# Breaking Down the Concept of "4:33"



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


----------



## David OByrne (Dec 1, 2016)

I doubt you've listened to a note of John Cage's music


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Please refer to all the other TC threads about 4'33". Don't start another


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

Not again.......


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

David OByrne said:


> I doubt you've listened to a note of John Cage's music


:lol: lol haha


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Vasks said:


> Please refer to all the other TC threads about 4'33". Don't start another


 I never use the search function.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Vasks said:


> Please refer to all the other TC threads about 4'33". Don't start another


But the topic has not been explored to the fullest extent, and other 4'33" threads are too bulked out. A fresh start will do us all good. I think there is infinite space in 4'33" to be broken down so there can be infinite number of threads about and infinite number of posts in any of those threads.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


I think in this piece, John Cage was more concerned with awareness than with meditation.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Manxfeeder said:


> I think in this piece, John Cage was more concerned with awareness than with meditation.


Care to explain?


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Manxfeeder said:


> I think in this piece, John Cage was more concerned with awareness than with meditation.


Based on my (admittedly limited) knowledge of meditative practices, I think that awareness can actually be an important part of meditation. Meditation helps people to cultivate a sense of being in the moment, of intense mindfulness - awareness of ambient sounds, as well as awareness of one's own breath and bodily rhythms. I think that Cage wanted to encourage - or at least enable - this type of experience in the concert hall.


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

If you really plan it out right, "4:33" is actually the greatest music work of all time, during which I just put on my headphones and start listening to Beethoven's 9th!


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

AfterHours said:


> If you really plan it out right, "4:33" is actually the greatest music work of all time, during which I just put on my headphones and start listening to Beethoven's 9th!


lol

:lol: :lol:


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

AfterHours said:


> *If you really plan it out right, "4:33" is actually the greatest music work of all time*, during which I just put on my headphones and start listening to Beethoven's 9th!


I think I will listen to 4'33" while I am at the drag races. Many wonderful sounds!


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Manxfeeder said:


> I think in this piece, John Cage was more concerned with awareness than with meditation.


Yeah, i heard the idea is that the noises the audience makes (coughing, shuffling, etc.) is music. That was Cage's philosophy, that everything is music.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Phil loves classical said:


> Yeah, i heard the idea is that the noises the audience makes (coughing, shuffling, etc.) is music. That was Cage's philosophy, that everything is music.


I basically agree with your description of Cage's philosophy. I would just amend it slightly: Cage's philosophy was that everything has the potential to _become _music, if we listen to it with that goal in mind.

Here's one of Cage's remarks about his aesthetics: "I saw art not as something that consisted of a communication from the artist to an audience but rather as an activity of sounds in which the artist found a way to let the sounds be themselves. And, in being themselves, to open the minds of people who made them or listened to them to other possibilities than they had previously considered." The implication of this remark (if I understand him correctly) is that any sound can be turned into music, if the listener is willing to receive the sound in an aesthetic context.

Here's the article where I found that quote, if anyone is interested in reading further: http://www.hermitary.com/solitude/cage.html


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Bettina said:


> The implication of this remark (if I understand him correctly) is that any sound can be turned into music, if the listener is willing to receive the sound in an aesthetic context.


That's exactly correct. That's his point. Anyone trying to extrapolate a different intent just doesn't want to buy into what Cage himself said.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Bettina said:


> I basically agree with your description of Cage's philosophy. I would just amend it slightly: Cage's philosophy was that everything has the potential to _become _music, if we listen to it with that goal in mind.
> 
> Here's one of Cage's remarks about his aesthetics: "I saw art not as something that consisted of a communication from the artist to an audience but rather as an activity of sounds in which the artist found a way to let the sounds be themselves. And, in being themselves, to open the minds of people who made them or listened to them to other possibilities than they had previously considered." The implication of this remark (if I understand him correctly) is that any sound can be turned into music, if the listener is willing to receive the sound in an aesthetic context.
> 
> Here's the article where I found that quote, if anyone is interested in reading further: http://www.hermitary.com/solitude/cage.html


While I agree with that concept in principle, it inevitably will lead to much music that I don't care for at all. Saws cutting wood, birds chirping, snakes hissing, plane engines roaring all mixed together to create "music". I have yet to see such "music" done in a way that appeals to me, but I do think it can be done in that all sounds are a note.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I never use the search function.


http://www.talkclassical.com/search.php


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


Agree entirely. There is nothing particularly profound about the concept behind _4'33"_ either.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


At the temple? But ... if the orchestra isn't there, how can the experience "achieve the same thing"?

So much has been written about 4'33", and much of it is worth reading, and contemplating, especially for those truly interested in art. The following article may prove of interest as a start: http://rosewhitemusic.com/piano/writings/silence-taught-john-cage/


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

SONNET CLV said:


> At the temple? But ... if the orchestra isn't there, how can the experience "achieve the same thing"?
> 
> So much has been written about 4'33", and much of it is worth reading, and contemplating, especially for those truly interested in art. The following article may prove of interest as a start: http://rosewhitemusic.com/piano/writings/silence-taught-john-cage/


I wouldn't pay for a concert to 4'33", but it is an interesting concept. You can enjoy it in the comfort of your home now:


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Phil loves classical said:


> I wouldn't pay for a concert to 4'33", but it is an interesting concept. You can enjoy it in the comfort of your home now:


As John M said: "You can not be serious"


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Pugg said:


> As John M said: "You can not be serious"


Maybe it works better in a concert live?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Phil loves classical said:


> Maybe it works better in a concert live?


Most common comment on hearing 4'33" in concert: "I paid for this???"


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

In spite of the redundancy I have read some interesting new spins on the work.

Hopefully the ones who do not understand this work will stay away.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

KenOC said:


> Most common comment on hearing 4'33" in concert: "I paid for this???"


Have you ever been to a live performance of 433 so how do you know?


----------



## Rys (Nov 26, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Most common comment on hearing 4'33" in concert: "I paid for this???"


I wonder what my non-classical friends would say if I got them to buy tickets to 4'33"?


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

I've been reading Philip Glass's autobiography and he offers this useful commentary about _4' 33"_:



> Take John's famous piece 4' 33". John, or anyone, sits at the piano for four minutes thirty-three seconds and during that time, whatever you hear is the piece ... The idea was that John simply took this space and this prescribed period of time and by framing it, announced, "This is what you're going to pay attention to. What you see and what you hear is the art." When he got up, it ended.
> ... The important point is that a work of art has no independent existence. It has a conventional identity and a conventional reality and it comes into being through an interdependence of other events with people.
> ... The accepted idea when I was growing up was that the late Beethoven quartets or The Art of the Fugue or any of the great masterpieces had a platonic identity - that they had an actual, independent existence. What Cage was saying is that there is no such thing as an independent existence. The music exists between you - the listener - and the object that you're listening to. The transaction of it coming into being happens through the effort you make in the presence of that work. The cognitive activity is the content of the work, This is the root of postmodernism, really, and John was wonderful at not only articulating it, but demonstrating it in his work and his life.


