Just finished up a project for Leon Kruse. He played some singer/songwriter type stuff on acoustic guitar. Very nice music and definitely worth a look. He plays occasionally in the San Francisco Bay Area if you want to check him out live.
Category: Uncategorized (Page 15 of 19)
Earplay, a San Francisco based ensemble dedicated to new chamber music, kicked off its 25th season at Herbst Theatre this past Monday with a program entitled Ear and There. Their current season is meant to showcase composers who have a connection to the Bay Area. As such, the bill included works by two local composers who also were available to give a little pre-concert talk.
The evening began with a piece by Carlos Sanchez-Gutierrez called and of course Henry the horse, an homage to The Beatles’ Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite. The four movements are meant to depict four contemporary art pieces, presumably making up a sort of modern day circus. Genghis is a reference to a robot built by Rodney Brooks, Mandala Tequila an installation piece by Ivan Puig, Machine with Artichoke the creations of Arthur Ganson, and Things that Go refers to a film by Peter Fischli and David Weiss. While the idea behind this work sounds quirky enough to inspire some raucous sonic adventures, the theme just gets lost. The movements don’t feel interconnected nor do they feel like completely fleshed out ideas. The notable exception to the latter problem is Mandala Tequila, its seemingly random assortment of pitches creating an atmosphere of wonder and melancholy.
Sam Nichols work, Unnamed Jr., was performed next with great amounts of skill but little in the way of memorable moments. This piece is meant to be, in the composers words, “a holding pen for all of the melodic, harmonic, textural, gestural and dramatic ideas”, for an opera he has been working on. Unfortunately, that’s sort of what it feels like too, a bunch of thoughts that haven’t been refined into something affecting. Hopefully this will no longer be the case by the time the opera is finished.
Next was Kaija Saariaho’s piece, Je sens un deuxieme coeur (I feel a second heart) which was easily the highlight of the night for me. This felt like a cohesive work from the very first to the very last notes. The ensemble seemed completely in tune with Saariaho’s sense of texture as well as dramatic intent regardless of the fact that it was easy to forget that it was supposed to depict the relationship between a mother and her unborn child. Of particular note was the intensity level of cellist Thalia Moore who appeared to be completely consumed with ferocious purpose. Placing this piece in the middle of the program placed the bar high for the rest of the night.
A, relatively, smaller work by Seymour Shifrin for four-hand piano entitled The Modern Temper eased the mood a bit, even with its heavy use dissonance. Written in 1959, this piece seemed a bit out of place due to its age as well as the fact that the others used a good portion of the ensemble. Shifrin’s music is exactly what one would expect from a modernist piece of the ’50s. Not that it was bad or without merit, it just wasn’t new. It also wasn’t unique enough to stand out amongst its peers of that era. An odd choice for a group whose mission is to focus on new music but ‘focus’ doesn’t necessitate exclusivity and, in the classical world, 50 year old music is generally considered new still.
The night ended with Bruce Christian Bennett’s From the Ashes, commissioned by Earplay. This was a 23 minute romp through the breakdown and creation of harmonies based on frequency modulation synthesis akin to the myth of the Phoenix. While that may sound like an overly scientific method of conjuring a highly poetic image, Bennett manages to not get lost in the theory so much that he loses sight of the point. There were truly some inspired moments during this performance but also some pitfalls. For one, the shifts between different instrument combinations and textural ideas didn’t always feel natural. Once one was brought into a new section, it was easy to forget this fault and become immersed in the moment again though. This piece also used the largest portion of the Earplay ensemble. Guest artist Chris Froh was even brought in to perform percussion which included a solo in the middle of the work, played with technical precision.
Throughout the night, the Earplay ensemble continued to dazzle me with their keen sense of musicianship. They took on some difficult music and managed, presumably, to draw as much emotional force out of it as there was to be found.
For an event meant to showcase the cross pollination of classical and electronic music, The Hotel Utah Saloon seemed like an odd venue. This place is old and looks old. You would sooner expect some ragtime from a dirty piano or maybe a down and out solo country singer to be playing here before the contemporary pastiche of sounds that were to be played. Regardless, the setting was comfortable and just the sort of place that new classical music should be brought to.
