# I Didn’t Know Carterphiles Could Be So Crude and Ugly



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

> That reminds me! I have been meaning to respond to this ****** [Daniel Asia]. This ******* waste of a human. First of all the assclown is trying to borrow some of the brilliance of Pierre Boulez. Well guess what dickbag, you aren't even worthy of wiping Boulez's *******.


Read the whole crude and ugly blogpost here:


While Daniel Asia's original article did contain a couple factual errors I still thought it was mostly on target.

It can be read here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-asia/carter-is-dead_b_2838247.html

Anyway, it's hard to understand why it provoked this howl of wounded outrage from the above blogger, especially when you consider that Carter was one of the most well represented (overhyped?) composers of the past 50 years.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

"My Grandfather beat up your Grandfather at the premiere of Le Sacre du Printemps." (Rare film clip at eleven 

C'mon! The internet, especially in those fora where everyone is supposedly qualified, with degrees, wax 'n' seals, are rift with those who would love to be recognized as brilliant authorities on this or that, and some are bilious black-green with envy that people like Daniel Asia have gotten there (at all), or gotten there first.

Et Voila, a very loud and unimportant First World Problem on full display for all to see!

Don't be fooled for a moment that those who like / love highly refined music, whether it is Mozart or Carter, are not incapable of the harshest crudeness, or for that matter, severe criminal behavior, LOL.


----------



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

Xavier said:


> Read the whole crude and ugly blogpost here:
> 
> 
> While Daniel Asia's original article did contain a couple factual errors I still thought it was mostly on target.
> ...


I am familiar with this particular blogger. While Carter was alive the posts consisted of jokingly verbose and explicit posts. This seems to fit with the overall theme of the blog.

The article written about Carter is terrible... and sad. A desperate, yet futile, effort to put down a composer's music.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

pluhagr said:


> I am familiar with this particular blogger. While Carter was alive the posts consisted of jokingly verbose and explicit posts. This seems to fit with the overall theme of the blog.
> 
> The article written about Carter is terrible... and sad. A desperate, yet futile, effort to put down a composer's music.


I confess to not looking further, i.e. not reading, but I think rightly assumed it a very light first world problem.... However, the dynamic I mentioned is somehow present, envy, or a person who just did not care for Carter whose nose was out of joint that Carter got so much attention / recognition. Envy, sour grapes, a hunger to be recognized, often without any basis as to being remarkable or having done anything of merit (Blame MTV Real Life, where at least for a Warholian fifteen minutes, people who deserved not a moment of attention were famous for being -- nothing.) This last dynamic is much in play, for several decades now, and the internet is one perfect place to post the whines, the jibes, command attention from those suckered in to giving attention.

All that has a false magic of appearing real / important because "your stuff is up in print."

It is virtual print, of course


----------



## Garlic (May 3, 2013)

That Daniel Asia article is almost as moronic as his Cage one. The blog post is explicit but I can't find anything to disagree with there.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Xavier said:


> Read the whole crude and ugly blogpost here:
> 
> 
> While Daniel Asia's original article did contain a couple factual errors I still thought it was mostly on target.
> ...


Daniel Asia makes lots of flimsy assertions and fails to back them up with anything of substance, relying instead on "am I right or am I right?" as the internal logic. When someone is so convinced of their own correctness, as Mr Asia obviously is, there is very little point attempting to respond to it reasonably, as evidenced by his responses to criticism of his John Cage article in which he makes nothing but appeal after appeal to his own authority.

FY!EC seems more like over-the-top parody than anything, and he does actually make some fine points about Asia's really rather poorly considered article. As for the crudity, I swear like a sailor, so these four letter words that you are for some reason afraid of bother me little.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Crudblud said:


> Daniel Asia makes lots of flimsy assertions and fails to back them up with anything of substance, relying instead on "am I right or am I right?" as the internal logic. When someone is so convinced of their own correctness, as Mr Asia obviously is, there is very little point attempting to respond to it reasonably, as evidenced by his responses to criticism of his John Cage article in which he makes nothing but appeal after appeal to his own authority.
> 
> FY!EC seems more like over-the-top parody than anything, and he does actually make some fine points about Asia's really rather poorly considered article. As for the crudity, I swear like a sailor, so these four letter words that you are for some reason afraid of bother me little.


Hah. I gradually grew out of the cuss-word-every-sentence groove after leaving the Air Force (it took awhile). In the case of this blog piece, my question is: What does the cussing add to the argument? For me nothing. It does contribute to my mental picture of the blogger - re faced, excreting spittle. Not persuasive.


----------



## niv (Apr 9, 2013)

I'm not very familiar with Carter's oeuvre but Daniel Asia to me sound the kind of critic I despise: "I don't find value in this music, therefore, it has no value, even though very knowledgeable people do find value, but they're obviously wrong because I'm right".

