# The irony about John Cage



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

The irony about John Cage is that he composed a good deal of music that his detractors would really enjoy. And by detractors I mean the people who think he was just an experimenter rather than a real artist.

Case in point:


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

*In a Landscape* reminds me of Satie. Except that it goes on far too long. I liked it at first then got bored.

I like *Dream*, in spite of it being a musical one-trick pony.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Sonatas and Interludes for Prepared Piano






Concerto for Prepared Piano and Chamber Orchestra


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

pianozach said:


> *In a Landscape* reminds me of Satie. Except that it goes on far too long. I liked it at first then got bored.
> 
> I like *Dream*, in spite of it being a musical one-trick pony.


They are simple works, for sure. The 'Sonatas & Interludes' represent a somewhat bigger kaleidoscope of ideas. But for that impressive, polyphonic, large, written-out, major work ...


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

joen_cph said:


> But for that impressive, polyphonic, large, written-out, major work ...


Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

In my opinion John Cage get's too much undeserved attention already. I think that he's a weak and overrated composer, and I would rather hear any day Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch or Hovhaness, among others, than his nonsensical and extremely boring music.

I think that the only true irony about Cage is that with him there's more talk than music.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

chu42 said:


> The irony about John Cage is that he composed a good deal of music that his detractors would really enjoy. And by detractors I mean the people who think he was just an experimenter rather than a real artist.


I agree that Cage has written some music that is definitely worthwhile investigating, however, I'd not suggest the two you posted which I think are one dimensional.

His late number pieces are often ethereally haunting and even beautiful - but it depends upon the performance since they leave to the performers many choices on instrumentation and musical outcome.

*Thirteen* (1992)


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Allerius said:


> In my opinion John Cage get's too much undeserved attention already. I think that he's a weak and overrated composer, and I would rather hear any day Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch or Hovhaness, among others, than his nonsensical and extremely boring music.
> 
> I think that the only true irony about Cage is that with him there's more talk than music.


You are not alone, Cage certainly has his detractors. But one of the wonderful things about music, for every composer you don't connect with there are probably dozens with whom you do.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Allerius said:


> In my opinion John Cage get's too much undeserved attention already. I think that he's a weak and overrated composer, and I would rather hear any day Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch or Hovhaness, among others, than his nonsensical and extremely boring music.
> 
> I think that the only true irony about Cage is that with him there's more talk than music.


Perhaps I am wrong but when I read that last sentence I wondered if it wasn't more a case of you having heard more of his talk than his music rather than that he didn't produce much music? I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration. But there have been occasions when I have heard music of his that seemed very worthwhile and I am planning one day to get to know his music better.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Enthusiast said:


> Perhaps I am wrong but when I read that last sentence I wondered if it wasn't more a case of you having heard more of his talk than his music rather than that he didn't produce much music? I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration. But there have been occasions when I have heard music of his that seemed very worthwhile and I am planning one day to get to know his music better.


Cage has produced some talks which he structured as musical compositions, these he performed at *The Club*. One I can think of is his _Lecture on Nothing_.

I find Cage to be a very interesting composer, thinker, and creative artist and find his career one of the most interesting from the 20th century, a period of much stylistic variety.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Enthusiast said:


> I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration.


It's a really interesting point. When he composed with time brackets -- well -- how did he compose? What was his compositional process?

And with the music based on chance operations -- was it really _all _based on chance operations? Or did he cheat? I mean music of changes sounds too good to me to be entirely the result of chance, but I may be wrong about that!

Stockhausen had his _excursions _away from the process; Boulez had his _moments d'indiscipline_ which inspired him to deviate from the process. I vaguely remember something similar for Xenakis and Tenney. Makes me wonder about Cage.



Enthusiast said:


> I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration.


Even if the composition is all about concepts, the performance is another matter. I was listening today to the Bozzini Quartet play the 30 Pieces for String Quartet -- it's poetic music making, no doubt about it.

But to what extent that's the result of good luck, and to what extent it's due to a sort of quasi-improvisational moment of inspiration, I just don't know.



Enthusiast said:


> I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration.


The one clear example of this is not Cage but Reich, and Reich's music can be very good even though it's just a process. What I'm saying is, conceptual music can be fun!


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Over the many years I’ve owned a grand piano I’ve been aware how important it is to take care of it including the tuning, voicing, attention to aging hammers, humidification in the dry climate I live in, keeping the interior as clean as possible since dust can accumulate if the top is kept open. You become very familiar with the sound of your grand when it is performing at its best and are very sensitive to the slightest changes.

