By pumpkin time on Monday develop an open response that addresses the relationship between the modernist (and other) music you have been exposed to and modernism (and/or other movements) in other arts (fiction, poetry, film, painting, sculpture, architecture, dance, photography, etc.). Here's a list of some of the composers you have heard: Mozart, Chopin, Liszt, Debussy, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Shostakovic, Ned Rorem (who composed the "Minotaur" and "Acrobat on a Ball"). I look forward to your responses.
[Music played in class: (1) Chopin: Nocturne #2, E flat (1830-40); (2) Liszt: Nuagis Gris (1881); (3) Debussy: from Prelude Book I (1910); (4) Stravinsky: from Rite of Spring (1913); (5) Shostakovic: String Quartet #8 (1960). Music played by the Hausmann Quartet in the auditorium: (1) Debussy: String Quartet in G minor, Op. 10; (2) Stravinsky: Three Pieces for String Quartet; (3) Gershwin: Lullaby. In the library the Hausmann Quartet played pieces of music composed by Mozart and Debussy as well as the "Minotaur" and "Acrobat on the Ball" sections of a piece by Ned Rorem. What have I forgotten?]
Most of the music directly relates to many forms of art. Some may be playing while someone is making art while others are part of films. In class we listened to a CD of some of the music beforehand just so we could get a general feel for how the music goes. When Liszt’s piece, titled Nuagis Gris, came on it caused a lot of tension. Also, it seemed like the type of music that would be playing during a chase scene during an old film or a scene where someone was creeping up on you. It also was similar to if you were going down a spiral staircase.
ReplyDeleteWhen the string quartet came they talked a lot about how the modernist music is very similar to the modernist paintings (i.e. cubism.) Many people reacted the same way to both. It was too different for them; they did not realize that change was a good thing. The composers had to dare to be different during that time. They also had to be okay with being rejected. Nowadays many people really enjoy the modernist music and paintings.
One of the many interesting qualities of the modernist music is that what the title of the piece is is usually how the music sounds. For example, the string quartet played “Acrobat on a Ball” when we moved up to the library. While listening to it, you could distinctly hear the bouncing ball. Also you could hear the music for when the acrobat was attempting to balance on the ball. Music like that can create a very vivid picture in your head, which can help a lot. It can help especially if you are not into that type of music.
Art was first a tool used to express ones self, starting with cavemen panting on cave walls. How ever as man grew so did art, it became as much a part of making people think as it was an expression of self. In films music is used to create, or inspire a certain emotion in the audience during a particular scene. Like in jaws the audience discovers that the shark is coming closer when the music gets faster. This eventually gets the audience prepared to see the shark, but it also gets them on the edge of their seats, some scared others nervous, and so on. This is just one example of how music in a movie makes the audience think more, then if the audience was watching the scene without music. So Not only is the film(which is a form of art) making people think, but so is the music(also art), and as previously stated modern art is about making people think, and telling a story. The music we listen to during the concert had a similar effect, but it wasn't as clear as in movies were you have a visual to help you put the puzzle together. But during the concert i could here the change's during the piece of music, And thought about what the composer was trying to get me to visualize. Although it wasn't clear to me i understood that there was a story in the music which like in all art.
ReplyDeleteMusic is one of the only direct ways to evoke an emotion, I think even more so than other types of art. Melodies and paintings from before the modernist era were particularly safe in their toying with the human soul. They ventured only so far as comfort, never pushing desirous rhythms or animalistic/malignant intentions. Paintings were also very by the book, simple renderings of an only imagined perfection of reality, sort of like "Oh yeah, it's a beautiful boat!" and that was the end of it. Modernist art, by nearing the more honest representations of the turmoil that is earthly desire and spiritual joy, played more upon the individual perspective rather than the societal ideal. This naturally brought about conflict, and very much mirrored the more political and self-sufficient qualities of the age these works were produced in.
ReplyDeleteLiterature followed a similar path, beginning within the safety of typical "happy-endings" or very decided tragedies characteristic of the Romantic era, focusing only on what was visible and accessible on the surface of the human psyche. At the turn of the modernist era, risk and deeper musings became evident in the moral and ethical questions raised in novels like Portrait of the Artist.
