|
Combination of the AboveFinally the most common reason of all is a combination of reasons. Most composers who embark on adventures with new technologies do so for more than one reason, but almost always, if the music is to be of any interest, one of the reasons is because of aesthetic imperatives. Without this aspect, the music can easily become nothing more than the temporary exploitation of a gimmick or a lifeless imitation of an artistic conception that should have been realized using other, perhaps human, resources.
Total RejectionWe now consider the second general category of response: “total rejection”. Just as there are those who, for various reasons, embrace new technologies, there are also many who will, sometimes thoughtlessly and sometimes after careful consideration, reject new tools. Again, various sub-categories are described below.
Political RejectionThe reasons for rejection of new technologies can include political reasons. By this I mean a kind of cultural politics where someone may find that the prestige associated with writing for older technologies such as an orchestra is so much greater than that available to composers using newer technologies. Or, a composer may find herself in a position where she has worked years to have her operas and orchestra pieces performed and now that she has achieved such status, adding electronics or changing to making computer music works not only adds nothing to her prestige but may even risk a loss of status for herself and her other work. In addition, those who believe using newer technology is “cheating” in some way, or that it allows “anyone to become a composer and therefore can’t be real composition” may well reject all of the new technology.
Aesthetic RejectionA second reason for a total rejection stance is an aesthetic rejection of the media fostered by the new technologies. Consider the case of Morton Feldman. One might guess that the quiet dynamic levels and different rhythmic notational system he felt obligated to use to achieve particular effects, together with his interest in timbral resources would have encouraged him to use the electronic medium. Here is what he said in an interview:
“...I loathe the sound of electronic music. I think it’s perfectly fine as a teaching vehicle if you don’t have any money for live performance ...Let’s put it this way: one of the best definitions of experimental music was given by John Cage. John says that experimental music is where the outcome cannot be foreseen. Very interesting observation. After my first adventure in electronic music, it’s outcome was foreseen.”5
|