As an aside, I also like this anecdote:


> John Cage liked me personally, but sometimes we would have conversations in which he would shake his head and say, "Philip, too many notes, too many notes, too many notes."
> I would laugh, and reply, "John, I'm one of your children, whether you like it or not."


----------



## tortkis (Jul 13, 2013)

It's interesting to know Glass's thoughts on 4'33" and that he thinks he is one of Cage children. I got curious about what Reich thought about 4'33" (and Cage) and checked out his writings.

In _Notes on music and dance_ (1973), Reich associates 4'33" ("any sound is music") with the 1960's avant garde dance trend ("any movement is dance"), regarding it rather negatively, and emphasizes the importance of getting back to the basic, that is, regular rhythmic movement done to music.

In another essay, he distinguishes what he was doing around 1960s from either the European serialism or Cage's chance operation. Reich thinks Cage's early percussion & prepared piano pieces will survive best, though they didn't influence his musical works. (_John Cage_, 1992)


----------



## topo morto (Apr 9, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> While I agree with that concept in principle, it inevitably will lead to much music that I don't care for at all. Saws cutting wood, birds chirping, snakes hissing, plane engines roaring all mixed together to create "music". I have yet to see such "music" done in a way that appeals to me, but I do think it can be done in that all sounds are a note.


I tend to find that birds do 'birds chirping' pretty well. A good dawn chorus beats most human-composed music!


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

It's the atonality in 4'33" that annoys me! It just grates on me everytime.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Nereffid said:


> I've been reading Philip Glass's autobiography and he offers this useful commentary about _4' 33"_:
> 
> As an aside, I also like this anecdote:


Thanks for sharing. I find Cage's idea interesting, as it was something I was contemplating, but I feel it is wrong now, especially with Glass's explanation. How does a work of music not exist independently? There is the concept of entropy. How is chaos music? Even Varese, one in influenced Cage thought music is organized sound. But Glass is correct that Cage's idea is the root of postmodernism. It applies in other arts.


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

I put 4'33'' on at the same time as I'm listening to Bach. It's quite wonderful music...


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Care to explain?


John Cage's quote is, "Wherever we are, what we hear is mostly noise. When we ignore it, it disturbs us. When we listen to it, we find it fascinating." So I don't see the piece so much as meditation as being awakened to the sounds around us which our minds actually tune out.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

The remarkable thing about 4'33" is that one can perform it even if they are dead. It might be a great piece to enjoy at a funeral home. Allow the dear departed a few special moments before they are planted.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> Thanks for sharing. I find Cage's idea interesting, as it was something I was contemplating, but I feel it is wrong now, especially with Glass's explanation. How does a work of music not exist independently? There is the concept of entropy. How is chaos music? Even Varese, one in influenced Cage thought music is organized sound. But Glass is correct that Cage's idea is the root of postmodernism. It applies in other arts.


I would say that what the composer has composed is one thing, what the performer performs is another thing, and what the listener hears is a third thing. The first two can't exist independently because there will always need to be a listener (or, as Glass also says, someone "imagining listening") for them to be perceived. Even if the composer, performer and listener are all the same person.

If music is "organized sound", how can chaos be music? I'd say that, in a work like _4' 33"_, the organization is simply the framing of the piece. Once the frame is there, whatever's in the frame becomes the music.

I accept that this can seem a very unsatisfactory way of looking at the world. I think we're just so used to having scores and recordings that we're very comfortable with the notion that one can have the exact same musical experience repeatedly, whereas _4' 33"_ is the most blatant musico-philosophical statement of Heraclitus's old dictum that one can never step in the same river twice.


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2017)

ArtMusic said:


> Agree entirely. There is nothing particularly profound about the concept behind _4'33"_ either.


Who needs profound? After 250 years of allegedly 'profound' from the Classicists and Romantics, "thoughtful" might be sufficient.

I wasn't there (and nor were you) at the time he came up with the concept, so I don't know whether it was received as 'new' or 'original' or 'profound'...but someone else here who has better knowledge might be able to shed light for us both.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Nereffid said:


> I would say that what the composer has composed is one thing, what the performer performs is another thing, and what the listener hears is a third thing. The first two can't exist independently because there will always need to be a listener (or, as Glass also says, someone "imagining listening") for them to be perceived. Even if the composer, performer and listener are all the same person.
> 
> If music is "organized sound", how can chaos be music? I'd say that, in a work like _4' 33"_, the organization is simply the framing of the piece. Once the frame is there, whatever's in the frame becomes the music.
> 
> I accept that this can seem a very unsatisfactory way of looking at the world. I think we're just so used to having scores and recordings that we're very comfortable with the notion that one can have the exact same musical experience repeatedly, whereas _4' 33"_ is the most blatant musico-philosophical statement of Heraclitus's old dictum that one can never step in the same river twice.


Like your first statement, which I fully agree with. But the actual composition can exist without a listener, because the composer who composed it made it to exist. Are the works that have been lost or destroyed not music on its own independently? Cage might say it only had the potential to be music.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Postmodern has been casting doubt on very rudimentary accepted things. I heard an interesting rebuttal against it in a poetry site with an illustration. According to Plato, a chair is a form. So people sit on it. But the postmodernist would say, there is a broken tyoe of chair, a stable kind, every chair is different, etc. You basically wouldn't be able to assume the chair you sit on is not going to break apart. So a postmodernist like Cage should be checking every chair before he sits on it. There is a kind of hypocrisy in the life of a postmodernist. Another example the writer used is how would a postmodernist appreciate someone saying his bank account no longer exists or the account balance is something different than yesterday. The bank teller could tell the postmodernist, the balance you remembered was yesterday, today is another day! :lol:


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> Like your first statement, which I fully agree with. But the actual composition can exist without a listener, because the composer who composed it made it to exist. Are the works that have been lost or destroyed not music on its own independently? Cage might say it only had the potential to be music.


Ultimately I'd agree with Cage. Obviously the physical score exists, but music _in the sense of something that we experience_ has to be heard (with your ears or in your mind). If no one's reading the score, performing or listening, then it's just a description of a potential listening experience.
But I accept that there's a kind of pedantry involved in discussions of this type; of course by "a piece of music" we can also mean a score, or a record, or a digital file, so I don't intend to get hung up on this one particular definition!


