Facinating post, I’m very grateful indeed for your very detailed insights. However – as a personal view – this is very much the sort of current composing that will only re-inforce the ghettoisation of contemporary music. It’s hard for me to see how anyone outside of the tiny circle of converts would ever be attracted to such defiantly unlovely music, however original. Hell, I’m sympathetic to new music and I can’t stand it one little bit! Which does not in the least lessen my gratitude for your excellent blog…
Many thanks for your response, Mark, and for the kind words; i’m glad you enjoy the blog.
i understand where you’re coming from, but i don’t really agree that contemporary music is ‘ghettoised’. Certain parts of it appeal to something of a niche audience, of course, but since when have the more experimental outshoots of any art form been met with stampedes of popular understanding and approval? As far as Aaron’s music is concerned, while there may be some truth in describing it as “defiantly unlovely”, i suspect that description may say more about your own desires and frustrations concerning what contemporary music could (or should) be like. Are you arguing that contemporary music ought to be “lovely” (and how is that defined exactly)? For what it’s worth, i find much beauty in Aaron’s I, purples and songs only as sad as their listener. However, i did highlight some of the inherent issues with Aaron’s approach to composition; it’ll be interesting to see how it develops and whether he manages to avoid/overcome them.
Newmill Mark
12 years ago
I think you’re right, my notions of the sort of “pleasurable experience” that I want music to provide for me aren’t met by Aaron’s composing, and that is entirely subjective. The excerpts got me thinking because on the same day I read an interview with George Benjamin in the Gaurdian, in which he lamented (IIRC) that “contemporary classical” publishing – i.e. within copyright, and therefore I guess including some far from avant garde composers – represented less than 1% of the publishing business. And I thought, hmmm, I don’t think Aaron’s going to boost that by very much…
Flippancy aside, I suppose I’m just a bit concerned that contemporary composing is at risk of disappearing in ever decreasing circles when it has so little (of course, in my opinion) that might appeal to those not already immersed in it. The likes of Stockhausen and Ligeti found their ideas reaching beyond the hardcore audience to a fair degree, but I’m just not sure I see it happening with this type of composing. But maybe that isn’t (or shouldn’t?) be a concern to the individual composer, who just does his/her own thing.
Essentially I think I basically feel for the performers who must have a hell of a job playing this incredibly complex music – with an end result that sounds indistinguishable from and may as well have been a free improvisation!
Anyway enough of my phillistine ramblings, thanks again for the website – I first discovered it via your excellent Dubstar posts, a rather different strain of music!
Mark, i wouldn’t worry; far from espying apocalyptic clouds on the horizon, i personally feel contemporary music (however you wish to define it) is more imaginative and healthy than it’s been in a very long time. If it ever did move in “ever decreasing circles”, i believe those days to be long gone; more people are aware of what’s going on today than they’ve ever been before, and long may that continue!
and
There’s something else i think you should consider, something vital to this discussion. Contemporary music does, of course, have a relatively small audience, but you seem to think the cause for that is due to the ‘difficult’ music composers choose to write rather than the prevailing attitudes of the masses. Perhaps if more people didn’t just turn to music when they want a quick fix of entertainment or as an anaesthetising aid to relaxation, they might realise that music’s capable of things infinitely more profound, interesting and ultimately nourishing than they ever dreamed of.
Simon – this is a fantastic post. I’m listening to Crutch of Memory at the moment, which is why I’m returning to it.
You don’t discuss timbre in depth, although you allude to it on one or two occasions. I wonder if your reservations about The Crutch of Memory (the piece), which I broadly share, are related to the much narrower timbral (and dynamic) envelope of the violin? That is, the brass/wind and vocal pieces sound more brilliant simply because the muscular operations on those instruments lead a much broader palette of sounds?
i think timbre is difficult to assess on its own terms in Aaron’s music, due to both its essentially fluxion nature as well as it being a somewhat ‘incidental’ parameter in Aaron’s music – by which i mean (like other surface details) it’s essentially a by-product of the primary physical parameters which Aaron’s wielding. But you might disagree with me there (i’ve disagreed with myself on this point)!
To answer your question, no, my reservations with The Crutch of Memory aren’t due to the narrowness of timbre and dynamic; after all, songs only as sad as their listener has a very much more restricted timbral/dynamic ‘bandwidth’ and is extremely effective. The Crutch of Memory just seems aimless in terms of the way the material plays out. While Aaron clearly wants to circumvent conventional notions of narrative listening, that doesn’t change the fact we hear – to some extent at least – in a linear way (notwithstanding the fact we can and to some extent should be able to cogitate retrospectively ‘on the fly’ while listening). As i said in the article, i think there are not insignificant issues underlying what Aaron’s doing, and it remains to be seen whether they’ll become more deeply problematic.
