fasstrack Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 I saw this today on CUNY TV, w/host James Day. Sorry, no link, and I'm limited w/the cell phone. But Copeland came across as an uncompromising advocate for (then) modern music, fresh ideas and serious listening. He talked about studying w/Boulanger in Paris, bristling w/youthful energy-and took me there. It must be on video somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 It's Copland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster_Ties Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 (edited) Copland's early work was pretty modern, and at least 'fairly' thorny (imho) -- and (gasp!) he even dabbled in serialism in the 50's (seriously!). Seems like I remember his tone-rows were only 11 notes long, which I always took as a sly way of saying he wasn't totally on board, even if he did want to - well - dabble! Heck, now that the Google has reminded me, Copland even thought himself to have dabbled in a sort of serialism back in the 30's... Serialism in the Early Music of Aaron Copland Edited April 21, 2012 by Rooster_Ties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted April 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 It's Copland. Gee, my face is red. I'll have to send his wife, J. Edgar Hoovere, a note... Seriously, my whole life I thought it was Copeland. It just looks right. And I wondered why he always called me 'mud'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fasstrack Posted April 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 ..dabbled in serialism in the 50's...he wasn't totally on board...More like 'on bored' I think he renounced the serialism, albiet quietly. He didn't cause the stir of, say, David Del Tredici-who just plain ignored it, and caught mad heat from almost everyone. I'm beginning to wonder if serialism wasn't a bad dream Milton Babbit had after those bad anchovies. Bartok managed to stay away and pieces like Concerto for Ochestra starts out w/4ths the way Schoenberg and Berg did pre-serialism-but staying tonal and with modes goes places Sbhoenberg never dreamed about. I don't know about that period. Maybe Schoeberg was a little nutso. Can't blame him for trying. But Berg and Webern IMO made more lasting music, and Bartok and Kodaly did work both 'modern' and based on real traditions (as did (Copland) If you birth a movement in a test tube it damn well better be better than what preceded it. And, oh yeah, it doesn't hurt to have it SOUND GOOD... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.