Actually, this was my comment, not Brian's, though Brian
seemed to agree at least in part.

By the way, I think your suggestion that classical music
involves the same degree of improvisation as jazz - if that
is what you are suggesting - is quite mistaken.  One plays a
Mozart piano concerto as written - with a few optional
decorations (which I personally usually do not like).  There
are of course cadenzas but even they are sometimes written
by the composer - and in any case can just as easily be done
without. A symphony doesn't even have that degree of
latitude. 

The 'interpretation' a conductor or performer gives to
classical music is not comparable to improvisation: it
involves slightly different ways of playing the same notes,
not insertion of strings of new notes.  If I listen to a
performance of say Mozart's 21st piano concerto, I know
exactly what is coming next. It may be played slightly
differently depending on the performer but it is always the
same sequence of notes. (Thank God! The last thing I want is
someone messing with my Mozart. It would be like someone
adding a few brushstrokes to a Rembrandt or another chapter
to 'Crime and Punishment)'.

DA
  


 
----- Original Message -----
From: Allan Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Music and all that jazz -correction
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:36:18 +0900

> On 15/4/08 12:58, "Brian Jenkins"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > "I find it very repetitive.  In fact I suspect one
> > learns to play jazz partly through learning a series of
> > rather standard routines."
> >
> >
> 
> Brian,
> 
> I understand what you are saying about teaching and
> learning jazz but disagree with you on point of precision.
> There is not so much difference from classical performance
> in what you say. Many musicians can produce a passable, if
> not laudable, rendition of many pieces, but few do this
> masterfully.  Few musicians are capable of the sensitive
> virtuosity demanded to recreate a composed piece. This is
> a difference between average craftsmanship in performance
> and virtuosic, artistic performance; it may be significant
> or slight in the act, but can immensely so in the outcome
> in performance.
> 
> To take your one of your examples, yes Beethoven's Op. 111
> can be performed masterfully, it can also be performed
> atrociously and also with any variation in quality of
> rendition in between the sublime and the awful, ambiguity
> intended here as a play of humour. To say the same without
> doubt, the performance can be any variation between the
> utterly superb and the utterly atrocious. Some works were
> completely unplayable when they were written, musical
> pedagogy and other improvements in technique have made
> them playable. Many, if not all renditions of classical
> pieces are marked by error of some sort, wrong notes,
> incorrectly struck keys, or the likes. Thus Glen Gould
> spent so much time patching together his best performances
> of pieces of a sonata or other pieces to make the best
> example he could produce. He could not achieve those in
> real time, thus did he not give up on live performance
> altogether.
> 
> Learning the craft is the first step for jazz and
> improvising musicians, it is then requisite on the
> musician to go beyond that individually and in ensemble
> performances. Some musicians do, some don't, some can,
> some cannot, transcend their learned practices. The very
> fact that you found it impossible to do satisfactorily, is
> a measure of the effort required to achieve that
> transcendence from the routine to the creative. Yes, some
> may be fully satisfied with a mundane performance, but
> that is also true of classical performances. A good many
> prefer the Blue Danube over Beethoven's Op. 111 or
> Mahler's 5th symphony, but that does not make Blue Danube
> better music, which you know.
> 
> Free jazz can often sound like chaos, and sometimes chaos
> is a sought goal. Or to say the same in another way, lack
> of structure and repetition can be a striven goal, just as
> abstract artists attempt to escape all traces of
> representation, either intentional put there or
> perceivable by an observer. But that attempt to escape any
> structure or form is mostly not the intention. As most
> other forms of music, free improvisation usually strive to
> create and present a conceptualised idea, for example,
> through the musical practice of musicians in ensembles.
> 
> Let me make one point clear, I am not arguing that jazz
> and improvised music, improvised within or outwith the
> basic jazz bebop form and harmonies, are spontaneous
> reproduction of music. This is quite in error, just as the
> performance of Beethoven's Op. 111 is not quite the same
> on each occasion. It is not, this is why Cage sought to
> introduce elements of chance and criticised jazz. Yes, it
> is the creation of music usually be ensembles of musicians
> in performance, but it is nonsense to think this could be
> done in any less a structured, or structuring manner, on
> the spot by musicians. Must music making practices are in
> some ways structured, jazz and improvised music included.
> It is whether that produces music which is adventurous and
> refreshing, rather than rote and tedium that is the point.
> The best jazz and improvised music is not rote and tedium,
> the worst can be and sometimes is; I have listened to
> both.
> 
> I do not consider that appreciating jazz makes the
> appreciation of other music impossible. I would hope that
> jazz and improvised music can be understood to add to the
> sound materials available to humanity, and that it creates
> a world of sound anew. Sorry, I do not hear what I hear in
> the best of jazz and improvised music in Bartok or anyone
> else.
> 
> I always find it odd when, as did Adorno, discussion of
> value in music, or in any other art form, leads one to the
> last great composer or painter or whatever being someone
> who is either dead or in decline. For Adorno it was
> Schvnberg, and Schvnberg before serialism, which Adorno
> thought mechanised the process of composition. Thankfully,
> the composers and musicians did not take Adorno's
> assessments to heart and continued on to create fresh,
> engaging and great music which did not supplant the music
> of the past.
> 
> Thank you for engaging,
> 
> Allan.

Reply via email to