Re: the composers intent (was 36-tone Debussy)

Whew! It's been an exciting coupla days! I'll try not to drag this
out TOO much (aren't the digests coming thick & fast?).

[Kraig Grady, TD 427.17:]
>You don't need to parasite others works to experiment.

Don't look now, but the hallowed greats were the biggest "parasites" of
all!

[David Beardsley, TD 427.23:]
>I've got to agree with KG here: do something new folks!

Please be sure to keep me posted about when the vote comes up for what
YOUR next project will be, David; I don't want to miss casting mine! ;^>

[Daniel Wolf:]
>>I will never cease to be amazed by Glenn Gould's Bach (piano and all).

[Dale Scott, TD 428.3:]
>You're right. I can almost hear Bach's notes over the incessant
>humming/moaning.

Har! That's a funny recording, all right! I actually wrote CBS about
it many years ago and got a courteous response (I asked where I could
buy the "non-singing" version; they regretfully informed me that there
wasn't one...). (Of course, I knew there wasn't one; I was just
twisting their corporate tail... Nobody, it seems, could stop GG from
singing, especially later in his life.).

[Kraig Grady, TD 428.10:]
>I believe Stravinsky complained bitterly about the changing of his
>music in Fantasia and i remember he included the "blackmail" letter
>from Walt himself telling him his copywrights meant nothing in the U.S.

Dang! I suppose this means I shouldn't post the killer "Rite of Spring"
piano reduction I got from a list member! Sounds like ol' Walt was
acting like a jerk... I do think that, while a composer is alive, it is
fair to grant full legal control over his/her work; if this is not being
done now, I would support changes. After a composer's death (and
separate expiration of works' copyrights), I think it's reasonable to
throw the game wide open. Let time weed out the crap; it does have a
way of doing so!!!

[JdL:]
>>A while back there was a controversy concerning Harry Partch and the
>>Kronos Quartet. Even then I tended to side with the quartet,

[Kraig:]
>them ur thar fightin wurds, mistar

Yeah, I've already been beat up on that one! I ain't tryin' to re-open
it!!

[Kraig:]
>Follow you vision then!!!!!!! we could go back and forth forever on
>this, at least you are aware as to how a composer might think that's
>all!

Sure. My quibble has to do with whether the boys of the past felt this
way; we'll see what the historical experts tell us on that one!

Thanks to all the list members, too many to mention (from memory,
anyway!) who make me feel that I'm not standing all alone! Many of you
offered not just unqualified support, but what might be called
"thoughtful support", highlighting important facets of the issues, and
bringing forth legitimate cautions. Thanks so much to all of you!!

Johnny, I just bought a statue of you, and I'm fixing the nose - it was
WAY too small...

JdL

"John A. deLaubenfels" wrote:

> [David Beardsley, TD 427.23:]
> >I've got to agree with KG here: do something new folks!
>
> Please be sure to keep me posted about when the vote comes up for what
> YOUR next project will be, David; I don't want to miss casting mine! ;^>

In the real near future, there's probably going to
be live microtonal guitar netcast.

I don't have any gigs scheduled right now,
but I should have a CD-R ready sometime in
January so I can start getting some together
in 2000.

> [Kraig Grady, TD 428.10:]
> >I believe Stravinsky complained bitterly about the changing of his
> >music in Fantasia and i remember he included the "blackmail" letter
> >from Walt himself telling him his copywrights meant nothing in the U.S.
>
> Dang! I suppose this means I shouldn't post the killer "Rite of Spring"
> piano reduction I got from a list member!

Think you could send a copy over this way? It's
a life long favorite.

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* xouoxno@virtulink.com
*
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* M E L A v i r t u a l d r e a m house monitor
*
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

To: tuning@onelist.com
[I wrote:]
>Johnny, I just bought a statue of you, and I'm fixing the nose - it was
>WAY too small...

Which, after I posted it, didn't sound at all well thought out. I
HOPE it was clear that I am not referring to any actual perceived
characteristics, either physical or otherwise! (I had not seen a pic
of you till I went looking just now!).

But if it did come out that way, I make the following joke on myself,
as atonement: you bought a statue of me and tried to adjust the size of
the head, but the store ran out of clay...

JdL

Perhaps "defacing" is what you had in mind after all, yes JdL? :)

No, I didn't get offended by your comments. But perhaps it's better that I
tell you my thoughts.

The difference is conceptual between our 2 positions. I find myself aligned
with Jon, Daniel, Kraig, and others that raise alarm at too much, or
ill-advised tinkering. Believe me, this is as unlikely a bunch of
bed-fellows as I can imagine on this list.

You seem to see the composition as existing only in its set of directions
through music notation. Not true and my metaphor still stands about sculpted
work. I don't feel you have the right to call it my sculpture if you alter
it before an exhibition...even if you own it. Sorry if this burdensome for
you. You can still legally do any kind of changing and rearranging you want.
Since it's my line of work, the presentation of previously unperformable
scores, I thought my opinion might be of some interest to you on this
subject.

The integrity of my compositions are threatened by those that don't see the
true designs which are often buried within a piece. I say the above
foremost as an interpreter, but with the approval of the composer inside.
The producer in me wouldn't have it any other way.

Johnny Reinhard
AFMM