Re: Academic or Not?


Subject: Re: Academic or Not?
From: Alexandra Hettergott (a.hettergott@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Wed Jul 14 1999 - 16:00:25 EDT


Linda Seltzer wrote
+AFs-...+AF0-
Interesting statement, immediately accessible in its apodistic claim...
What would be interesting to me is where are the boundaries, when the getting folk
does start : already with -- considering music history -- making use of folk-arisen
forms like waltz, polka, fandango, bolero, ragtime, etc., appealing to the ordinary
listener's basic motoric instincts...? Does it hold for the manifold use of folk
tunes, forms, rhythms in traditional music, gotten, e.g., from turkish, hungarian, or
gipsy, spanish tunes/dances, too ? Or allow for the fact that earlier it has been
danced to what we feel to be more sophisticated -- serious -- today ? Or the vast
influence of asian and african musics to 20 century compositions ? Is it a low-level
and a higher level folk between which you distinguish ?, so the (academically)
getting inspired should be something still tolerable to you, or is it rather be a
potential contamination in either direction taking place then : so, going folk, the
EA composer weakens his intellect (eclecticism being the low of contemporary
education), or in the reverse case, in using sophisticated techniques the folk
composer upgrades getting a faint idea, if not (yet) consciousness, of what he is
actually doing and to what more (even if not yet) elaborated aim ? Intermediate forms
in composers imaginable ? tolerable ? Crossover inspiration, even though being
abdominal rather than intellectual, in (e.g.) already successful composers something
(still) excusable ? -- Well, I did neglect that you were referring to electroacoustic
music only, the today easy availability of powerful technologies giving rise for a
devaluation of pure intellectual items -- to end up with disgusting culinaric
triviality...
Sincerely,
Alexandra Hettergott.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:09:02 EDT