Wiggling Air
Music,
no stranger to philosophical depth, can be viewed from many angles. These
include technical craft, business and professionalism, social implications, and
several others. Of the many angles, musical culture always seems to interest me
the most; specifically, how certain music communities can form generalized
attitudes, standards, and social norms. I’ve only been alive for a little
while, but it seems that with the mass accessibility of various musical styles
and thoughts, many of these established cultures are breaking down and
reforming in new directions. In the case of classical music, which has
historically been quite a serious affair filled with ”genius” composers of high
social status, it seems that we are finally coming back down to Earth. This
change does not imply a lack of craft or ability. This cultural change is taking place
alongside the natural evolution of musical thought, which is moving in
directions that I find quite exciting. Florent Ghys’ work and presentation exemplifies
many of the positive qualities of recent contemporary classical music.
It would be hard to deny the craft
and originality present in Ghys’ works. In a music entrepreneurship class I
had, a guest presenter said that the 20th century was about being the best, but
the 21st century is about being unique. Without trying to unpack the validity
of this statement, most of Ghys’ pieces exhibit a unique perspective on music
as art that fits well into the proposed 21st century narrative. Specifically,
his use of video and found sounds creates an approach that can easily be
identified with him. While unique, the pieces are also meticulously made. His
work that accompanied a video of a pong game displayed a great amount of
creativity. This creativity shines when considering how long the process must
have taken to create sound in response to the game, which was then edited and
synced to the video projection. As he mentioned, many of his pieces co-exist
with the visual as one justifies the other. However, the music itself is still
well made, as evidenced by his albums released as audio-only. As a whole, his
work represents a take on Dadaism seen through and made with the tools of
current technology.
Of his entire presentation, Ghys’
statement that he tries not to take himself too seriously struck me the most. I
have long grappled with the idea of “the artist,” whom historically has taken
themself very seriously. In a certain opera class I have taken, the written accounts
of the romantic operas (even those of the early 20th century) spend large
amounts of ink trying to convince the reader that any given opera is really, really important and the
composer is a really, really genius artist.
It’s a kind of pedestal that I don’t feel comfortable supporting. A piece of
art, whether music or anything else, can be taken seriously without glorifying
the ego of the creator to epic proportions. There is a balancing act I have yet
to figure out where really great composers, such as Florence and many other
living creators close to home, can take the craft and impact of their art seriously
without taking themselves as people so seriously. Ghys’ attitude combined with
the way he presents himself, to me, represents a model of the ideal
contemporary musician.
Good stuff. Balancing is incredibly challenging, Ghys had a nice way of presenting himself, as this sort of craftsman with intense attention to detail. Being a "serious composer" versus a "light composer" is a strange distinction that's plagued the film world for some time, a bit less so now. I'm happy that people care a little more about caring about people in art now though, regardless of alleged seriousness or not. Of course there's this balance between audience pandering (bad) and absolute neglect that there are other humans with ears in the world (also bad.)
ReplyDeleteBalance is life and I think part of the game is finding that balance. Anyways, good post.
I agree that sometimes the seriousness of ego can make it difficult to process art. I enjoy the refreshing attitude of many of the guests that we have had in this course of people who just like what they do. To them its fun. I think thats a terribly under emphasized quality of contemporary performers. Whether they take themselves seriously or not, just having fun and enjoying the musical process should be a big part of it.
ReplyDeleteThat's the thing!!
DeleteI also really connected to the fact that Ghys made a point to explain to us that he tries not to take himself too seriously. In these days, being an artist tends to mean turning yourself into a business, or brand, as well. It seems that Ghys, while he takes his music very seriously, also really enjoys being an artist, and loves having fun with what he can do with his talents.
ReplyDeleteI agree. It was a really inspiring lecture. I went on Youtube to watch his compositions before Composers forum and found the the way he presented the combination of video and music was really unique and experimental. I did also find his statement of not taking serious quite interesting. Often times, we find ourselves boxed in by the expectation of what an artist should do. When we feel that we are creating music to live up to the standard of a proper piece of music that is suitable for a concert hall, we might end up missing the most essential part of music, the fun of it.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your thoughts on the different societal expectations artists had placed on them depending on the time period. It's a broad statement to surmise that in general, artists pursued talent rather than uniqueness in the 20th century and vice-vera in the modern era. Florent Ghys is certainly both talented and unique in his particular writing. I too connected with the tongue and cheekness of his writing. It brings into light the more philosophical question of the role of the artist and what art is. Ghys does an excellent job of taking albeit pedestrian activities (watching the weather, snow blowing the driveway, or playing a simple video game) and turning them into excellent musical pieces. It's a great concept, during the ordinary into the interesting.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree on the last point specifically. Ghys' attitude toward how he carries himself as an artist stuck out to me the most during his talk. The fact that he doesn't take himself too seriously certainly adds a uniqueness that makes him attractive as an artist. One point that I feel exemplifies this is that, while he says he doesn't take himself too seriously, his work shows that he is indeed serious about that outlook on his work. He's serious about not taking himself too seriously. I think this is an important distinction to make, because it shows in his body of work. Even if some of his pieces had silly root concepts, the final products all felt at home where they were, as they were. I never got the feeling that any of his work was trying to be any more or less than what it was. I also feel that, from the viewpoint of one who had a more "20th century" mindset, this consistency would legitimize his work as well. I too think that Florant Ghys represents an ideal in contemporary artistic attitude. I think we can all learn from him how specifically to not take our work too seriously.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! Well-written.