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

It doesn't matter how detailed the blueprints might be. A house does not exist until it is built. Similarly, the _idea_ of music is not music itself.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

Phil loves classical said:


> Postmodern has been casting doubt on very rudimentary accepted things. I heard an interesting rebuttal against it in a poetry site with an illustration. According to Plato, a chair is a form. So people sit on it. But the postmodernist would say, there is a broken tyoe of chair, a stable kind, every chair is different, etc. You basically wouldn't be able to assume the chair you sit on is not going to break apart. So a postmodernist like Cage should be checking every chair before he sits on it.


Cage is absolutely not a Postmodernist. The point of "4:33" is that it IS music (you can of course disagree with the point, but that's the point). The Postmodernist would say music is a social construct, so NOTHING inherently IS music



Phil loves classical said:


> There is a kind of hypocrisy in the life of a postmodernist.


Maybe, maybe not, but they won the late 20th century either way


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

There is really no meaningful difference between saying that "everything is music" and that "nothing is music." The net effect of both positions is that "music" is not a distinct thing . . . and both positions are equally (and utterly) wrong.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

JAS said:


> There is really no meaningful difference between saying that "everything is music" and that "nothing is music." The net effect of both positions is that "music" is not a distinct thing . . . and both positions are equally (and utterly) wrong.


It's not "everything is music" and "nothing is music." It's (Cage, Modernist) "This IS what music is _whether you like it or not_, because it's objectively so" versus (Postmodernist) "This IS what music is AS FAR AS YOU'RE CONCERNED, _whether you like it or not_, because your society says so"

(By the way, Cage's position isn't that everything is music , but rather that the "production of sound" is music.)


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

If all sound is music, then there is no need for the word "music," as we already have "sound." The effect is the same, as there is no distinct thing that can be called "music." The fact that we can abuse the word, and willfully misapply it as a demonstration of how o' so clever we are, is evidence of nothing particularly useful.


----------



## Jacred (Jan 14, 2017)

Basically, 4'33" exists to question all the rules of music that have been established since the dawn of time and that have been unquestionably understood since then. Presumptuous at best... but hey, I didn't write it.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

JAS said:


> If all sound is music, then there is no need for the word "music," as we already have "sound." The effect is the same, as there is no distinct thing that can be called "music." The fact that we can abuse the word, and willfully misapply it as a demonstration of how o' so clever we are, is evidence of nothing particularly useful.


Congratulations, you came up with the same devastating refutation that thousands of people already did. Guess what? People are still arguing about "4:33" anyway so Cage wins and you lose

And this is beside the point that there's a basic difference between "4:33" and Postmodernism


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Magnum Miserium said:


> Congratulations, you came up with the same devastating refutation that thousands of people already did.


I make no special claims in merely acknowledging widely recognized reality.



Magnum Miserium said:


> Guess what? People are still arguing about "4:33" anyway so Cage wins and you lose.


No one wins or loses this argument, which is precisely why the argument goes on and on and on . . .



Magnum Miserium said:


> And this is beside the point that there's a basic difference between "4:33" and Postmodernism


I was not directly speaking about 4'33, which I consider to be a stunt rather than actual music, but merely the philosophy behind it, as well as the philosophy behind Postmodernism. At their root, the differences are meaningless. Both seek only to destroy the tyranny of meaning, even if they might use slightly different means to attain that end.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

JAS said:


> No one wins or loses this argument, which is precisely why the argument goes on and on and on . . .


Then the one who started the argument wins, which is, again...



JAS said:


> Both seek only to destroy the tyranny of meaning, even if they might use slightly different means to attain that end.


Yeah, yeah, and the bankers and the communists are secretly working together to destroy Western civilization


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Magnum Miserium said:


> Then the one who started the argument wins, which is, again...


One might argue that, if the goal was merely to create pointless, self-fulfilling conflict. I would argue that in so doing, everyone loses.



Magnum Miserium said:


> Yeah, yeah, and the bankers and the communists are secretly working together to destroy Western civilization


Why bring the communists into the plot? And who still thinks that it is a secret?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Magnum Miserium said:


> Cage is absolutely not a Postmodernist. The point of "4:33" is that it IS music (you can of course disagree with the point, but that's the point). The Postmodernist would say music is a social construct, so NOTHING inherently IS music
> 
> Maybe, maybe not, but they won the late 20th century either way


Cage has been linked to both modernism and postmodernism.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/book...ostmodernism/5578D4CF86776807ACE9099D661686AE


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

JAS said:


> If all sound is music, then there is no need for the word "music," as we already have "sound." The effect is the same, as there is no distinct thing that can be called "music." The fact that we can abuse the word, and willfully misapply it as a demonstration of how o' so clever we are, is evidence of nothing particularly useful.


I've always understood the idea to be that all sound *can be* music, not that all sound is automatically music.


----------



## topo morto (Apr 9, 2017)

JAS said:


> If all sound is music, then there is no need for the word "music," as we already have "sound."


Music is sound _that someone is trying to sell_.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

I believe the answer is 42.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Maybe instead of calling 4'33" music, we call it art (if it is even that) or perhaps artless. At best we can call it an idea or concept and leave music and art out of it.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

topo morto said:


> Music is sound _that someone is trying to sell_.


This is excellent


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

topo morto said:


> Music is sound _that someone is trying to sell_.


Well, not always. Surely there have been musicians/composers who have written or performed (at least now and then) purely for the joy if it with no care for the money.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

JAS said:


> It doesn't matter how detailed the blueprints might be. A house does not exist until it is built. Similarly, the _idea_ of music is not music itself.


But the composer already heard it in his head, how does it not exist? A house is made up of materials, music is more abstract.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> But the composer already heard it in his head, how does it not exist? A house is made up of materials, music is more abstract.


Can a thought exist in your head _without you thinking about it_? 

I need to lie down now.


----------



## topo morto (Apr 9, 2017)

Florestan said:


> Well, not always. Surely there have been musicians/composers who have written or performed (at least now and then) purely for the joy if it with no care for the money.


True, but they're still usually trying to sell it _as_ a worthwhile experience, concept, or whatever. Plus at some level it works a bit like the free samples in the supermarket, or the drug dealer outside the playground doing the first hit for free, etc.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

JAS said:


> If all sound is music, then there is no need for the word "music," as we already have "sound." The effect is the same, as there is no distinct thing that can be called "music." The fact that we can abuse the word, and willfully misapply it as a demonstration of how o' so clever we are, is evidence of nothing particularly useful.





