(April 2000) Still going strong at age 84, renouned composer Milton Babbitt was a founding member of the Columbia-Princeton Electronic Center where he created "Philomel," one of the first compositions of the synthesizer
Posted on 01/30/2011 9:26:47 AM PST by Borges
Milton Babbitt, an influential composer, theorist and teacher who wrote music that was intensely rational and for many listeners impenetrably abstruse, died on Saturday. He was 94 and lived in Princeton, N.J.
********************************************************
He often said in interviews that every note in a contemporary composition should be so thoroughly justified that the alteration of a tone color or a dynamic would ruin the work’s structure. And although colleagues who worked in atonal music objected when their music was described as cerebral or academic, Mr. Babbitt embraced both terms and came to be regarded as the standard-bearer of the ultrarational extreme in American composition.
That reputation was based in part on an article published by High Fidelity magazine in February 1958 under the title “Who Cares if You Listen?” The headline was often cited as evidence of contemporary composers’ disregard for the public’s sensibilities, and Mr. Babbitt objected that it had been added by an editor, without his permission. But whatever his objections, the article did argue that contemporary composition was a business for specialists, on both the composing and listening end of the transaction, and that the general public’s objections were irrelevant.
“Why refuse to recognize the possibility that contemporary music has reached a stage long since attained by other forms of activity?” Mr. Babbitt wrote. “The time has passed when the normally well-educated man without special preparation could understand the most advanced work in, for example, mathematics, philosophy and physics. Advanced music, to the extent that it reflects the knowledge and originality of the informed composer, scarcely can be expected to appear more intelligible than these arts and sciences to the person whose musical education usually has been even less extensive than his background in other fields.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Classical Music Ping
I never heard of him, and so I went and Googled him. After trying to listen to a couple youtube selections, I now know why I never heard of him.
It’s like “modern art”. It’s a way for pretentious elites to feel superior. Fine, let THEM pay for it. My tax dollars had better not be involved.
I decided at a very young age that atonality, polka and Hawaiian music all have their moments of being tolerable and/or brilliant but, none of those moments are longer than 5 or 10 seconds.
Or maybe not everyone can appreciate something right away and it takes some effort.
I’ve listened to “drone” or “ambient” music before, some of it isn’t all that bad. That stuff he made, I couldea done that.. nothing but random noise.
AFAIC, the most impressive thing that this dude ever did was teach mathematics at Princeton.
(April 2000) Still going strong at age 84, renouned composer Milton Babbitt was a founding member of the Columbia-Princeton Electronic Center where he created "Philomel," one of the first compositions of the synthesizer
The title “Who Cares If You Listen?” was added by an editor and Babbitt didn’t care for it. Read the excerpt I posted above. It explains his attitude on this matter.
That was neater (and more enjoyable) than I expected. Thanks for posting.
Perhaps you think me a Philistine, but I walk away from the atonal music as quickly as I walk away from almost all abstract art. To me, art should be enjoyable and not something that one thinks they like because they want to be seen as hip, cool or intelligent.
To my mind, while the guy was no doubt brilliant and great at what he did, he completely missed the point of musice, and by extension of other art.
That purpose is to create the intended emotional response in the listener. If it doesn’t do that, what’s the rutting point?
During the 1800s and the first part of the 1900s “modern” classical music was revered by “the people.” Now most people just ignore it, and for damn good reason. Same with most modern poetry, painting, sculpture, etc.
I strongly suspect most of those who claim to like this stuff are really only trying demonstrate their sophistication to their peers who are trying to to the same.
In my opinion Borges’ productions were neither classical nor music. They were cacophony, right up there with John cage’s symphony featuring 100 metronomes winding down. sd
Indeed...my feelings precisely.
Intellect is just as valid an appeal as Emotion. And besides to some people an intellectual response IS emotional.
Agree with your second point. Not sure about the first. More or less by definition, if you say you “enjoy” a piece of music, you are describing an emotional response toit.
The elaboration of complexity for its own sake seems ultimately meaningless to me.
I think the obvious way people ignore this stuff indicates most agree with me. Of course, a lot of the “music” that is popular today creates in me an emotional response, but by no means a positive one.
YMMV
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.