Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: John Cage recordings ("scientific"?)



This reminds me; did anyone catch "Breakfast with the Arts" on A&E last 
week?

Laurie Anderson was being interviewed, and spoke about the use of new
instruments in new contexts, circuit bending, etc. She told of an
instrument she's recently built which she described as a stick along which
there are sliding sleeves which trigger various samples and loops, and
which can be "played" in a highly theatrical manner by the "dancers"
onstage as well as by the "musicians" (the quotation marks reflect the very
flexible and overlapping job descriptions of the artists involved in her
project...)

But the best part of it all was the blank stare the interviewer wore on his
face while Ms. Anderson enthusiastically talked tech; he was obviously much
more comfortable asking her questions about her popular acceptance, and
visibly fidgeted while she described the MIDI outs on her new instrument,
or her tape head violin, or anything from the perspective of CREATING the
music (as performer) as opposed to the CONSUMPTION of art (as audient).

Tim

At 07:27 PM 6/8/99 -0300, you wrote:
>I think "Classical Music" has a lot to do with the social aceptance.
>Its what Academy and University accepts as "art" and classifies.
>This again, has a lot to do with the habits of the musician. If he is
>connected to the institutions, chance that his work is accepted is much
>bigger. If he considers himself "alternative" and plays "on the steet", he
>is not classic but popular, right?
>
>Maybe it also has to do with the ability of the musician to explain the
>function of his work within the music history?