Though it is much more soothing to associate the simple pleasures in life with ourselves, the approach of the impressionist pieces, specifically the selections of Stravinsky we heard, provide a much needed juxtaposition to the ideal fired at us from the rest of the world. The discomfort and nausea some of his chaotic tumblings of notes evoke, though very unpleasant, make it much more enjoyable to listen to pieces like Gershwin's Lullaby. Plus, the relief of life's imperfection, and the fallibility(I GOT IT RIGHT MR. COOK! =] ) of human nature found in less conventional works assures us that we are not alone in our desires. Most pointedly however, it solidifies the notion that passion can be channeled into a very moving(though in what way is ambiguous) piece of expression, be it pros, melodies, or otherwise.
Music and art go hand and hand with me. To me you can’t have one without the other because they are one in the same. As someone who often does different variations of art, I always have to have music going. It creates a story that you can visualize and put onto canvas. It evoke emotions that you never thought were possible and then you can put them into a picture. Every song tells a story, even if there aren’t lyrics. There is a feel, a tone, and color even if you can’t see it.
ReplyDeleteMusic draws many parallels with visual art. When musicians use different instruments to create a mood, it’s like picking certain colors to create a balance. A musician probably wouldn’t using a soft piano in a heavy mix of rock metal, just as an artist wouldn’t use black in a sunset. It mixes the signal to viewers and to listeners and it becomes too chaotic. What I loved about the classical music that we got a chance to listen to, was that it was painting a picture. You could almost feel the brush strokes as notes were being played. The upbeat tones are brighter colors, and rough sporadic notes darker colors in a less even spread.
A perfect example of music being able to tell a story would be Ned Romen’s “acrobat on a ball”. There were no lyrics, just melody and yet you could vividly picture it. You could feel the tension, almost as if you were the acrobat on the ball. If there were to be an artist in the room listening, they would be able to paint that just based off the sound alone.
My first artistic connection of the music was to Marsden Hartley’s paintings. Many of his pieces, and specifically his landscapes, feature exaggerated shapes, shading, and color. They appear to be simplistic at first and feel awkward without more intense examination. Though the Stravinsky and Rorem pieces we listened to were not by any means simple, they possess awkwardness that requires rapt attention and an open mind to overcome. The Hartley landscapes, many of which feature boulders, mountains, and other rock formations, are harsh and obtrusive in contrast to the realist landscapes of their time. This coincides with the severity of the Stravinsky pieces we heard in both the auditorium and the classroom, which are at odds with the traditional string compositions of the early twentieth century. It is the uniqueness of the pieces, musical and visual, that define them as “Modernist”. They feature layering and contrasts; in the “Three Pieces for String Quartet” by Stravinsky, this is done by placing a traditional part with a bizarre, unsettling repetition, along with other parts that juxtapose the already odd components. An example of this layering and contrast in Hartley’s work is clear in “Landscape, New Mexico (1923)” by Hartley. It features two starkly white clouds against a bright blue sky, with a flowing dirt road lined with dark, abstract trees and background mountains. The road contrasts the dark trees, and the sky and clouds contrast the rest of the earth-toned painting. The piece is a profound example of the specific feelings that can be conjured without depicting something as a visual replica. In other words, it summons the emotions and sensations delivered by the landscape without copying it line for line and color for color. I think this is the most important aspect of the modernist movement: the first attempt at delivering sensations and emotions by exaggerating on certain specific aspects of that which is being depicted. This holds true for paintings, such as Hartley’s, literature, and music. Much of the music we were exposed to falls into the Modernist period, and the pieces which do not still upheld the vital characteristic of Modernism: to portray a specific emotion or sensation by juxtaposing and expanding on specific details and characterizing features.
ReplyDeleteAfter being predisposed to the intense and stirring work of Chopin, Liszt, Debussy, Stravinsky and Shostakovic in our secluded and calm classroom, I was delighted to watch the Hausmann Quartet in action, performing with such commanding passion and elegance, bringing to life music I had consequently heard through speakers a day before. After the day of music and art was over, I was thus itching to do a bit more research on the modernist era as a whole from other angles of art, as I was often reminded of other means of expression while listening to this type of music.
ReplyDeleteIt’s no secret that the likes of Stravinsky and Debussy changed the face of the musical world, and it isn’t surprising that today his harmonic innovations continue to emerge in the works of composers in a variety of styles, from rock to motion picture soundtracks. Modernist music often refers to something a bit out of the ordinary for the time, and while listening to these musical talents play, I was reminded of Berenice Abbott. While this may seem a bit strange and out of left field, after a bit of explanation it might gain some ground in validity. While studying photography last year, I came across Abbott and her modernistic style. Specifically in Abbott’s project Changing New York, she created contrasts through photography between the old and the new, and chose her camera angles and lenses to make compositions that either stabilized a subject or destabilized it, being suggestively modernistic. Berenice Abbott captured New York in a time of great structural and emotional change, and this translated directly into modernism. Her photos echoed a great deal of what the Hausmann Quartet touched on in the library session, and even more specifically, when they talked about the layering and coloring of their music. In Abbott’s art, she employs a similar technique, especially in her architectural photographs, where they are layered and so meticulously attentive to the detail that is evident all over New York.