All of this is to say that the presence of bolts and washers stuck between the strings in pictures of a ‘prepared piano’ tends to turn my stomach.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

chu42 said:


> The irony about John Cage is that he composed a good deal of music that his detractors would really enjoy.


I agree with the sentiment, and your choice of pieces, but I've found one can never underestimate how little modern music some people will enjoy! There will always be _something_ wrong with it.

Anyway, here's an arrangement of _In a Landscape_ by the early music ensemble Lautten Compagney:


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Nereffid said:


> I agree with the sentiment, and your choice of pieces, but I've found one can never underestimate how little modern music some people will enjoy! There will always be _something_ wrong with it.
> 
> Anyway, here's an arrangement of _In a Landscape_ by the early music ensemble Lautten Compagney:


I love that arrangement of it! It caused me to re-evaluate the work.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> Perhaps I am wrong but when I read that last sentence I wondered if it wasn't more a case of you having heard more of his talk than his music rather than that he didn't produce much music? I also am put off by his seeming to be all about concepts than musical inspiration. But there have been occasions when I have heard music of his that seemed very worthwhile and I am planning one day to get to know his music better.


Yes, you have a point. I know some of his compositions but my reaction to them has been so negative that it kept me from exploring more. I just don't get his talk about "desconstructing" music, or of finding noise appealing, or his idea of composing very little but using many random instructions in a score for the performers to compose (but without acknowledging the composition as actually being by them), or of putting someone to play nothing in a concert hall and pretend that this is some kind of revolution in music, and I wonder if his current fame is not eclipsing interesting music by other composers of the same era. I find value in the works of a Carter, with his intricate, complex music, or of a Partch, with his microtones and rhythmic vitality, but I found no Cage to enjoy yet. I agree that I exaggerated in my attack on him here though and now regret having written what I wrote.



SanAntone said:


> You are not alone, Cage certainly has his detractors. But one of the wonderful things about music, for every composer you don't connect with there are probably dozens with whom you do.


Yes, you're right. Of all the classical composers I know, I think I only really have a problem with two: Britten and Cage - and with the former this is due to extra-musical reasons only.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

********************************


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

chu42 said:


> The irony about John Cage is that he composed a good deal of music that his detractors would really enjoy. And by detractors I mean the people who think he was just an experimenter rather than a real artist.
> 
> Case in point...


I love _In a Landscape_, its on the only Cage album I've retained out of a handful. Its the BachCage album by Francesco Tristano. On it, he plays a number of works by the two composers. I hadn't heard _Dream_ before, I'm enjoying it now. Thank you.

Cage's output can be broken up into five periods. The earlier pieces take up gamelan and modal music where French composers had left off. These are indeed easy on the ear. I used to own more of his music, and even made an effort to attend live performances. Although it no longer interests me as regular listening, initially it did challenge and in some ways change my views on what music could be.

It took me longer to come around to his philosophy. Reading Kay Larson's biography some years ago helped me do this. It put Cage into context and helped make sense of his views which can be contradictory, especially when taken in isolation. The main message I got from that was that for Cage there was no boundary between art and life.

I really like the fact that Cage didn't own any recordings or a sound system. He was critical of recordings because he saw them as getting in the way of people being in touch with themselves and their environment. This is in line with ancient philosophers like Rumi ("Listen to silence. It has so much to say") and Marcus Aurelius ("...it is open to you, at any time you want, to retreat into yourself.").

His views on this sort of mindfulness influenced me in a number of ways. I've reduced the amount of recordings I own and also put effort into include silence - or what amounts to it in a busy city - as part of my daily routine.

So, in a practical sense, Cage's philosophy has made more impact on me than his actual music.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

As a result of the various classical music forums I have participated in and reading all of the complaints about his music, I have actually discovered music by Cage that I like.

My favorite is _Atlas Eclipticalis_.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

To me, the finest irony of John Cage and his music remains that one can never really hear Cage's composition but rather only a performer's rendition at the moment. Cage's works are largely fluid rather than solid, elastic rather than set in stone. Changeable from one performance to the next in ways much more profound than other, more traditional, composers' expect their works to be. We can conceive of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony in a manner of fixed structure readily recognizable. Such is not the case with so much of Cage, where the music is based upon chance operations and performer choice. Recordings cheat Cage's music because they solidify it, make it permanent in a form that is always only one possible version of an infinite number of versions. Which is one reason I feel somehow uncomfortable hearing Cage via recordings, since I know I'm not really hearing the piece at all, but only a single possibility of what it can be.