The night opened with Harlan Otter playing some solo piano pieces inspired by, or having to do with, mountains. Save for the first piece by Alan Hovhaness, an ominous sounding work ending in a spastic romp called Mountain Dance No. 2, the mountain references were hard to decipher. Otter portrayed the works, which also included some pieces by Bay Area composers Jason McChristian and Doug Michael (Moto Perpetuo and Clusters respectively) interjected with Philip Glass’s Metamorphosis, with specific attention to accuracy. Glass’s music was easily the most moving of what was played although, at times, it felt like the performance was too rough or rigid. Either way, it stood out much more than the other modernistic pieces. Of special note was Clusters, which transitioned into the George Hurd Ensemble’s set. In this piece, electronics were added to the piano part. This wasn’t done in a particularly effective way as the two never really meshed very well, instead feeling like two separate pieces played at the same time, but it was an excellent choice by Otter who should also be applauded for taking a chance on some new music.
The George Hurd Ensemble, comprised of a viola, violin, cello, upright bass, piano, and electronics, appeared to be in good form. On the other hand, the sound system did not. The mix coming out of the speakers didn’t make the group louder as much as it threw off the balance. The nice part of amplifying a classical ensemble is that it does away with that concert hall hush. People are free to roam and chat a bit and, if someone coughs, the rest of the crowd doesn’t look at them with scorn in their eyes. The bad part of all this is that the subtleties of the compositions can be completely glossed over by a bad mix or sound system. Pop music has been plagued by this issue for years and it looks like classical music will have to welcome a new challenge if it’s going to modernize itself in this way. Still, while the sound wasn’t perfect, the music was able to shine through.
The set started off was a groove heavy piece marked by liberal use of pizzicato to give it a playful feel. Hurd has a particular penchant for this technique but it never sounds overdone. The next couple of tunes continued in this vein and also made apparent a possible trip-hop influence. One of the stand out parts of the set was a piece for solo piano. It may have stood out because it was the only one to not make use of the whole ensemble but it also offered some insight into more of Hurd’s influences. It acted as a sort of interlude that reminded me of a solo Thelonious Monk performance with hints of romanticism thrown in. The rest of the group came back in for the remainder of the set which contained a work that seemed to be mimicking koto music and mixing it with synthesized harpsichord (which was skillfully implemented, avoiding the expected baroque feel). The performance ended with an energetic foray that could only properly be described as swingin’.
George Hurd seems to have found a balance between accessibility and depth. This music sounds fresh and new while retaining its connection to its roots. And, while this combination of electronic music with classical music is being attempted by people like Mason Bates, it sounds much more naturally integrated in Hurd’s work. He regularly leaves one with impressions of various musicians or genres but the sound is always his. This is classical music’s equivalent to indie rock.
To tie together the classical-meets-electronic theme, the night ended with a set by William S. Braintree mixing some highly energetic IDM. Unfortunately, I’m uncertain whether he was mixing all original music or whether this was more of a DJ mix. Either way, you could tell Braintree was a huge Aphex Twin fan. The set started out very strong with a very organic flow. By the end, maybe because the crowd started to dissipate, the transitions seemed a lot less inspired. Still, it felt like a perfect end to the night. Intentionally or not, the music managed to hint at a classical influence that culminated in a few final chords that sounded like Franz Liszt playing through an FM modulator.
It occurs to me that large classical institutions could learn something from programming of this sort. For instance, there didn’t seem to be a person over 40 in the room and the space felt much more communal than what you would experience in a concert hall. From the players dressed in a fairly casual manor, the violist having a beer during his set, to the audience, which at one point even included people who looked like they would sooner go to a punk show than a classical concert, this was an event that was very in touch with modern sensibilities.
Er, well, in a way. It’s more like a conversation about whether we should honor people like this who can, at best, inform the id in us or whether we should start paying attention and minimizing the effect of such, uh, artists. Existing is one thing, I would say necessary even, but nominating this kind of “work” for more awards than any other musician or composer is a bit nutty. That’s where I stand at least. Anyway, check it out.
art
/ɑrt/ [ahrt]
–noun
1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
That’s one of the definitions for art according to Dictionary.com.
ter⋅ror⋅ism
/ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm/ [ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
This is what they say about terrorism.