While the modernistic music and Hausmann Quartet evoked plenty of emotion from me and kick started a whirl of thoughts and ideas in my head, Berenice Abbott remained the most prominent. Fueled by my knowledge and research of photography that I attained last year and the clear similarities between Abbott and the other figureheads of art in that time, it was not hard for me to make connections between these differing works of modernistic art and certainly enjoyed examining other means of expression during a time of great societal change.
I find it baffling and even a little amusing how music can be so different from today’s music. The “gangster” crap that invades the radio stations cannot compare to the classical notes of Mozart, Stravinsky, Debussy, Chopin, Liszt, and all the other artists whose music we have sampled. The musicians deserve to be called artists because that is what they are. Each and every one of them creates art through their music. Every time I listen to Mozart, I think of how wonderful it would be to paint a picture, write a poem, or sculpt your own piece of architecture out of simple clay while listening to his beautiful melodies.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I find it interesting how Stravinsky’s works differed from the works of the other artists. Or at least, I found it different. His music just stood out a lot more to me than the others. Stravinsky was born in 1898 and died in 1971, so he lived during a time when technology was becoming more advanced than, say, the technology of Mozart’s time. Stravinsky experienced more changes in society than any of the other artists. His lifestyle allowed him to create music that is undoubtedly different from other artists.
It is difficult for me to come up with comparisons between the individual pieces we listened to and specific examples of art (for the most part anyway), however, I think that all of the music reflects interestingly on the state of art at the time each peace was composed. It is difficult to look back on Chopin piece, from a modern perspective, and think of it as something radical, especially to someone unaccustomed to classical music, but that is sort of the point. The fact that such a piece can be considered radically different from the norm speaks volumes about the social and artistic rigidity of the time period it was composed in. Similarly, Jane Eyre (which wasn't contemporary with Chopin, but was with others we listened to), was considered radically different at the time it was published, but seems tame in comparison to some (many) modern works.
ReplyDeleteEach song we listened to seemed nearer what a modern listener may consider “different.” In the classroom, this culminated in the Shostakovic piece inspired by the firebombing of Dresden, an event that also inspired Kurt Vonnegut's book Slaughterhouse-Five, a book that challenged the norm in a time as recent as 1969. Slaughterhouse-Five, or any novel like it, is too strange to have been seriously considered literary in the early 1900's, never mind the 1800's. The same could be said for Shostakovic's piece, and that makes sense, as both are written about an event (and a war) that was drastically different from anything people in the 1800's could even have conceptualized.
And then on the modern end of the spectrum, is the Minotaur piece, which despite taking cues from classical music, manages to be different from the modern musical expectations. The title alone reminded me of my summer reading book, House of Leaves, in which the Minotaur was a common motif (and potentially a character? It's never clear.) House of Leaves is a post-modernist novel, radically different from most books written today, and from anything I'd read prior to it. It is interesting to bring up the novel's status as post-modernist, as that genre came into existence as a response to modernism, the genre that encompasses much of the music we listened to. Even though modernism was considered radical at the turn of the 20th century, it did become significantly more popular, and eventually more common. The radical ideas of the late 1800's and early 1900's were the boring, normal ideas of the late 1900's.
They (scientists and researchers) say that having a baby listen to Mozart makes them smart. However, as a child, I was not exposed to this, and grew up listening to the child songs of “London Bridge” or “Mary Had a Little Lamb” and Japanese learning songs like the “Multiplication Table” or the “Alphabet”.
ReplyDeleteAs a somewhat artist myself, whenever I'm having an "artist's" block, I like to just play a random song over and over again, and draw a picture based on the song. Most of my inspiration comes from such sources. The idea actually came from my friend who likes to draw like I do.
So as I was listening to the string quartet I would close my eyes for a second to try and see what kind of picture was painted amongst the music
One of my favorite pieces that was played was Stravinsky’s “Three Pieces for String Quartet”. The first piece reminded me of two different storied that were happening simultaneously. One was the “folk song” like a scene of a festival, while another scene was like the build up of suspense. The second piece kind of reminded me of the “silent” (no words or phrases) episodes I used to watch as a kid (such as Disney animals or Tom and Jerry). It just showed the animation with the music in the background. I absolutely loved those as a kid, because it didn’t matter what language it was in or from what country it was made in, because music is the “international” language. The story in my head was something along the lines of the journey of an acorn or something or other. The third piece was similar to the second, but this one was more solemn and melancholy, giving the story like something of someone was lost.