I've known _In a Landscape_ and _Dream_ for some while, and actually have more than one copy of each in my collection, and they both rank high among my least enjoyed of Cage's works. So much so that I can't recall when I last listened to either work. I _do_ recall recently playing the _Insomnia_ album by pianist Kai Schumacher and skipping track two, Cage's _Dream_, while playing all the other tracks: music by Gershwin, George Crumb, Brian Belet, and Bruce Stark.









I prefer 4'33" (of which I also have several recorded versions in my collection) to _In a Landscape_ and _Dream_. I turn to Cage's music with a certain expectation, and that includes anticipations of surprise and wonderment, which I do not get from _In a Landscape_ and _Dream_.

Among my favorite and most frequently listened-to pieces by Cage is _Atlas Eclipticalis_ (1961) in the recording by James Levine.









Again, each time I listen to the music I feel that Cage is being cheated by the permanent shape the recording endows to the piece. I'd rather have 100 performances to randomly choose from, so that the work would have more of the expectation of surprise for me as it forms before my ears ever fresh and new. But for those looking to explore the music of John Cage further, that is the piece I recommend.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

arpeggio said:


> As a result of the various classical music forums I have participated in and reading all of the complaints about his music, I have actually discovered music by Cage that I like.
> 
> My favorite is _Atlas Eclipticalis_.


It is also among my favorites, which is why the story of his experience with the NY Phil performance is so disturbing. During the performance members of the orchestra ignored the actual pitches Cage had notated, and instead used Cage's score which is written with eighty-six instrumental parts to be played "in whole or in part, any duration, in any ensemble, chamber or orchestral" as an excuse for making barnyard sounds, jazz riffs, quotes from other works, and in general to disrespect Cage and his work.



> The series culminated in a legendary fiasco. Audience members streamed out of a performance of Cage's "Atlas Eclipticalis," which the composer charged that the orchestra members sabotaged, accompanied by what one critic called "the loudest chorus of boos I have ever heard."
> 
> "They are a group of gangsters," Cage recalled of the Philharmonic. "The New York orchestra is like grown-ups who intend to be bad. They are criminals."


Cage later said that after the performance one member of the orchestra came up to him and said, "come back in ten years, and we'll treat you better."


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Allerius said:


> Of all the classical composers I know, I think I only really have a problem with two: Britten and Cage - and with the former this is due to extra-musical reasons only.


Don't you also have some negative views on Mahler as well?


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Allerius said:


> In my opinion John Cage get's too much undeserved attention already. I think that he's a weak and overrated composer, and I would rather hear any day Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch or Hovhaness, among others, than his nonsensical and extremely boring music.
> 
> I think that the only true irony about Cage is that with him there's more talk than music.


Out there in the real world, Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch and Hovhaness, and others, are at least as well known as John Cage, and their music as often if not more often performed and recorded, as his. Only in internet bubbles like this do people endlessly rage about the unwarranted attention Cage supposedly gets. I think the reasons are political, as Cage intentionally adopted a role as a cultural, social, and political provocateur and conceptual artist as well as that of a musician.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

fluteman said:


> Out there in the real world, Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch and Hovhaness, and others, are at least as well known as John Cage, and their music as often if not more often performed and recorded, as his. Only in internet bubbles like this do people endlessly rage about the unwarranted attention Cage supposedly gets. I think the reasons are political, as Cage intentionally adopted a role as a cultural, social, and political provocateur and conceptual artist as well as that of a musician.


Interesting to see Partch in the list - I wonder if that's an American thing, I really can't recall a Partch concert in London or Paris, maybe I'm forgetting. And I really doubt that his music is more often recorded than Cage's. Cage is high in people's consciousness here because quiet improvisatory music is big here, and of course there's the whole Cardew/AMM/Morley College legacy. Hard for me to imagine that Cage is not a strong presence in New York culture.

Ditto for Riley. I don't know about the others.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> Interesting to see Partch in the list - I wonder if that's an American thing, I really can't recall a Partch concert in London or Paris, maybe I'm forgetting. And I really doubt that his music is more often recorded than Cage's. Cage is high in people's consciousness here because quiet improvisatory music is big here, and of course there's the whole Cardew/AMM/Morley College legacy. Hard for me to imagine that Cage is not a strong presence in New York culture.
> 
> Ditto for Riley. I don't know about the others.