While the blogpost is not only a parody, it's supposed to be written by elliot carter himself. And this quote nails it IMHO:



> Who gave you the right to judge? You apparently lack qualifications. Congratulations on your take-down piece. Were you hoping that this would bring you some notoriety? That writing a salacious headline like this and then pointing out all the flaws in your hearing would somehow gain you a following.


It's not about this particular article. It says a lot about a lot of critics.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hah. I gradually grew out of the cuss-word-every-sentence groove after leaving the Air Force (it took awhile). In the case of this blog piece, my question is: What does the cussing add to the argument? For me nothing. It does contribute to my mental picture of the blogger - re faced, excreting spittle. Not persuasive.


I think you (and indeed the OP) have missed the point of the character. A cursory glance at the rest of the blog shows that this is intended largely as comedy, with the occasional serious note thrown in there on occasion. Now, I get that this is not going to appeal to everyone as a comedic style, and that it is a little overbearing in a somewhat more serious post, that the blogger could afford to be more artful about it in a long-ish piece such as this where a more considered use would be beneficial, but I don't find myself turned off by the swearing itself.


----------



## Rangstrom (Sep 24, 2010)

I buy a Carter work every once in awhile. The works (especially the later ones) can pique one's curiosity, but for me many times the description of the work and its structure is more interesting than the music itself. I seldom feel a need to revisit a piece. Well, other than the quartets which I continue to work at. Can't say that I love them (or understand them) but I keep trying to get a handle.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I think I just wasted a minute of my life by reading that thing. 
Well, I would have wasted it anyway.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Crudblud said:


> I think you (and indeed the OP) have missed the point of the character. A cursory glance at the rest of the blog shows that this is intended largely as comedy, with the occasional serious note thrown in there on occasion. Now, I get that this is not going to appeal to everyone as a comedic style, and that it is a little overbearing in a somewhat more serious post, that the blogger could afford to be more artful about it in a long-ish piece such as this where a more considered use would be beneficial, but I don't find myself turned off by the swearing itself.


It's indeed a joke entry. But of a very unimaginative and dull sense of humor...
The "serious" article is crap too. There seems to be in the US certain generation of composers who hate Carter, they see him as some kind of american Boulez... John Adams is one of them (http://www.earbox.com/posts/116; this is Adams' blog). I don't know, maybe it's true. But in that case why don't they criticize the man instead of the music...


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Harsh criticism of a musician just makes me want to hear their work.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

aleazk said:


> There seems to be in the US certain generation of composers who hate Carter, they see him as some kind of american Boulez... John Adams is one of them (http://www.earbox.com/posts/116; this is Adams' blog).


Just for the record, John Adams does NOT criticize Carter or his music in the blog. Quite the opposite. Here's the closing paragraph: "Those who love Carter's music do so for its vitality, its invention and its overall seriousness. The vitality has always struck me as an American trait, something he inherited from Ives and that he shared with his colleagues Copland, Harris and Nancarrow. His staggering powers of invention, a gift that never failed him, came to the fore in the early fifties in the First String Quartet and the Variations for Orchestra, works that remain my personal favorites. In them the formal plans are bold and dramatic, and the personality that he accords individual instruments is vivid and full of piquant character. No wonder musicians love to play his music!"


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

KenOC said:


> Just for the record, John Adams does NOT criticize Carter or his music in the blog. Quite the opposite. Here's the closing paragraph: "Those who love Carter's music do so for its vitality, its invention and its overall seriousness. The vitality has always struck me as an American trait, something he inherited from Ives and that he shared with his colleagues Copland, Harris and Nancarrow. His staggering powers of invention, a gift that never failed him, came to the fore in the early fifties in the First String Quartet and the Variations for Orchestra, works that remain my personal favorites. In them the formal plans are bold and dramatic, and the personality that he accords individual instruments is vivid and full of piquant character. No wonder musicians love to play his music!"


Well, yes, but I see his position as somewhat conflictive in any case. Maybe "hate" was not the right word, but certainly there's some bitterness towards Carter in Adams' words.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

aleazk said:


> Well, yes, but I see his position as somewhat conflictive in any case. Maybe "hate" was not the right word, but certainly there's some bitterness towards Carter in Adams' words.


Adams has a love-hate relationship with Schoenberg and Boulez as well. The only modernist he seems unreservedly negative about is Webern.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> Adams has a love-hate relationship with Schoenberg and Boulez as well. The only modernist he seems unreservedly negative about is Webern.


What is interesting is that Carter didn't seem a bully like Boulez. I think that some part of that "hate" actually comes because of all the flattery journalists and critics showed towards Carter and in detriment of the young composers of the time, like Adams.


----------



## niv (Apr 9, 2013)

Turns out this guy Daniel Asia is actually a composer. Anybody heard him?


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

niv said:


> Turns out this guy Daniel Asia is actually a composer. Anybody heard him?