Nereffid said:


> I've always understood the idea to be that all sound *can be* music, not that all sound is automatically music.


I would add one, perhaps two unnecessary, words. The idea is that all sound *can be heard as* music. One can choose to hear any sounds as music. Most might hear a performance of 4'33" as silence or annoying sounds, but one can also choose to focus on those sounds and find music in them.


----------



## MissKittysMom (Mar 2, 2017)

AfterHours said:


> If you really plan it out right, "4:33" is actually the greatest music work of all time, during which I just put on my headphones and start listening to Beethoven's 9th!


There is a story that Cage's own favorite performance of 4:33 was in an auditorium with practice rooms nearby, where a student was practicing the last movement of the Moonlight sonata. He would rip through a passage, screw it up, swear, then try again, screw it up, swear, and repeat again.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

arpeggio said:


> In spite of the redundancy I have read some interesting new spins on the work.
> 
> Hopefully the ones who do not understand this work will stay away.


I have a slightly different take. Hopefully those who do not understand 4'33" will read the thread with an open mind and better understand Cage's intent. It's fine to disagree with his views, but one should, for example, actually know that 4'33" _is not, and was not intended to be, silence_.


----------



## MissKittysMom (Mar 2, 2017)

Is it still 4:33 if you don't take the repeats?


----------



## NishmatHaChalil (Apr 17, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


4'33'' is part conceptual, but I see it primarily as a piece of performative art. It can be listened to at home too, and I think it works really well as part of a playlist, but, in my view, it works the best when listened to in group and in an official setting. If you are wondering why people pay to listen to it in concerts, remember: it's 4'33''. Almost no concert lasts for only 4'33'', which means people are going to listen to several other pieces in the concert as well. What is the harm in setting 4'33'' apart to pause, pay attention to the natural sounds from the environment and reflect? Cage did not intend it to be listened to in isolation, nor did he mean it as an attack to other music.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

For those who despise _433_ I recommend the following threads that are still open (some have been closed):

http://www.talkclassical.com/44746-what-do-you-hate.html

http://www.talkclassical.com/42451-composers-you-couldnt-care.html

http://www.talkclassical.com/31317-rant-horrible-music-composers.html (The OP is a real good one)

http://www.talkclassical.com/40488-classical-composers-you-hate.html

Or better yet start an I hate _433_ thread.

At least leave those of us who are trying to understand the work alone.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

arpeggio said:


> For those who despise _433_ I recommend the following threads that are still open (some have been closed):
> 
> http://www.talkclassical.com/44746-what-do-you-hate.html
> 
> ...


It never occurred to me that there were people still trying to understand it. Nor that anyone seriously considers it a 'work'.


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2017)

DaveM said:


> It never occurred to me that there were people still trying to understand it. Nor that anyone seriously considers it a 'work'.


Well with new people joining this Forum all the time, and the inexperienced listener becoming more experienced all the time, I'd say it's as obvious as that there are people trying to "understand" many different pieces of music, works of art, people's idiosyncrasies etc etc etc.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

MacLeod said:


> Well with new people joining this Forum all the time, and the inexperienced listener becoming more experienced all the time, I'd say it's as obvious as that there are people trying to "understand" many different pieces of music, works of art, people's idiosyncrasies etc etc etc.


I think that it is widely accepted that Cage was trying to make a point with 4'33", nothing more, nothing less. I think he would have been dismayed to see the amount of time people have spent discussing it, not to mention the attempts to attach profound meaning to it beyond what was intended. The term 'work' implies a creation, a result of effort; 4'33" is not a 'work'. So, it is up to those of us who are more experienced listeners to not mislead those who are new to classical music.


----------



## jdec (Mar 23, 2013)

MissKittysMom said:


> Is it still 4:33 if you don't take the repeats?


The first movement is not sonata form, it's ABACA form.


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

DaveM said:


> I think that it is widely accepted that Cage was trying to make a point with 4'33", nothing more, nothing less. I think he would have been dismayed to see the amount of time people have spent discussing it, not to mention the attempts to attach profound meaning to it beyond what was intended. The term 'work' implies a creation, a result of effort; 4'33" is not a 'work'. So, it is up to those of us who are more experienced listeners to not mislead those who are new to classical music.


Writing "Tacet" and giving a time indication does require a certain amount of creativity and effort, yes.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

It's very easy for tempers to fray when topics which arouse fierce passions, such as 4'33", are discussed. Please do make the effort to ensure that you remain polite and respectful to each other, and don't overreact in the thread. If you are offended by a post, report it to the mods instead.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

arpeggio said:


> Have you ever been to a live performance of 433 so how do you know?


Anyone is capable of a live performance of _4'33"_. Almost anywhere, anytime. That's the fallacy of the concept.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

ArtMusic said:


> Anyone is capable of a live performance of _4'33"_. Almost anywhere, anytime. That's the fallacy of the concept.


More like the universality of the concept.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> More like the universality of the concept.


Thus a conceptual, philosophical piece more than a musical piece per se. But as commented earlier, hardly profound as such.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

ArtMusic said:


> Anyone is capable of a live performance of _4'33"_. Almost anywhere, anytime. That's the fallacy of the concept.


That is if...one wants to attend


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

ArtMusic said:


> Anyone is capable of a live performance of _4'33"_. Almost anywhere, anytime. That's the fallacy of the concept.


I don't know if anyone could do it...it might be difficult to keep count of exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds. Is it OK to use a stopwatch? Or does that go against Cage's intention?


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Some orch don't play the repeats and that is just not on.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Bettina said:


> Is it OK to use a stopwatch? Or does that go against Cage's intention?


The video I used in my classroom of a performance by a pianist has him using a stopwatch. Remember, there are 3 movements, the lengths of which add up to 4'33"


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

Bettina said:


> I don't know if anyone could do it...it might be difficult to keep count of exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds. Is it OK to use a stopwatch? Or does that go against Cage's intention?


If the stopwatch is an old-fashioned kind, and makes a ticking sound, that is probably all the better.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Bettina said:


> I don't know if anyone could do it...it might be difficult to keep count of exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds. Is it OK to use a stopwatch? Or does that go against Cage's intention?


All they need is someone offstage to signal to the pianist when it's time


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Vasks said:


> The video I used in my classroom of a performance by a pianist has him using a stopwatch. Remember, there are 3 movements, the lengths of which add up to 4'33"


Is 4 minutes, 33 seconds the defining feature of the work? If not, then it can be whatever length we desire. But by naming it 4'33" Cage suggest that is must be that length. Unfortunately, that leaves an infinite number of other similar compositions to be composed simply by varying the length. And therefore, it makes 4'33" very common and mundane, if it's only defining feature is the specific length.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

My understanding was that it was best to listen to it at 4'33" pm.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

How long would 4'33" run if Maximianno Cobra performed it? Does anyone prefer a HIP 4'33"?