I was having a discussion about what art is recently and my answer is generally, “Anything meant to evoke a reaction.” The reply to this was, “That makes terrorism into art.” At first, I had to agree that my definition was too vague because of this but, after thinking about it more, I’m not so sure. Maybe my initial response was based wholly on the severely negative connotations of the word terrorism. People often claim that the United States is a terrorist organization because of the things we do around the world but, if you live here, that view isn’t very pronounced. Che Guevara is considered to have been a terrorist by some while people who agree with what his purpose was will say that he was a hero. Even people who appear to fit the exact definition of terrorist, like Osama bin Laden, are viewed in a completely different light by members of al-Qaeda who would say that he’s doing God’s work. Basically, one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. With that in mind, terrorism becomes a lot more subjective and inserting the word art into its definition no longer requires a sense of disgust.
There are plenty of projects that have been undertaken that, while often provoking denial at first, have become widely considered to be works of art. You have John Cage’s 4’33”, Jackson Pollock’s abstract expressionism, David Smith’s Cubi sculptures, architecture to some people as a whole, and the list of borderline works of art can go on and on. Eventually, it seems that people decide that these things can be classified as art even if it’s only because they’ve stirred up so much conversation and curiosity. And isn’t that exactly what terrorism does? There are times when you can’t watch or read anything about current events without running into talk about terrorism. The whole purpose of these acts is to make a statement, to make people consider something they haven’t considered before. To me, there’s a blurry line here that doesn’t help solve the problem of defining art at all. Maybe that’s the point though. If art were definable then it might not be art at all. Either way, I think it’s food for thought that’s worth sharing.
So here’s a follow up to the last blog I posted, having to do with Jim Cramer of CNBC suggesting that hedge fund managers should manipulate the market, even illegally, to make a quick buck. Jon Stewart’s interview with Cramer on the Daily Show wasn’t sparked by the same video I posted but that video was used during the interview. The initial reason for all this was Stewart criticizing Rick Santelli of CNBC, who had a little rant on a trading floor about not wanting to pay for the mortgages of “losers”. The bit was criticized by The Daily Show, mocking the fact that CNBC regularly gives bad advice that could very well lead people to be one of these “losers”. Cramer decided to take Stewart’s sarcasm to heart and shot back at him. Everything escalated from there and culminated in this truly uncomfortable interview:
Personally, I loved this. It seems like a lot of people missed the point but I thought it was great. After reading reactions to the show, I found a lot of people talking about whether Stewart or Cramer won this battle or whether Cramer makes bad stock picks or whether Stewart is funny. All of that is completely beside the point. This wasn’t about Jon Stewart or Jim Cramer or even CNBC, this was about the shady greed of Wall Street that is allowed to fester. At one point, Cramer actually says that it’s difficult to come on TV and tell people that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson just lied to you left and right. Why is it so hard to call CEOs and government officials liars when they’re clearly lying? Isn’t this the job of any reputable news organization? Why does CNBC allow CEOs to give them a false reality to broadcast to its audience? This is part of the problem. This is why we have honest people losing their homes, their retirement savings, and their jobs. When Jon Stewart tells Jim Cramer, “This isn’t a fucking game”, you can tell he means it and it’s astounding to me that a comedian is the only person willing to come forward and say this. I don’t know about others out there, but I personally know people who are losing jobs that never did anything wrong. Some of these people have been working hard at the same place for 35 years and because of hedge fund managers like Jim Cramer, complacent reporting, and a world that allowed greed to reign king for far too long, that’s all over.
I guess I just want to make sure that people pay attention to this because you never know who’s next. I’m not against greed, there is such a thing as healthy greed, and I’m not against having a free market, but this is ridiculous.
This is amazing. I don’t have time to comment on it and I don’t know what I could say other than mentioning that the SEC needs to start understanding what these guys are doing so they can be sent to jail. Just watch in amazement as Jim Cramer, host of CNBC’s Mad Money, suggests that hedge fund managers should illegally manipulate the market because it will make them money. This guy should be hung by his testicles in the middle of Wall Street.
I watched a short animated film the other day that showed up on Google Video’s front page and thought it was worth sharing. It’s by a Japanese guy named Kunio Kato and has won the grand prize at the Annecy International Animated Film Festival as well as an Academy Award for Best Short Animated Film.
I don’t have much to say about it since it sort of speaks for itself, even though there’s no dialogue. I also don’t want to ruin the effect of watching it. To me, it does an impressive job at summing up where one is going/has to go as well as where one has been. Somehow, having something so visual that represents this idea makes it much more affecting than just saying it.