Symphony No. 3 and String Quartet No. 1 are both on YouTube. The first movement of the symphony is not very interesting to my ears, it sounds kind of like what I'd expect a symphony based on music from _The West Wing_ to sound like, plus some quasi-minimalist repetition that goes on way too long for my taste. The string quartet seems like a lot of generic "contemporary" sounds played in sequence with not much logic or sense of pacing behind it, lots of little bits (some of which are nice) that don't seem to fit together. Of course, it's all in one piece in the video, for all I know it is intended as a series of fragments.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

aleazk said:


> What is interesting is that Carter didn't seem a bully like Boulez. I think that some part of that "hate" actually comes because of all the flattery journalists and critics showed towards Carter and in detriment of the young composers of the time, like Adams.


Also, it's very curious that in all this trashing of Carter his education is mentioned always: "A man of wealth, correct education (Harvard), and European credentials" (Asia); "Anyone familiar with Elliott Carter's life story knows that he benefitted from a privileged upbringing, was exceptionally well-educated, developed discriminating tastes in music and literature at an early age, and studied in Paris with the fabled Nadia Boulanger" (Adams). 
I say: so what?. They are evidently trying to suggest something, I don't know what...


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

niv said:


> Turns out this guy Daniel Asia is actually a composer. Anybody heard him?


Oh, boy: this just gets better and better. Internationally renowned, I suppose (meaning he sent an MP3 midi file via email to a friend in another country than his own ? 

Actually, it is not as a bad as all that, but I can imagine the fury that might have the composer of this
Symphony No. 3, I - Maestoso




seriously ticked off that no one world is exactly beating a path to that piece, while some of the world musical world, at least, remains agog with Carter's _Syringa_ from its premiere through to today.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

aleazk said:


> Also, it's very curious that in all this trashing of Carter his education is mentioned always: "A man of wealth, correct education (Harvard), and European credentials" (Asia); "Anyone familiar with Elliott Carter's life story knows that he benefitted from a privileged upbringing, was exceptionally well-educated, developed discriminating tastes in music and literature at an early age, and studied in Paris with the fabled Nadia Boulanger" (Adams).
> I say: so what?. They are evidently trying to suggest something, I don't know what...


I think that is called the green envy of outsiders who were perhaps less fortunate in the personal circumstances of their lives.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

PetrB said:


> I think that is called the green envy of outsiders who were perhaps less fortunate in the personal circumstances of their lives.


I'm surprised with that interpretation...


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

*Oh dear oh dear!*

Not having heard of Asia or his music is a *measure of our own ignorance and nothing more.*

We must resist the sheep-like adherence to _received_ opinion. Journalists, critics, scholars and historians are only expressing an _opinion_. Like Asia does. Like Boulez does. Like Carter's own dismissal of minimalism does.

If Asia's credentials as a musician (read his CV- he has received many commissions and honours) are not enough to lend his opinion some weight, then what right do we have to casually and superficially dismiss his own music as if _our_ opinion carries any more weight than his.

Let's use our ears people, and don't just respect what 'teacher' tells us!

We don't have to like Asia's music or Carter's or anyone else's no matter what the _correct opinion police_ tell us!


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Petwhac said:


> Not having heard of Asia or his music is a *measure of our own ignorance and nothing more.*
> 
> We must resist the sheep-like adherence to _received_ opinion. Journalists, critics, scholars and historians are only expressing an _opinion_. Like Asia does. Like Boulez does. Like Carter's own dismissal of minimalism does.
> 
> ...


Not all opinions are equally valid though. Some opinions _do_ carry more weight than others, if they are well-informed, well-thought out, etc. I take no position on Asia vs. Carter, but his opinion piece is definitely eligible for criticism.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Lmfao wow I understand that one would be upset if someone made negative criticisms of a composer who you love, right after they pass, but why use so much ugly language? In real life, in real conversations, does this person drop the f-bomb in every sentence? I hope not that's very embarrassing


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Cosmos said:


> Lmfao wow I understand that one would be upset if someone made negative criticisms of a composer who you love, right after they pass, but why use so much ugly language? In real life, in real conversations, does this person drop the f-bomb in every sentence? I hope not that's very embarrassing


I don't follow the blog, but I assume it's a kind of satire in response to the pretentiousness of a lot of discussions of classical music and the classical music scene in general.


----------



## Petwhac (Jun 9, 2010)

apricissimus said:


> Not all opinions are equally valid though. Some opinions _do_ carry more weight than others, if they are well-informed, well-thought out, etc. I take no position on Asia vs. Carter, but his opinion piece is definitely eligible for criticism.


I agree. However, some opinions carry more weight for _me_ while those opinions may not carry as much weight for you.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Wow... so sad that Elliott Carter is still being frowned upon by other composers ... his music is so lyrical and varied.


----------