ReplyDeleteFlorent’s ease with humor and lightheartedness is undeniable. He has such a knack for inviting the audience member in with playful gestures and moods. You can’t help but sit up in your seat, even just a few seconds into any of his pieces. Personally, I find that humor is one of the hardest things to achieve consistently and productively in music. When I try to incorporate it into my work, I often find that the harder I try, the less likely it is that I will achieve it. It’s almost like a Magic Eye illusion: you have to just relax and let it come to you. Florent seems to be a master of this type of intelligent and confident looseness, letting the playful ideas freely enter his work.
Florent’s playfulness is almost a trojan horse for the more erudite aspects of the art - that is, his virtuosity, his meticulousness and density of labor, and his intellectualism. The audience is initially drawn in by the lightness of it all, and then is primed to marvel at his craft.
So let’s give credit where it’s due. I tip my hat to Florent’s craft and unique voice.
Having said all that, I did have a hard time with many aspects of the presentation. I often found myself wondering about the “why” of all his work. Why did this or that piece need to be written? What’s the point? Why is he applying for this specific fellowship or that specific PhD? What political takeaways am I being invited to consider?
I also found myself wondering if he has done his homework on the history and science behind his most closely-held aesthetic values. It was unclear to me, from both his presentation and his answers to student questions, what he was aware of. Off the top of my head, I can think of the orchestrational onomatopoeias of Hector Berlioz or John Williams. I think of the speech-melody transcriptions that jazz elder statesmen like Hermeto Pascoal and Jason Moran have deftly incorporated into their compositions. All of these artists have employed similar musical techniques as part of much larger pieces - not just for the sake of the technique itself. To get specific for those interested, I think of Williams’ twinkly moment of orchestration for the explosion of the Death Star in Star Wars Episode III, or Jason Moran’s “Artists Ought to Be Writing”. Both are instances where the muscial technique is working towards a larger idea than just “isn’t it funny how the music is matching?” There’s also academic psychology literature on the relationship between speech and melody, probably the most famous of which is Diana Deustch’s speech-to-melody illusion study from the 1990’s. I was craving mention of any of this, or things like it, so that I could appropriately place Florent in an artistic continuum that he seemed undoubtedly part of. Even as just a music fan, he seemed unable to mention contemporaries using similar audio-visual techniques as his. I wish he had shouted out an artist like MonoNeon, who posts equally humorous and virtuosic speech-melody videos on Instagram many times a month.
Also troubling was Florent’s lack of political sensitivity at certain moments. His language around the Iranian weather report video was unsettling. He was borderline flippant in discussing the reporter’s religious garb (a hijab, if my memory serves me), and described the language being spoken as “Iranian”, which is not a language that exists. From my seat, his non-chalant words in this example and others belied a lack socio-political awareness that recast his use of humor in a less becoming light.
For such a talented composer, taking up a PhD slot at a world-class institution such as Princeton, I would have hoped for a little more intellectual rigor from Florent. However, it’s never too late, and I hope Florent takes the time to incorporate more research and political gravity into his work. I actually think his work would only flourish with such rigor, and not be freighted by it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe death of the ego has been such a good thing for classical music. I love that artists like Florent allow their art to speak for itself in terms of creativity and craft without needing to back it up with an air of self-importance.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Mike Brun that his language around the Iranian weather report seemed very half-baked, but I'm hopeful this was just him avoiding a long conversation. That being said, I don't feel that composers should have to always be brimming with intellectual conversation -- sometimes music is just about making nice (or not-so-nice) sounds. If their music is politically or intellectually driven, I'd love to hear about it, but by no means think it should be a requirement for their music to be "valid".
To follow this up, I'd like to say that I'm sure Florent can speak about his music quite intellectually when he wants to. His CV is incredible. I'm inclined to believe that he simply made the decision to make his presentation an overview of his career rather than an academic lecture, which aligns well with his "I try not to take myself too seriously" attitude.
DeleteI too was somewhat unsettled by Ghys' lack of acknowledgment to any of his predecessors and/or contemporaries in the speech - melody transcription thing. And as per the question I asked him regarding the audio only recordings of his music...he was clearly uncomfortable with the fact that the recordings exist without their video companion & seemed to convey that these pieces should only be experienced with both audio & visual to fully realize the entire intent. I agree with him there. While the advent of multi media elements into contemporary classical music can so often seem like just bells & whistles added to the music, some of Ghys' work shows a true integration of just this. The woman in the Iranian video was speaking Farsi, Persian...
ReplyDeleteI definitely dig this perspective. I too think that it is refreshing to see a composer with great skill not taking himself or his music too seriously while not sacrificing the level of complexity, effort required, or art. I think this outlook on music is healthy and also makes it fun to be part of, even if just as a listener being in on the joke of the weather report. I thought what he said about the weather reports was interesting. He said he selected them because the dialogue is not as political as a news report and I think it's particularly effective in showing similarities between cultures believed to be opposites - even though the languages and physical presentations of the reporters are different, the actual report is more or less the same.
ReplyDeleteI do wonder if Ghys believes himself to be part of the "contemporary classical music" world that you implied to include him in. I recall him saying just "contemporary music" when talking about his music and those like him. There are certainly elements in his music that are associated with "contemporary classical music" but listening through his other music, I'm not sure if I would call him a contemporary classical composer.
I actually agree with your last point. I should have emphasized less that he is a "contemporary classical composer," and more so that he stems from that tradition in the sense that his formal training was in classical bass and concert composition. His possible personal departure from the "contemporary classical" generalization supports some of the other motives in his presentation.
DeleteI agree with Evan, Not taking oneself too seriously is key in this generation of musicians.
ReplyDelete