Other arts included dancing, and wholly agree that dancing is almost nothing without music, because music creates a kind of rhythm that helps the dancer to dance properly. I always enjoy watching other people dance to music, because dance shows how much they enjoy it.
Music and art are intertwined. Art has different forms: music, painting, film, and writing. When people say they love the arts, they do not just like music or writing, they love it all. When ever I have to write or create something, I listen to music. Music, like most other people, inspires me when I create. Like right now, I am listening to music. Arts all go together. When you combine different kinds of art, you get an enhancement of emotion. Like you always notice the music in the background of movies. The music stirs up and enhances the emotions in a movie. If there is a sad scene, there will be somber music playing in the background.
ReplyDeleteThe time periods of art can also have a big influence on people. Some people would love to create or listen to art from hundreds of years ago. Though some people only want to work with more modern work. I like to work with more modern art. Modern art has more intense, up kind of beat, that really inspires and interests me. Great films are influenced from great books. Great Dances are based on great music. Writers make lyrics with instruments making sounds creates music. Art uses other types of art to create their own art. Art is one of the most complex things ever, it can relate to just about everything on the planet.
I’d never realized fully how related music is to other forms of art, especially in terms of time period. What I gathered from everything we did and experienced with the music was that it really works together with other, sometimes wildly different forms of art. It reminds me of the manner in which the myriad ingredients of arctic ice samples, when graphed comparatively, match up surprisingly closely. Essentially, it comes down to the fact that overall cultural movements are driving forces behind the art that culture produces. This works backwards as well, as we saw in the case of the more radical pieces – the culture is a driving force behind the art that seeks to deviate or contradict it. Either way, we gain a good picture of what was going on at the time.
ReplyDeleteAs we saw (or rather, heard) with these pieces, the music of the time reflected a shift not just in culture, but in how art worked at all. I can’t imagine the excitement of such a thing, and it’s no wonder that the artists tended to appear crazy. It’s a crazy thing, changing the nature of art in a culture.
For me, I get the sense that at the time that this music and writing and painting and everything else was going on, everything was in flux. While this could be said for today. it’s so different from then, at least, like I said, for me. Being into what I’m into, the prevailing mentality that I’m immersed in and possessed of is one of seeking to rebuild, maintain, conserve and go back to simpler things in some cases. The time that bore this music was one of limitless ascension, a quintessential golden age for human nature. Inventions, discoveries, advancements. Today, we still invent and discover and advance, but it’s with a different focus and mission on the whole. The music comes from, and reflects, crazy times that asked “what next?”
Music is an art, which is why art and music are related. The first piece we listened to in class by Chopin is one of my new favorites. The opening part reminds me of almost a waltz. The piece done by Liszt gave an anxious feel with a a large amount of tension. As I mentioned in class, the piece by Shostakovic gave me almost a thriller feel, and made me think of Tim Burton. The song especially made me think of the opening scene of Sweeney Todd where the city is being shown from the people down to the cracks of the streets.
ReplyDeleteAt the actual production done by the Hausmann Quartet we heard many different pieces. My favorite was "Lullaby" by Gershwin, which lulled me to sleep. It reminded me of poetry, gently relaxing me. Lastly, I loved how in the piece "Acrobat on the Ball" and how directly you could hear the acrobat and their changes in balance. It is amazing how each instrument is given its own voice to tell its own version of the story.
Music and art are just two of the many subjects that were influenced by the period of impressionism. Due to their capability to be taken in multiple directions, variations of music and art skyrocketed through the period. Debussy, Liszt, and Shostakovic were able to capture emotion or tell a story and yet also leave room for wonder and mystery with their music. One of the things I found very interesting that the Hausmann Quartet said was the different “colors” sprinkled throughout the pieces. Sometimes more subtle than others, hints of other melodies or notes can be added throughout a piece to give it more flavor. I also found it amazing how the music was able to convey emotion. The listener is able to feel the sadness, happiness, and confusion of a piece or its composer, simply by listening. Similar to A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, impressionist styles allow for a lot more interpretation by the viewer, reader or listener. The same rule also applies, I think, when comparing the different pieces of music we heard. There are many different ways a person can interpret the music, nothing is clean-cut. I appreciated the dismantling of a piece, everything played separately and then meshing them altogether. Somehow the music, when apart, sounded muddled and unclear and yet when performed as a whole could not be more beautiful. I also loved the hint of one melody, circulating throughout the piece, just perhaps at a different pace or different style. I think the morphing of one tone, object or work into something new or slightly varied is the exact reason why the impressionist period was able to capture so much beauty.