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

DaveM said:


> My understanding was that it was best to listen to it at 4'33" pm.


I was thinking what a terrible joke this was . . . until it occurred to me that it should be played in Pajok, in South Sudan, for reasons I will just make you guess at. (But I admit that it is just a little off.)


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

JAS said:


> I was thinking what a terrible joke this was . . . until it occurred to me that it should be played in Pajok, in South Sudan, for reasons I will just make you guess at. (But I admit that it is just a little off.)


I think you're on to something and we may be getting down to the optimal setting for the performance: 4'33" pm at latitude & longitude 4 N and 33 E which is very close to Pajok, South Sudan, a place I've always wanted to visit. "


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

DaveM said:


> I think you're on to something and we may be getting down to the optimal setting for the performance: 4'33" pm at latitude & longitude 4 N and 33 E which is very close to Pajok, South Sudan, a place I've always wanted to visit. "


Congratulations, you get the prize! That spot is really remarkably close to the right values. (If we really want to be adventurous, we could have it at Hassi R'Mel, in Algeria, which is not quite so close to longitude 4 and latitude 33, but now I am just being crazy.)

I will bet that 4'33 is being played in both locations even as we type.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Florestan said:


> Is 4 minutes, 33 seconds the defining feature of the work? If not, then it can be whatever length we desire. But by naming it 4'33" Cage suggest that is must be that length. Unfortunately, that leaves an infinite number of other similar compositions to be composed simply by varying the length. And therefore, it makes 4'33" very common and mundane, if it's only defining feature is the specific length.


I think Cage picked the time 4'33" as it is not a nice round number, to suggest something more specific than generalized. It could have well been 3'43". The main thing was to have enough time to get the point across, but without boring the audience for too long.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

David OByrne said:


> I doubt you've listened to a note of John Cage's music


Is that really relevant?


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

JAS said:


> Congratulations, you get the prize! That spot is really remarkably close to the right values. (If we really want to be adventurous, we could have it at Hassi R'Mel, in Algeria, which is not quite so close to longitude 4 and latitude 33, but now I am just being crazy.)
> 
> *I will bet that 4'33 is being played in both locations even as we type.*


If they don't know that they're playing 4'33", are they really playing 4'33"? A new twist on the ol' tree-falling-in-the-forest conundrum.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

mmsbls said:


> It's fine to disagree with his views, but one should, for example, actually know that 4'33" _is not, and was not intended to be, silence_.


Personally, because of this piece, I have become aware of the sounds around me. I catch myself walking around Nashville with a silly grin because I'm caught up in the sounds. Whether that was Cage's point or not, that has been my takeaway from the concept.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Cage said in the video I referred to that when he designed the 3 movements, they added up to 4 minutes and 33 seconds. Thus the title and thus the piece must be 4'33' long; nothing shorter, nothing longer.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Did Cage ever perform 4'33'' on a prepared piano?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

The "content" of 4'33" is _your awareness_ during that short time.

With 4'33", Cage has presented to Western audiences, in the context of a musical performance with (probably) other works, the idea that, if you listen, the sounds around you can be musical. It is an _invitation_ to awareness, not something he is forcing anyone to do.
He is doing this in the context of a concert performance, because that is his intended audience, the audience that he wishes to present this possibility to.

As such, the statement that "4'33" could be performed anywhere" is not exactly true.

It is what it is. The piece has been named and published under the name of John Cage.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

I usually don't write to the 4'33" threads but here goes...

4'33" made me a hardcore platonist! I had to abandon the experience and awareness altogether, shut them out from true music. True music is the _idea_ of music and nothing else. Actual music is something that is _intended to point to_ the true music, whether the listener experiences that or not.

So if you listen to 4'33" intensely and start noticing musical patterns in the soundscape, they are not music, because they are not expressed with the intention to point to the true musical idea. Yes, you may get a true musical idea from them! But that does not make those sounds music, just like if you see a beautiful tree and get an idea about a symphony based on that, it does not make the tree the symphony. But then when you go home after this great performance of 4'33" and write those musical ideas on note paper and then get some kind of ensemble to perform the music... then that performance is actual music that refers to the true music. Even if it sounds _exactly the same_ as that first performance of 4'33" (which is not music) that initiated the whole process.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Xaltotun said:


> I usually don't write to the 4'33" threads but here goes...
> 
> 4'33" made me a hardcore platonist! I had to abandon the experience and awareness altogether, shut them out from true music. True music is the _idea_ of music and nothing else. Actual music is something that is _intended to point to_ the true music, whether the listener experiences that or not.
> 
> So if you listen to 4'33" intensely and start noticing musical patterns in the soundscape, they are not music, because they are not expressed with the intention to point to the true musical idea. Yes, you may get a true musical idea from them! But that does not make those sounds music, just like if you see a beautiful tree and get an idea about a symphony based on that, it does not make the tree the symphony. But then when you go home after this great performance of 4'33" and write those musical ideas on note paper and then get some kind of ensemble to perform the music... then that performance is actual music that refers to the true music. Even if it sounds _exactly the same_ as that first performance of 4'33" (which is not music) that initiated the whole process.


Well argued. You have as much claim to that definition of music as Cage does.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

premont said:


> Did Cage ever perform 4'33'' on a prepared piano?


Was there ever a piano or performer?


----------



## David OByrne (Dec 1, 2016)

Phil loves classical said:


> Was there ever a piano or performer?


Yes there was, in the very first performance.....


----------



## David OByrne (Dec 1, 2016)

Captainnumber36 said:


> :lol: lol haha


So I'm right


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Random observation (I almost posted it in the Stupid Thread Ideas, but then I decided to put it here): 4'33" is literally a-tonal, because it doesn't use any tones.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

You could also say it's a type of dodecaphonic work because it uses all twelve tones of the scale equally. Which is to say, zero.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Phil loves classical said:


> Was there ever a piano or performer?


I've tried so many times , more the 433 times for sure.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Vasks said:


> Please refer to all the other TC threads about 4'33". Don't start another


I think I've learned by now how to turn a thread like this around: Before 4'33", there was Richard Wagner, who brought tonal music to its highest point. Then Arnold Schoenberg came along and ruined everything with his atonal nonsense that nobody wanted to listen to. Then a bunch of academics forced us to listen to Godless atonal music throughout the 20th century, and that caused both world wars and the decline of classical music. Then John Cage said, "You don't want to listen to my music? Fine! I'll make you sit there and listen to nothing!" There may have been some more composers after John Cage (maybe even one named Vasks), but no point in finding out, music is ruined forever, let's go back to Wagner.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> ...
> He is doing this in the context of a concert performance, because that is his intended audience, the audience that he wishes to present this possibility to.
> 
> As such, the statement that "4'33" could be performed anywhere" is not exactly true.
> ...