Unlock with Patreon
Facinating post, I’m very grateful indeed for your very detailed insights. However – as a personal view – this is very much the sort of current composing that will only re-inforce the ghettoisation of contemporary music. It’s hard for me to see how anyone outside of the tiny circle of converts would ever be attracted to such defiantly unlovely music, however original. Hell, I’m sympathetic to new music and I can’t stand it one little bit! Which does not in the least lessen my gratitude for your excellent blog…
Many thanks for your response, Mark, and for the kind words; i’m glad you enjoy the blog.
i understand where you’re coming from, but i don’t really agree that contemporary music is ‘ghettoised’. Certain parts of it appeal to something of a niche audience, of course, but since when have the more experimental outshoots of any art form been met with stampedes of popular understanding and approval? As far as Aaron’s music is concerned, while there may be some truth in describing it as “defiantly unlovely”, i suspect that description may say more about your own desires and frustrations concerning what contemporary music could (or should) be like. Are you arguing that contemporary music ought to be “lovely” (and how is that defined exactly)? For what it’s worth, i find much beauty in Aaron’s I, purples and songs only as sad as their listener. However, i did highlight some of the inherent issues with Aaron’s approach to composition; it’ll be interesting to see how it develops and whether he manages to avoid/overcome them.
I think you’re right, my notions of the sort of “pleasurable experience” that I want music to provide for me aren’t met by Aaron’s composing, and that is entirely subjective. The excerpts got me thinking because on the same day I read an interview with George Benjamin in the Gaurdian, in which he lamented (IIRC) that “contemporary classical” publishing – i.e. within copyright, and therefore I guess including some far from avant garde composers – represented less than 1% of the publishing business. And I thought, hmmm, I don’t think Aaron’s going to boost that by very much…
Flippancy aside, I suppose I’m just a bit concerned that contemporary composing is at risk of disappearing in ever decreasing circles when it has so little (of course, in my opinion) that might appeal to those not already immersed in it. The likes of Stockhausen and Ligeti found their ideas reaching beyond the hardcore audience to a fair degree, but I’m just not sure I see it happening with this type of composing. But maybe that isn’t (or shouldn’t?) be a concern to the individual composer, who just does his/her own thing.
Essentially I think I basically feel for the performers who must have a hell of a job playing this incredibly complex music – with an end result that sounds indistinguishable from and may as well have been a free improvisation!
Anyway enough of my phillistine ramblings, thanks again for the website – I first discovered it via your excellent Dubstar posts, a rather different strain of music!
Mark, i wouldn’t worry; far from espying apocalyptic clouds on the horizon, i personally feel contemporary music (however you wish to define it) is more imaginative and healthy than it’s been in a very long time. If it ever did move in “ever decreasing circles”, i believe those days to be long gone; more people are aware of what’s going on today than they’ve ever been before, and long may that continue!
and
There’s something else i think you should consider, something vital to this discussion. Contemporary music does, of course, have a relatively small audience, but you seem to think the cause for that is due to the ‘difficult’ music composers choose to write rather than the prevailing attitudes of the masses. Perhaps if more people didn’t just turn to music when they want a quick fix of entertainment or as an anaesthetising aid to relaxation, they might realise that music’s capable of things infinitely more profound, interesting and ultimately nourishing than they ever dreamed of.
Simon – this is a fantastic post. I’m listening to Crutch of Memory at the moment, which is why I’m returning to it.
You don’t discuss timbre in depth, although you allude to it on one or two occasions. I wonder if your reservations about The Crutch of Memory (the piece), which I broadly share, are related to the much narrower timbral (and dynamic) envelope of the violin? That is, the brass/wind and vocal pieces sound more brilliant simply because the muscular operations on those instruments lead a much broader palette of sounds?
Would be interested in your thoughts on this.
Hi Tim – sorry for the delay replying to you.
i think timbre is difficult to assess on its own terms in Aaron’s music, due to both its essentially fluxion nature as well as it being a somewhat ‘incidental’ parameter in Aaron’s music – by which i mean (like other surface details) it’s essentially a by-product of the primary physical parameters which Aaron’s wielding. But you might disagree with me there (i’ve disagreed with myself on this point)!
To answer your question, no, my reservations with The Crutch of Memory aren’t due to the narrowness of timbre and dynamic; after all, songs only as sad as their listener has a very much more restricted timbral/dynamic ‘bandwidth’ and is extremely effective. The Crutch of Memory just seems aimless in terms of the way the material plays out. While Aaron clearly wants to circumvent conventional notions of narrative listening, that doesn’t change the fact we hear – to some extent at least – in a linear way (notwithstanding the fact we can and to some extent should be able to cogitate retrospectively ‘on the fly’ while listening). As i said in the article, i think there are not insignificant issues underlying what Aaron’s doing, and it remains to be seen whether they’ll become more deeply problematic.
[…] in-depth back in May, this survey of Cassidy’s works for one or two players provides a real insight into the […]
[…] Cummings, Simon. (2012, May 28th). Giving voice to the indescribable: Aaron Cassidy – The Crutch of Memory. 5:4. Retrieved November 29, 2022, from https://5against4.com/2012/05/28/giving-voice-to-the-indescribable-aaron-cassidy-the-crutch-of-memor… […]