ReplyDeleteAs Clare mentioned, there is a vast different between listening to a piece through speakers or headphones and then listening to the same piece being played by live musicians. Listening to music in class made it difficult for me to grasp the complete feeling of the composition. When I listen to classical music at home, however, I am able to concentrate solely on the piece rather than other noises and distractions that arise in a classroom setting. As if that difference wasn't enough, seeing the Hausmann Quartet perform had a surprising impact on me. From a young age I have been exposed to all types of music. I have even seen concerts similar to the one played for us the other day. However, it had been years since I had been present at a live concert for this music style. Watching the four musicians let me see how much time, effort, and dedication it took to master their works.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, digging deeper into modernist literature, such as 'A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man,' has shown me the complexity involved in works of literature. As we noticed in class, many of the musical pieces contained tones and moods that changed throughout the composition. In the same way, the characters in the books we have read in (and out of) class go through similar fluctuations of emotions.
When the members of the Hausmann Quartet spoke to us in the library after their performance they discussed the different layers of a musical piece. One by one each of them played a different part, that when played together, made up the complete piece. This reminded me of Mr. Cook's voice repeating 'relate the parts to the whole.' Hearing the different parts of a particular song showed me that alone, the parts had meaning, but together, the meaning and mood they displayed was different. Similarly, you can read 'A Portrait..' for only the story, or only the style in which it is told. However, when we put all the pieces together we gain the most understanding of what Joyce meant to convey.
- ELEANOR KELLER
Music and art are big essentials in life, at least in my opinion. They are intertwined because music is considered an art, and that is because music is made to express a thought, an idea, or an emotion. I believe we had a quartet being displayed before us rather than a single musician was to show us how much beauty in art and music is somewhat a team effort. Melodies and harmonies are always praised. I unfortunatly had to miss the string quartet's performance, but I have been listening to the songs on the list. Each song, along with it's composer has it's own style, and the way you interpret the songs depend on who's playing it and who the listener is. Being a listener of all genres, and enjoys listening to classical music. Some of the songs were gentle at the beginning, but eventually near the middle of the song, there was always a buildup that would overwhelm the ears with something very unexpected. All the songs are either with piano or strings. When you listen to music, you create a picture or a story in your mind, and whenever you hear that song again, you rethink the story or picture.
ReplyDeleteTroughout my young life, music and art are two things that have been very significant. Through my artistic endeavors such as photography and my experience with music, I view art and music in a very similar way. I think of music primarily as an artform itself. In all honesty, I'm not very familiar or well trained in modernist classical music. In this class is one of the few times I have actually sat down and listened to classical music. Anyway, like I was saying I think there is an obvious connection between music and other forms of art. The most primitive relationship is that they're both forms of expression. If there were a difference between music and literature it would have to be that literature is often intellectual and philosophical while music is almost strictly about emotion and feelings.
ReplyDeleteI could clearly see the development of the music in some of the same ways that we've studied the development of literature. In the same way that modern composers like Debussy and Stravinsky were introducing discordant notes to the music, authors such as James Joyce were using stream of conciousness and improper grammar. All of these artists, musicians, and writers were breaking the established rules of their artform. I thought the performance was pretty good in terms of classical music. The only thing that I didn't really like was that the performance involved all stringed instruments so it was mostly the same sound throughout the performance.
^
ReplyDeleteNick Rasmussen
I really enjoyed the music played by the Quartet. It reminded me of a lot the the imperssionist art work of the same time. The musians talked about the piece of music repersenting different ideas or objects. For example one repeating sound was a clown balancing on the ball. I this same way that impressionistic artist of the time captured the feeling of a thing or place instead of its photo realistic image, they used the intensity of color of the thickness of the line to ilist the feeling of motion. In the same way the music simulated those feelings. If i closed my eye i could feel like i was just barely balancing on a ball the sounds felt like wobbling. Stephen expresses his story in feeling and textures and colors rather then straight plot. Like the writing the music is disorganized jumping from thought to thought with out much pattern changing mood and ton quickly and often with out warning.
ReplyDelete