The music, by Kenji Kondo, is worth commenting on. It sounds, to me, highly influenced by Erik Satie, especially his Gymnopedies. In fact, the French title may be a nod to French art in general. After all, the animation could be considered impressionistic. Satie was a composer writing around the beginning of the 20th century. He wrote mostly solo piano pieces which are notable for their, for the time, unusual chord progressions and harmonies. They were progressive works at the time that, now, sound like a demonstration of how much can be expressed with a few simple sounds. If you enjoy the music in this film, I would definitely recommend checking out Satie’s music.
UPDATE: The video seems to be getting pulled from video hosting sites very quickly. You can problem still find it but I have no way to post it here without getting the dreaded “This content has been removed” message. So, if you’re interested, search Google Video for La Maison en Petits Cubes.
I came across this video today:
At first, it’s easy to watch this and come to the conclusion that Jewish people are terrible and hypocrites but this is how these things get perpetuated. What you have here are Jews reacting to Muslims who were reacting to Jews who were reacting to Muslims, ad infinitum. Apparently, it’s incredibly easy to get caught up in what’s happening right at the moment without considering how we got to this point.
Right now, Israel is pretty much obliterating Gaza. Some Israelis have died too but the difference in deaths is so drastic that you might as well just say that no one in Israel has been killed in the current conflict. This is why what the people in the video above are saying is absolutely crazy. Sometimes I really wonder how someone comes to the point where they’re willing to march in the streets in support of one side of a controversial issue that they seem to know absolutely nothing about. For instance, the girl in the middle of the video who claims this is the holocaust all over again, she either doesn’t have any clue that this holocaust she speaks of is being carried out by Israel on Gaza or she’s so full of hatred and bitterness that she just doesn’t care. Whatever the reason, these people really need to step back and take some deep breaths and I’m not only referring to Jews and Israelis.
Palestinians shouldn’t be turned into martyrs either. They’re far from innocent in all this. Really, the issue here is that both sides have various reasons to be angry at the other. That’s the nature of controversy. Controversial subjects only exist when there are valid points being made on both sides of the argument. With that in mind, when one comes into contact with a topic of this nature, the immediate reaction should be to acknowledge that both sides have some solid ground to stand on. Unfortunately, humans, as a whole, are apt to act before they think and are not exactly fans of compromise.
William Zantzinger just died the other day at the age of 69. If you’re a part of my generation, you probably have no idea who he was. I certainly didn’t know who he was until I decided to read about him today and I’m not too sure whether that’s a good or a bad thing.
Zantzinger was a well-off tobacco farmer who, in 1963, in a still segregated Maryland, killed a 51 year old black woman named Hattie Caroll while she was working. She was guilty of not getting his drink fast enough for him. He called her a “black, son of a bitch” and hit her in the head with a cane. She died eight hours later of a brain hemorrhage. Zantzinger was given six months in a county jail and a $500 fine and had his imprisonment deferred so that he could take care of his tobacco crop yield first.
This most likely wouldn’t go down in history as anything different from all the other screwed up things that were done to blacks in America during the first half of the 20th century except for one thing, Bob Dylan wrote a song about it:
Zantzinger was made famous because of this song which Dylan, so I’ve read, still plays up to this day.
To me, not to downplay the tragedy of the event, there’s a lot of symbolism in all this. This man, who was by all accounts a terrible racist, who was able to murder a black woman and practically get away scot-free, has died less than twenty days before a black man enters into the presidency of the United States. Also, the fact that he is, most likely, completely unknown to people born after 1980 (yeah I know I’m conjecturing) says a lot about where we are with race relations in this country.
We could very well be past the point where we need these types of stories to remind us of what racism can do. Or maybe we’re just ignorant and don’t realize, or aren’t told, how often these types of things still happen. Maybe they don’t happen anymore. Maybe we’re giving people like Zantzinger their just rewards by relegating them to the position of relics that will be happily forgotten. Maybe we’re being foolish by forgetting.
My opinion is that we just don’t need to feel angry anymore. We don’t need to ignore racism or let it slide or anything like that, but grudges from 46 years ago will no longer move us forward. It was probably a good thing that every time Zantzinger showed up in the paper that Dylan’s song showed up as well. It was probably a good thing that he has never stopped playing that song. The man is dead now, though, and the current racial challenges are different. The generation that was capable of committing such acts is disappearing and a generation that is willing to make a black man into the most important figure in our country is now at the helm. We’re one step closer to finding a balance.
English
Français
Recent Comments