It may be hard for you to imagine that Cage is no longer such a strong presence in New York culture, but as a lifelong New Yorker I can report that he is not, so your imagination may need some stretching.  When Cage was alive and active (as he was until nearly the end of his life), he was more prominent, as a conceptual performance artist as much as a composer, but performances end with a performer's life, and his ended in 1992. (Edit: Except that he has that piece that will last 600 years, right?) Many other New York performance artists have since followed in his footsteps.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

I personally think he deserves credit but there has been too much hype. I feel he's one of those composers some people say to like when they want to appear clever or to show they know music. Expecially if they do not have a classical background.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Amadea said:


> I personally think he deserves credit but there has been too much hype. I feel he's one of those composers some people say to like when they want to appear clever or to show they know music. Expecially if they do not have a classical background.


Do you do that? I mean, claim to like something in order to appear clever?


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> Do you do that? I mean, claim to like something in order to appear clever?


Today, I'd say I'm more honest about my taste and my limited knowledge of things, but when I was a teen it happened. Mostly with bands.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Amadea said:


> I personally think he deserves credit but there has been too much hype. I feel he's one of those composers some people say to like when they want to appear clever or to show they know music. Expecially if they do not have a classical background.


He became a big celebrity and pop culture icon, as did Andy Warhol and Alan Ginsberg. I don't think that has much to do with technical knowledge of music, or wanting to appear sophisticated. Now they all are historical figures, and other celebrities and pop culture icons have succeeded them. I shouldn't even admit i remember who they are, it just shows I'm an unhip old man.:lol:


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I don't object to Cage's trying to experiment with new ways of composing music . 
But I've always been very annoyed by his tendency to dismiss and belittle the music written by great composers of the past , which is insufferably smug and arrogant, implying that HIS esthetic ideals were valid and not those of composers of the past . 
He once stated "Beethoven was wrong ". Huh ? How was Beethoven supposed to know what Cage's esthetic ideals would be 200 years ago ?


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

superhorn said:


> I don't object to Cage's trying to experiment with new ways of composing music .
> But I've always been very annoyed by his tendency to dismiss and belittle the music written by great composers of the past , which is insufferably smug and arrogant, implying that HIS esthetic ideals were valid and not those of composers of the past .
> He once stated "Beethoven was wrong ". Huh ? How was Beethoven supposed to know what Cage's esthetic ideals would be 200 years ago ?


That was Cage the provocateur. In his lifetime he softened the blow with his mischievous but gentle sense of humor. A more modest and self-effacing person would be hard to find. I wouldn't get too worked up about it.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

superhorn said:


> I don't object to Cage's trying to experiment with new ways of composing music .
> But I've always been very annoyed by his tendency to dismiss and belittle the music written by great composers of the past , which is insufferably smug and arrogant, implying that HIS esthetic ideals were valid and not those of composers of the past .
> He once stated "Beethoven was wrong ". Huh ? How was Beethoven supposed to know what Cage's esthetic ideals would be 200 years ago ?


Here's the complete quote:

"With Beethoven the parts of a composition were defined by means of harmony. With Satie […] they were defined by means of time-lengths. The question of structure is so basic, and it is so important to be in agreement about it, that we must now ask: Was Beethoven right or […] Satie? I answer immediately and unequivocally, Beethoven was in error, and his influence, which has been extensive as it is lamentable, has been deadening to the art of music." (John Cage, "Defense of Satie," in John Cage, ed. Richard Kostelanetz (New York: Praeger, 1970):81.)

As you can see Cage was speaking within the context of two composers, Erik Satie and Beethoven, and of the two, which compositional method was more relevant for composers of the 20th century. Within that context, Cage thought that Satie's approach, time based as opposed to harmonically based, was correct for contemporary composers. You also must remember Cage's long-standing attitude about the importance of harmony, which was nil according to Cage. Schoenberg thought he would have to confront harmony, and Cage simply refused to accept the limitation of harmony.

You can agree or disagree, but I don't see John Cage as making a negative opinion about Beethoven in general, just in this specific point of comparison and which of the two composers, Satie or Beethoven, he found more relevant.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

fluteman said:


> Out there in the real world, Riley, Carter, Górecki, Partch and Hovhaness, and others, are at least as well known as John Cage, and their music as often if not more often performed and recorded, as his. Only in internet bubbles like this do people endlessly rage about the unwarranted attention Cage supposedly gets. I think the reasons are political, as Cage intentionally adopted a role as a cultural, social, and political provocateur and conceptual artist as well as that of a musician.


Here at TC I think that Cage receives much more attention than these other composers, as there seem to be much more threads and discussions about him than about them. My experience out of here is that he's more popular also among rookie listeners, perhaps for being more controversial, and I think that his prominence is one of the reasons for many people to think so negatively about contemporary classical. I have some books on CM and they all discuss John Cage, but people like Carter, Partch and Hovhaness are not mentioned so often, and when they are, it's usually in the footnotes (I only discovered these composers after joining this forum by the way, but 4'33" I already knew since I was starting in CM).



hammeredklavier said:


> Don't you also have some negative views on Mahler as well?


