begin with. The only music that’s truly in demand is popular music now, and it’s your own fault!

The Softee Variations

You’ve done something wrong when one of your variations on the Mister Softee theme ends up being this dark piece in C minor 🙂

The release, as usual, is slated for “when it’s done”, but I anticipate it being done over the next few weeks, depending on how much time I need to do my research, which takes priority.

Appassionata

Beethoven’s “Appassionata” Sonata (no. 23) is one of the most amazing pieces of music I’ve ever listened to. Music doesn’t usually give me chills, but this piece did, especially the final movement. I was working on a theme that sounded somewhat like one of the thematic elements of the third movement and immediately decided to abandon it upon hearing the movement itself for fear of sullying such a powerful piece of music.

Moon Song

I just did something very interesting as I was writing part of Moon Song, a composition I’ve been procrastinating for far too long on: as I wrote a fully harmonized theme for a section of the song (so the small training I received wasn’t useless after all!), I thought to insert a rather long introductory motif I had used on a whim.

It fit perfectly. No parallel intervals or anything, and it sounded great. Essentially, I had unconsciously (or accidentally, but that’s unlikely) written a counter-melody in the opening to the theme I was about to introduce (or wrote the theme around the opening) and then subconsciously knew exactly where to insert it. There are three remarkable things about this:

a. I’m working with about six harmonic voices in this particular measure.
b. I have no training in counterpoint.
c. This theme is about 10 measures long (at a very slow tempo, meaning this is nearly a minute of music).

Thus, I’m very surprised that this works. Unfortunately, this sets a very high standard for the rest of the piece, and I am now going to need to either put a lot more time into it or end it quickly 🙂

It is good to see progress.

Temple University

Well, this is great. A quick search reveals that just about everyone coming out of Temple’s music program is writing atonal, or at best weakly tonal, music, which explains a lot of the pressure I’ve encountered (and resisted) to abandon the concepts of tonality. If I can’t write tonal music, I don’t want to write music at all.

Again, I am getting the feeling that I simply don’t belong in this school. I can’t study algorithms, I can’t study mathematics, and I can’t study tonal music composition. Of course, I could have studied all three at any of the schools I didn’t get into. Unfortunately, apparently only the ivies recognize the value of timeless instruction (more likely they just have enough prestige to get funding in even fields that are not “hot” at the moment). Everyone else just seems to want to chase after fads. The only consolation is that I am interested in biology as well, which is something I can study here for once.

Monmouth opened up possibilities, but all Temple has done is close them thus far.

Originality

Modern classical-style composers seem so focused on carving out an original style for themselves that they tend to leave aesthetics by the wayside. I can’t see the point of this; regardless of how original one’s music is, it will never be heard if people don’t want to listen to it.

I’ve suspected for a while that this is the reason that classical and popular music began to diverge in the early 20th century, smack in the middle of the Modernist period.

Coming up with compositions vs. writing them

I’ve figured out why it’s so easy for me to think up new compositions but difficult for me to actually write them down: one can intuitively think up songs; in fact, this is how it’s usually done (Fi might play a role too, but it’s a minor one). However, writing them down is a strictly introverted sensory activity… and on the MBTI, Si is the least preferred of the functions by the INTJ type.

But I need to go through the work if my music is to become real.

Books on composing classical music

Why can’t I find books on composing classical music? I can find books on individual components of compositions, such as harmony and counterpoint, but not on composition in the classical tradition (which is, incidentally, the title of a book that has nothing to do with composition or music; it’s apparently on an ancient Greek form of argument). Does no one care, or have too many people moved to a different style by now?

I always feel as if I’m missing something when I write music (probably training), because I can hear entire pieces springing fully formed into my mind, but I can never write them. I have a fairly well-developed sense of relative pitch by this point and I still can’t write down the music without having to undergo a tedious trial-and-error sort of process. For me, writing is a chore, but the glory of composition, as distinct from writing, motivates me to complete pieces.

Compositional progress

Finally, I’m beginning to see some significant progress as a composer.

I just wrote a short passage for piano, violin, and cello that sounds like a cross between Beethoven and Gluck. The violin part is rather challenging to play, the cello carries the melody, and the piano interjects with a diminished 7th chord at the end. How these composers managed to write entire pieces like this is still beyond me.

It’s going into “Facing Fears”. Believe me, you’ll recognize it; it’s stylistically very different from the rest of the piece (and yet it fits).

Despite the fact that this piece is classified “near complete”, I just keep getting new ideas and I never want to end it. It’s not even that long, but it’s just fun to write. (Which is a little unusual; to me, music is fun to compose and writing is a challenge that I force myself to undergo in order to relay that composition to the world… so it can be promptly ignored). As I mentioned in my Treatise, the music I imagine is quite compelling. The ideas just won’t let me go until I’ve made them manifest. They demand expression.