A work of art? A musical performance? An exercise in sharpening definitions.

[tybrad]

I have recently been revisiting my Aesthetics In Art book from my undergrad days and came across something about John Cage. The idea is to explore, not declare, per se as there are not clear cut answers. But I am interested in how you're thinking about it.

John Cage's 4'33"

Among the most famous of John Cage’s compositions is his piece for piano entitled, 4’33”. To perform this work, the pianist goes on stage, sits at a piano, opens the keyboard and remains silently seated for exactly four minutes and thirty-three seconds. At the end of that time the pianist closes the keyboard and leaves the stage.

Is 4’33” a work of art? Is it a piece of music? What if Cage insisted that 4’33” was a “listening experience” in which the audience is supposed to hear background noises– would you answer the “music” question differently?

Suppose that during a recent concert of Cage’s works, the pianist hired to perform 4’33” became ill at the last moment and had to withdraw. In desperation, the stage manager himself performs the work. Would this be a performance of Cage’s work? Would it be a musical performance?

In earnest,
Tyler

 

[walkandtalk]

Anybody can perform the work - that makes it one of the most accessible artworks, IMHO.

Every performance is different. Not a musical performance perhaps, but a performance of Cage's work as intended by the composer.

I'm laughing to myself, thinking how unique a performance it would be if the ill pianist could be heard making his own movements in the background...

 

[Stuart Pedaso]

Spaces between the notes are no less important to musical composition than the notes themselves. A performance of all spaces and no notes, such as 4'33", can therefore be declared just as validly "musical" as one of all notes and no spaces, such as guitar shredding.

Depending on my mood of the moment, I could enjoy a recital of either ...

 

[spideyjack]

Is 4’33” a work of art?

Is it a piece of music?

What if Cage insisted that 4’33” was a “listening experience” in which the audience is supposed to hear background noises– would you answer the “music” question differently?

1) sure!
2) you bet!
3) that was his intention, as I have always understood it.

4'33" forever changed my uderstanding of music, very liberating :yes:

 

[JesusChrysler]

Well personally I'd be pissed off if I were at said recital.

But I didnt go to college.


Matt

 

[dumptruck]

Spaces between the notes are no less important to musical composition than the notes themselves. A performance of all spaces and no notes, such as 4'33", can therefore be declared just as validly "musical" as one of all notes and no spaces, such as guitar shredding.

I disagree. As you said, "spaces between the notes" are no less important. Without any notes, there are no spaces between notes either. Cage's piece is performance art with a heavy conceptual component. Musical composition and performance is the medium, but it is not music.

 

[dumptruck]

Side point: one of the most frustrating things to me about the general public's reaction to "difficult" modern artwork (and it gets a whole lot more difficult than a silent composition or blank painting) is that people tend to think they have to "get" some obtuse concept that they might not agree with anyway. All you have to do is take it in (really take it in openly and fully) and try to appreciate the thoughts and feelings it effects. All the masturbatory art theory stuff is supposed to come after that, not before.

P.S. My previous post is just my own conclusion about defining the work. It's debatable, and was not intended to be anything less than debatable, which is why it makes a good little undergrad exercise as in the OP.

 

[jsisk]

I would say that whether it is performance art or music would come down to how he transcribed it when it was first created.

If the piece was written as a page of musical rests that would equal the 4 minutes and 33 seconds, you would have to accept it as a musical composition.

If it was written as a general direction to sit at the piano and play nothing, I would consider it to be performance art rather than music.

I think it is the perfect piece to play on the bagpipes.

 

[John James]

i would say that whether it is performance art or music would come down to how he transcribed it when it was first created.

If the piece was written as a page of musical rests that would equal the 4 minutes and 33 seconds, you would have to accept it as a musical composition.

If it was written as a general direction to sit at the piano and play nothing, i would consider it to be performance art rather than music.

i think it is the perfect piece to play on the bagpipes.

bam!

 

[Guest123]

John Cage had more nerve than Madonna.

 

[robgmn]

I'd call it a joke on the audience, then offer to sell blank canvases at $1,000 a pop to anyone who thought it was spectacular (for an extra hundie, I'd throw in a CD or LP of the performance to listen to at home)...