Considering that so many people seem to place him in the same league as Bach, Mozart and Beethoven, I think that he is overrated, yet I do enjoy his music. Give me the _Titan_ or the _Resurrection_ symphonies over anything by Cage any day.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Allerius said:


> Considering that so many people seem to place him in the same league as Bach, Mozart and Beethoven, I think that he is overrated, ....


???? What people are these? Fundamental to everything Cage did was his desire NOT to be in the same league as Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. As silly as it is to rank art and pretend that ranking has any significance beyond one's personal tastes, it is even sillier to rank Cage in this way, as it would be to rank Andy Warhol with Titian or Rembrandt.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

fluteman said:


> ???? What people are these? Fundamental to everything Cage did was his desire NOT to be in the same league as Bach, Mozart and Beethoven. As silly as it is to rank art and pretend that ranking has any significance beyond one's personal tastes, it is even sillier to rank Cage in this way, as it would be to rank Andy Warhol with Titian or Rembrandt.


This is probably the (tragic) irony of John Cage, by the way - so much of his philosophy involved anti-romanticism, in the sense that he wanted to get as far away from the idea of the heroic composer artist as possible- and yet he's somehow ended up portrayed and despised as the exact kind of Famous Composer image that his philosophy was against.

edit: actually i think that post was talking about Mahler, not Cage ,but oh well, the point stands


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

fluteman said:


> ???? What people are these? Fundamental to everything Cage did was his desire NOT to be in the same league as Bach, Mozart and Beethoven.





fbjim said:


> edit: actually i think that post was talking about Mahler, not Cage ,but oh well, the point stands


Yes, I was talking about Mahler, not Cage.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

fbjim said:


> This is probably the (tragic) irony of John Cage, by the way - so much of his philosophy involved anti-romanticism, in the sense that he wanted to get as far away from the idea of the heroic composer artist as possible- and yet he's somehow ended up portrayed and despised as the exact kind of Famous Composer image that his philosophy was against.
> 
> edit: actually i think that post was talking about Mahler, not Cage ,but oh well, the point stands


Actually, I think Cage would be delighted by his legacy in terms of his influence on western art. He certainly lived long enough to see what it would be. But if you went out on the street and started asking random people if they recognize his name, you might be out there a long time before someone says yes. Both Mozart and Beethoven had hit movies made about their lives not too long ago. The recently departed Charles Grodin starred in a hilarious movie called Beethoven that admittedly was about a dog named Beethoven and had nothing to do with the composer, but it shows Beethoven's name is still recognized. The best Cage can do is a hilariously brief mention here:


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Seems a lot of posts on TC are spent talking about the size of an audience, i.e. new music has a tiny one. Or how recognizable is John Cage's name to the man on the street. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see why these questions have any importance.

New classical music has an audience of people who are enthusiastic about what young composers are doing today, I'm one of them. And I don't give a hoot about the size of this audience. I just find the music and listen to it, sometimes I contact the composer and interview them for my blog. Without exception these composers are fulfilling their dream of writing music and having it performed for audiences across the globe. They are excited about what they are doing and the response they are getting.

The same is true regarding John Cage. I enjoy his music and writings and philosophy. I have several books written by him and a number of books about him and enjoy reading them, as I do listening to his music. Again, I don't care if he is as famous as Beethoven, that is the last thing I care about concerning John Cage.

And I have no clue why anyone cares about those issues. I guess it's a TC thing.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

SanAntone said:


> Seems a lot of posts on TC are spent talking about the size of an audience, i.e. new music has a tiny one. Or how recognizable is John Cage's name to the man on the street. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see why these questions have any importance.
> 
> New classical music has an audience of people who are enthusiastic about what young composers are doing today, I'm one of them. And I don't give a hoot about the size of this audience. I just find the music and listen to it, sometimes I contact the composer and interview them for my blog. Without exception these composers are fulfilling their dream of writing music and having it performed for audiences across the globe. They are excited about what they are doing and the response they are getting.
> 
> ...


That was my point. It doesn't matter.


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> I agree that Cage has written some music that is definitely worthwhile investigating, however, I'd not suggest the two you posted which I think are one dimensional.


I said music his detractors would enjoy, not music that I'd enjoy


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

After Cage had spent some time studying under him, Schoenberg declared the then young Cage wasn't really a composer, but "an inventor of genius ". Schoenberg was dismayed by Cage's total lack of understanding of harmony , and his indifference to it .


----------

