More Ives Universe

Nice mention of JR's work on Elodie Lauten's Sequenza 21 blog:
http://www.sequenza21.com/lauten.html

Cheers,
Jon

Thanks for pointing Elodie's Blog out, Jon. Here's a bit more, now about
microtonality:

Just another observation that follows something I said about a week ago.

It strikes me, again, what most people have ignored about Ives is the
microtonal issue. They've been struck with this atonal thing, and
that polytonal thing, and this polyrhythmic thing. Not that those are
insignificant, but as time has passed, they, for their own sake, are
not enough to make Ives's music striking. It now does that pretty
much through its own worth.

But if there's still one thing to make us say, "Wow, how was he able
to do that in 19--", it's the issues I was discussing with Johnny in
earlier posts, microtonality and various schemes of tuning.

As noted, even temperament makes tuning certain instruments much
easier, as least in the absence of modern technology. When even
temperament took over, 12-tone/atonal music was inevitable, not a bad
thing, IMO, I should note. But when we come to the Second Viennese
School, and then the Total Serialist school, we find the potential for
innovation in even temperament is largely spent.

The neo-tonal folks like Del Tredici and the late George Rochberg say
the answer is to step backward. Minimalists like Philip Glass (and to
a lesser degree, Steve Reich and John Adams) say the answer is to go
backwards harmonically, but try to do something different in regards
to rhythm and melody.

Ives, however, if not the only one, is one of the very few to say the
answer is to go both backward and forward, in a sense, with the
rejection of even temperament. The desire for just intonantion or
schemes approximating it is not quite the same as microtonal composers
who might propose a 24 tone quartertone octave that still has equal
temperament between the 24 tones, in other words, not a quest to
extend dodecaphony to include a few more tones. It is a quest to
realize a "new" harmony, one essentially as old as nature, but never
really exploited by composers. It is the next logical step after 12-tone.

I find it interesting to note that in 1927 Eugene Goosens had to deal
with a new kind of orchestral playing with the 4th Symphony, and
almost 70 years later, Johnny faced a similar task with the Universe.
How many people can maintain themselves in the vanguard for seven
decades, especially when they've been dead for four of them?!?

It really tells me, as I've said before, despite all the "he did this
before anyone else"'s or even one person's "he just made it look like
he did this before anyone else," the surprises are still coming from
CEI, and the music world hasn't even really begun to evaluate what he
pointed them toward 90 YEARS AGO.

I must be in a manic phase today....