By "concert performance", if Cage meant in a concert hall, then he is woefully limiting the breadth of audience. My living room can hold a concert performance, a solo or a string quintet can comfortably fit in my living room. Hence _4'33"_ can be a concert performance in my living room.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

I bet you that Cage has hours and hours of amusement reading all the theories of his masterpiece, yeh he is having a right old giggle.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Dan Ante said:


> I bet you that Cage has hours and hours of amusement reading all the theories of his masterpiece, yeh he is having a right old giggle.


I think he would too because that was his real motivation - to generate a lot of discussion.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

We should organize a performance of 4'33" during which we spend the whole time bickering about the meaning of the work. Our bickering would be the music itself during that particular performance!


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bettina said:


> We should organize a performance of 4'33" during which we spend the whole time bickering about the meaning of the work. Our bickering would be the music itself during that particular performance!


We can do a poll about this, maximum time should be 4 minutes 33 seconds.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Every one seems to accept that he was referring to time but it could have been angular measurement. 
0 degrees - 4 minutes - 33 seconds. The thin end of the wedge.


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

What a shame 99% of Cage discussions focus around 4'33" and none of his other masterpieces. I think 4'33" is a philisophically interesting and important piece of conceptual art, but I don't know if its music (that's kind of irrelevant, though).


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

mathisdermaler said:


> What a shame 99% of Cage discussions focus around 4'33" and none of his other masterpieces.


Maybe, but if so, he only has himself to blame.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Sadly it's usually the bad stuff which generates long threads (especially referring to the other big one about this piece).


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Sitting in silence in a group is the equivalent or meditating in a Temple of place of choice. I think that can be a very powerful thing to achieve, but you don't need to pay money to see an Orchestra sitting in front of you doing nothing, just go to a Temple (or place of choice with some friends) and achieve the same thing!


I'm having a breakdown just thinking about the concept of 4'33".:lol:


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Dan Ante said:


> Every one seems to accept that he was referring to time but it could have been angular measurement.
> 0 degrees - 4 minutes - 33 seconds. The thin end of the wedge.


What angle? Angle of view?

If so might be the case, I find it rather narrow for a claimed piece of art.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

premont said:


> What angle? Angle of view?
> 
> If so might be the case, I find it rather narrow for a claimed piece of art.


Makes more sense than calling it music...


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

Barbebleu said:


> I'm having a breakdown just thinking about the concept of 4'33".:lol:


I think it has two related conceptual points.

1. All sound is musical/all sound has inherent beauty and value when framed as art

2. We should open ourselves up to/appreciate the natural/ambient world of sound

I think the second point is totally true and an important point to make. The first, I don't know. I definitely agree that a lot of sounds we consider to be ugly do actually have beauty, but I'm not radical enough to say all sound and arrangements of sound are inherently beautiful.

(Now I discuss the concept of 4'33" after saying that is bad, I see the irony)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Makes more sense than calling it music...


Perhaps we should start another thread about that.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Pugg said:


> Perhaps we should start another thread about that.


Great go for it Pugg...


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Great go for it Pugg...


I dive for that challenge....


----------



## dzc4627 (Apr 23, 2015)

Guys, I think we have a problem:

There just aren't enough 4'33 threads. I encourage each of you... yes, even you! Please, make another 4'33 thread. This dead horse is just _begging_ to be beaten.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

dzc4627 said:


> Guys, I think we have a problem:
> 
> There just aren't enough 4'33 threads. I encourage each of you... yes, even you! Please, make another 4'33 thread. This dead horse is just _begging_ to be beaten.


First, we have to fulfill an even more pressing need on TC: the need for more threads on Wagner's anti-semitism.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Personally, I think Hitler was totally inspired by John Cage! No, wait, maybe I'm thinking of that other guy...


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

KenOC said:


> Personally, I think Hitler was totally inspired by John Cage!


No, he was not:


----------



## dzc4627 (Apr 23, 2015)

Art Rock said:


> No, he was not:


Going to have to agree with Adolf on this one.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bettina said:


> First, we have to fulfill an even more pressing need on TC: the need for more threads on Wagner's anti-semitism.


Or Mahler being Jewish .


----------



## dzc4627 (Apr 23, 2015)

Pugg said:


> Or Mahler being Jewish .


We don't need any more threads on that... everyone already knows that Mahler's entire oeuvre is just a crisis of Jewish identity! The 2nd and 8th symphonies... they're just... uh... satire, yeah... satire. :tiphat:


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

I think we have a good thread on 4'33". Except for the last ten posts or so. If your tired of it, go somewhere else.


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

Casebearer said:


> I think we have a good thread on 4'33". Except for the last ten posts or so. If your tired of it, go somewhere else.


I gave this reply 4 min and 33 seconds of silence before posting, yet drew the same conclusion, so here you are


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

AfterHours said:


> I gave this reply 4 min and 33 seconds of silence before posting, yet drew the same conclusion, so here you are


Right answer, better than "statement"


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

AfterHours said:


> I gave this reply 4 min and 33 seconds of silence before posting, yet drew the same conclusion, so here you are


And if you repeat that again (i.e. the silence before posting), you will probably also draw the same conclusion.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

When will it be realised that citizen Cage was just just taking the psis


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> When will it be realised that citizen Cage was just just taking the psis


Out of what ?


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> Out of what ?


Out of who................


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Random thought: I wonder if anyone has ever performed 4'33" as an encore piece? It would be a great way to leave the audience wanting more!!


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

Can some one recommend a recording?.......


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

alan davis said:


> Can some one recommend a recording?.......


They are all very much the same but the Isle of Dogs combined sym-phony orchestras takes some beating.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

alan davis said:


> Can some one recommend a recording?.......