 

[dumptruck]

I'd call it a joke on the audience, then offer to sell blank canvases at $1,000 a pop to anyone who thought it was spectacular (for an extra hundie, I'd throw in a CD or LP of the performance to listen to at home)...

Since Cage cited Rauschenberg's white paintings, that's not too far off from what happened, just backwards.

 

[JDub]

If the piece was written as a page of musical rests that would equal the 4 minutes and 33 seconds, you would have to accept it as a musical composition.

I think this answers the question. If it was written as a series of rests with pacing notes (adagio, allegro, whatever), then the performer would have some discretion in counting the beats and the performance would not necessarily be be 4'33". In specifying the time, Cage demonstrates that it is not music.

 

[dumptruck]

I think Cage just noted the length of each "movement", but modern pacing notes are sometimes in bpm, and Bartók is famous for tempo notes down to the second.

 

[walkandtalk]

Side point: one of the most frustrating things to me about the general public's reaction to "difficult" modern artwork (and it gets a whole lot more difficult than a silent composition or blank painting) is that people tend to think they have to "get" some obtuse concept that they might not agree with anyway. All you have to do is take it in (really take it in openly and fully) and try to appreciate the thoughts and feelings it effects. All the masturbatory art theory stuff is supposed to come after that, not before.

P.S. My previous post is just my own conclusion about defining the work. It's debatable, and was not intended to be anything less than debatable, which is why it makes a good little undergrad exercise as in the OP.

I enjoy going to some rather experimental musical performances, and a few years back invited my fiance to join me. I warned her not to expect too much, that she probably wouldn't like it considering how much like random noise it would appear to be.

After the performance, I asked her what she thought, and this is what she said:

"Watching them just frustrated me, because I was seeing them beat on things and whap things and shake things. Then, I closed my eyes, and after a minute I wasn't watching them perform, but I was imagining what the sounds felt like. Before long, the sounds had a life of their own, and sometimes it was funny, sometimes it was scary or happy or sad."

I was so proud of her, and told her she "got it".

 

[spideyjack]

The original score is in conventional notation, I'm pretty sure all of Cage's works are scored.

 

[copterske2]

And Cage did compose some works like those for prepared piano (which are terrific) that if not conventional per se were not that far afield. As mentioned before, 4'33'' is essentially an invitation to consider the ambient sounds that surround us. I believe Cage was influenced by Zen Buddhism at this time. Current composers like Pauline Oliveros incorporate this "deep listening" sensibility in works that likewise require a certain level of audience concentration. There are also elements of fun and play in the realization of these works that can result in a very enjoyable concert experience.

 

[mfrench]

I probably would have recorded it if I were to attend. The highlight would have been the footsteps of the performer coming onto and leaving the stage, and the keyboard opening/closing; and of course the ovations.

In contrast to no sound,.... Another oddity, one which I did record on May 13, 2006 - Center for the Arts, Eagle Rock (L.A.), Ca.:
Alvin Lucier: A Tribute to James Tenney for solo double bass and pure wave oscillators
Quoting the program for the evening,...
In Alvin Luciers "A Tribute to James Tenney", two oscillator tones, a C and D, are sent to the left and right speakers, and played in five different octaves (in five separate movements). The double bassist stands in the middle playing microtones between the two oscillator tones. What results is a fascinating collision of phase cancellations and sideband tones that wreak havoc on the listeners perceptions of what the sound is and where it is coming from. Sounds seem to come from nowhere and swirl around the room

I was allowed to set up wherever in the room would yield the best sound, prior to the performance, during rehearsals, and what I captured is very aptly described above.
The oscillating tones would leave your brain processing the left/right pure tone signal, and trying to make sense of that. Then the bass microtones would be played, and all aural havoc would occur, impacting what your brain had just made sense of. It was a very aural, visceral mind-screwing, to say the least.
People that have heard the recording have been left feeling somewhat dizzy, disoriented, always with a deeply exhaling woahhh,…..

This is the only version of it that I can find online. Unfortunately, it was poorly recorded, and extremely low in amplitude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MFwqlxy9W4