Don't get Maximianno Cobra's! His rendition lasts for 4 hours and 33 minutes.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> I've been reading Philip Glass's autobiography and he offers this useful commentary about _4' 33"_:
> _
> The accepted idea when I was growing up was that the late Beethoven quartets or The Art of the Fugue or any of the great masterpieces had a platonic identity - that they had an actual, independent existence. What Cage was saying is that there is no such thing as an independent existence. The music exists between you - the listener - and the object that you're listening to. The transaction of it coming into being happens through the effort you make in the presence of that work. The cognitive activity is the content of the work, This is the root of postmodernism, really, and John was wonderful at not only articulating it, but demonstrating it in his work and his life. _


This is very interesting. I cannot accept the ideas of "no independent existence at all" and "it's all in your head", that's just too radical for me. But I really like otoh the idea of congnitive effort and listener's active role, I think there's some truth in this. I'm not just buying it fully.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Lenny said:


> This is very interesting. I cannot accept the ideas of "no independent existence at all" and "it's all in your head", that's just too radical for me. But I really like otoh the idea of congnitive effort and listener's active role, I think there's some truth in this. I'm not just buying it fully.


Better to not buy it fully than to sneer at it immediately without thinking! :tiphat:


----------



## Guest (May 22, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> Out of who................


Okay then..out of whom? (and perhaps answer this time?)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bettina said:


> Don't get Maximianno Cobra's! His rendition lasts for 4 hours and 33 minutes.


Must get this one, looks interesting.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

If 4'33" had been released as a vinyl 45rpm single, would it have sounded the same played at 78rpm and 33 1/3rpm?


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Bettina said:


> Don't get Maximianno Cobra's! His rendition lasts for 4 hours and 33 minutes.


So he plays all the repeats, a brave man.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> Okay then..out of whom? (and perhaps answer this time?)


I would have thought that was obvious but for your benefit: Out of those that interpret it as music.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

DaveM said:


> If 4'33" had been released as a vinyl 45rpm single, would it have sounded the same played at 78rpm and 33 1/3rpm?


If 4'33" had been released as a hi-res SACD at 24 bit/96kHz, would skeptics still say they couldn't hear any difference between that and the MP3?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Dan Ante said:


> I would have thought that was obvious but for your benefit: Out of those that interpret it as music.


What is the "it" that is being interpreted as music? There is no content. The only "music" is your awareness of the ambient sounds as such, if you choose to participate.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> I would have thought that was obvious but for your benefit: Out of those that interpret it as music.


And your evidence that he must have been taking the ****?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> If 4'33" had been released as a hi-res SACD at 24 bit/96kHz, would skeptics still say they couldn't hear any difference between that and the MP3?


Funny you should mention that. I played it as a 24 Kbps MP3 occupying only 1 Kb of space and couldn't hear any difference between it and a FLAC version.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> If 4'33" had been released as a hi-res SACD at 24 bit/96kHz, would skeptics still say they couldn't hear any difference between that and the MP3?


The fidelity of 4"33" on SACD is so good that you can smell what John Cage ate for lunch on the day he came up with the idea of 4'33". Of course, you'd also need $20,000 speaker wires and interconnects to smell this detail. If you can't smell it, it means your stereo system sucks. 

Would I miss the concept of 4'33" if I listened to it on a cassette tape with Dolby Noise Reduction?


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> And your evidence that he must have been taking the ****?


Evidence??? Is it needed good lord man is it not obvious? Or are you of the opinion that it is music if so I would love to hear your rationale.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> Better to not buy it fully than to sneer at it immediately without thinking! :tiphat:


I gave it a thought and decided it's half BS 

The "postmodernist" says there's nothing objective that can explain the experience, which means that _anything_ can be the most profound experience to someone. I don't deny this. In fact I'd go even further and claim that pure nothingness can evoke holy, why not? But this doesn't mean that there's no objective reality.

So I think experiencing a rapture while listening to 4'33'' is not the whole truth.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Lenny said:


> I gave it a thought and decided it's half BS
> 
> The "postmodernist" says there's nothing objective that can explain the experience, which means that _anything_ can be the most profound experience to someone. I don't deny this. In fact I'd go even further and claim that pure nothingness can evoke holy, why not? But this doesn't mean that there's no objective reality.
> 
> So I think experiencing a rapture while listening to 4'33'' is not the whole truth.


Excuse me for butting into your conversation but it is an interesting that you say "pure nothingness" as a philosophical interest, can there actually be 'nothing' I followed a debate which was fascinating but very deep that said there cannot be nothing and that is the reason for the cosmos.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> Excuse me for butting into your conversation but it is an interesting that you say "pure nothingness" as a philosophical interest, can there actually be 'nothing' I followed a debate which was fascinating but very deep that said there cannot be nothing and that is the reason for the cosmos.


Nothing comes from nothing. The past, present, and future are one. Therefore silence and music are one.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Dan Ante said:


> Excuse me for butting into your conversation but it is an interesting that you say "pure nothingness" as a philosophical interest, can there actually be 'nothing' I followed a debate which was fascinating but very deep that said there cannot be nothing and that is the reason for the cosmos.


You are most welcome! By "nothing" I mean something that we human beings are not capable of expressing with our logical, rational minds. And I want to be brutally honest here: as a deeply religious (don't ask which religion, I don't know) person, to me _that_ nothingness has at the same time very deep meaning. Which in a way underlines your debate, althought that was probably about something else, maybe Big Bang or something like that?

But I find in this postmodern critique some very deep truth at the same time. I just don't think it explains away _everything_. OTOH I don't know if that was even the case. Maybe Cage just wanted to point out simply that our own cognitive, active effort in music (I really, really like that notion) has much bigger impact that many people think. I think it's a fair thing to say.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

Threads like this just reinforce the idea that 4'33" is the most discussed piece of music of all time. And I hate that.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Tristan said:


> Threads like this just reinforce the idea that 4'33" is the most discussed piece of music of all time. And I hate that.


I didn't know, I just started it... Sorry


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I've been listening to 4'33" for almost an hour and just found out that my iTunes is set to "repeat." That really fries me!


----------



## Guest (May 24, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> Evidence??? Is it needed good lord man is it not obvious? Or are you of the opinion that it is music if so I would love to hear your rationale.


What I'm trying to get at is whether there is any rationale for what _you _think. The issue I'm interested in is not whether it's 'music' or not, but what evidence you have to support your claim that Cage was taking the ****. So far, you've offered none. From what I've read, what I've listened to, and what I've seen of him on Youtube, I'd conclude the man had a sense of humour, but that he was posing a serious philosophical point.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Lenny said:


> But I find in this postmodern critique some very deep truth at the same time. I just don't think it explains away _everything_. OTOH I don't know if that was even the case. Maybe Cage just wanted to point out simply that our own cognitive, active effort in music (I really, really like that notion) has much bigger impact that many people think. I think it's a fair thing to say.


For my part, it's another way of looking at the world. I don't expect or want it to explain everything (the people who think their world view explains everything are the sort of people who burn witches or blow up children).
As for _4' 33"_, I like the idea, and I think it has informed how I listen to other music (I can omit the "other" from that) and experience other art too. Doesn't mean it's the kind of thing I prefer to listen to, or even have much interest beyond the concept.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 19, 2016)

Nereffid said:


> For my part, it's another way of looking at the world. I don't expect or want it to explain everything (the people who think their world view explains everything are the sort of people who burn witches or blow up children).
> As for _4' 33"_, I like the idea, and I think it has informed how I listen to other music (I can omit the "other" from that) and experience other art too. Doesn't mean it's the kind of thing I prefer to listen to, or even have much interest beyond the concept.


I can easily see this point of view, as a practical approach.

So for me personally, this discussion was very useful. Apologies for those who are fed up with 4'33'' discussion


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

How do performers approach the piece. Do some tend to take it quicker or slower than others or are performance standards generally uniform?


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Lenny said:


> Maybe Cage just wanted to point out simply that our own cognitive, active effort in music (I really, really like that notion) has much bigger impact that many people think. I think it's a fair thing to say.


That's a REALLY good way of putting it, cutting to the heart of the matter really. I still disagree with it, though. But there's beautiful clarity there, when you put it that way.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Tristan said:


> Threads like this just reinforce the idea that 4'33" is the most discussed piece of music of all time. And I hate that.


I think I know how you feel, and I think it comes from Cage's choice of medium. It's an important debate, an important question in the philosophy of music -- but Cage presented the point as a piece of music. That was actually very effective for him, but I know, it's annoying, because in a way he used controversy to market the discussion, and presented his opinion in a way that was thus obscured and hidden. That annoys me, because there's a very worthy debate beneath the silly piece of music.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

alan davis said:


> How do performers approach the piece. Do some tend to take it quicker or slower than others or are performance standards generally uniform?


One has to have the knowledges of reading scores.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Pugg said:


> One has to have the knowledges of reading scores.


. And the good fortune of finding a score ♒


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Actually, if we consider 'nothing,' Cage is carrying on the Western Christian tradition in music.

The doctrine of Privatio Boni (absence of good) says that there can not be 'nothing,' since God created everything, and 'nothingness' would be contrary to this. Rather simplistic reasoning, until we look at 'being' in relation to this.

Cage has repeatedly said that there is no such thing as total silence.

Time has been traditionally measured without 'zero,' and in fact 'zero' was forbidden for many years. That's why clocks and calendars have no 'zero' hour, or month, or day, and there is no 'zero' year (it's 1 B.C. or 1 A. D.). Babies are not 'zero' years old, but fractions of one year (four days, six months, etc.).

Cage has repeatedly said that there is no such thing as total silence, so in effect he is saying that we always go back to "being" as a constant of existence.

This shows how 'being in time' is crucial to Christian thought. Being is the 'one,' and 'one' is God (or the sacred, spirit, etc.) according to this scheme.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> What I'm trying to get at is whether there is any rationale for what _you _think. The issue I'm interested in is not whether it's 'music' or not, but what evidence you have to support your claim that Cage was taking the ****. So far, you've offered none.


So all you want is to have a go at me sighhhhh, well OK now if you are asking me to show proof that Cage actually said or wrote, "I am taking the psis out of gullible people" you will know that I cannot and I never said that he did, I am making an assumption based on my thoughts and observations if you want to take issue with my conclusion go for it, He is making money out of performance rights and sheet music sales for 4'33 would you buy a CD (if one exists)that contained only 4'33 but by different ens or performers? Nuf said, make your own assumption.















> From what I've read, what I've listened to, and what I've seen of him on Youtube, I'd conclude the man had a sense of humour, but that he was posing a serious philosophical point.


And what did he say the point was?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I think I understand the point Cage was making with 4'33". In fact, after all the discussion about it here and elsewhere I would hope I do. And I understand it seems to have particularly profound meaning for some more than others. But the fact that it is actually being sold on iTunes and elsewhere as a music track is just wrong.


----------



## Guest (May 25, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> So all you want is to have a go at me sighhhhh, well OK now if you are asking me to show proof that Cage actually said or wrote, "I am taking the psis out of gullible people" you will know that I cannot and I never said that he did, I am making an assumption based on my thoughts and observations if you want to take issue with my conclusion go for it, He is making money out of performance rights and sheet music sales for 4'33 would you buy a CD (if one exists)that contained only 4'33 but by different ens or performers? Nuf said, make your own assumption.


I know you didn't say that Cage said or wrote "I am taking the psis out of gullible people". What you said was, "When will it be realised that citizen Cage was just just taking the psis."

I'll leave it there.


----------



## AfterHours (Mar 27, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> Actually, if we consider 'nothing,' Cage is carrying on the Western Christian tradition in music.
> 
> The doctrine of Privatio Boni (absence of good) says that there can not be 'nothing,' since God created everything, and 'nothingness' would be contrary to this. Rather simplistic reasoning, until we look at 'being' in relation to this.
> 
> ...


Interesting and thoughtful, thank you.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Actually, if we consider 'nothing,' Cage is carrying on the Western Christian tradition in music.
> 
> The doctrine of Privatio Boni (absence of good) says that there can not be 'nothing,' since God created everything, and 'nothingness' would be contrary to this. Rather simplistic reasoning, until we look at 'being' in relation to this.
> 
> ...


In a Black Hole in space there would be total silence, as nothing not even light escapes from it. So silence does exist. Though we may not be able to perceive it unless one is physically deaf, which is why _4'33"_ is not a pleasant conceptual piece to people who are physically deaf, as I am sure they would love to listen to conventional music that we take for granted.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> I know you didn't say that Cage said or wrote "I am taking the psis out of gullible people". What you said was, "When will it be realised that citizen Cage was just just taking the psis."
> 
> I'll leave it there.


A good choice .........................


----------



## Portamento (Dec 8, 2016)

we should not "break down" the concept . Instead we should re-construct it per say delve into Cage's life influences why he would do this . Maybe he was jsut a creative person. Anyway that is the direction i would go with such a thread .


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

This thread is still going?


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> This thread is still going?


(Has anyone done the "Imagine-I've-posted-enough-words-here-that-take-4'33"-to-read,-assuming-a-reading-rate-of-x-words-per minute" gag?)


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

****the end****


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

DaveM said:


> ****the end****


Great...just when I'd finally figured out the right answer and was about to post it.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Phil loves classical said:


> This thread is still going?


And if this one stops, another will come up, ....soon.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Pugg said:


> And if this one stops, another will come up, ....soon.


Yes there is so much more concept to break down


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Yes there is so much more concept to break down


Will take longer then 4:33 minutes though.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Much ado about nothing


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Dan Ante said:


> Much ado about nothing


----------

