https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaKSc1XaXRE

Atkinson's reviews resemble automobile reviews in
which the reviewer examines every nut and bolt of
the vehicle. What a waste of education!

Cheers

Dan Koren schrieb am Donnerstag, 21. Dezember 2023 um 06:30:16 UTC+1:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaKSc1XaXRE
>
> Atkinson's reviews resemble automobile reviews in
> which the reviewer examines every nut and bolt of
> the vehicle. What a waste of education!

I don't believe Atkinson intended this to be a review, it's an analysis (judge the content by what the content is trying to achieve). And I think one can gain quite a bit out of it.

Composing music requires pedanticism. This is something you need to change your mind about I guess ;)

Anyway, ofc composing music requires more than just pendanticism, it also requires some sort of inspiration. Adorno once mentioned how he was discussing a certain composition of Schoenberg (it's been while since I heard it; I think it was in his discussion with Stockhausen) with the composer himself; and there was a part in the composition about which Schoenberg said that he didn't know why he composed it that way, that it sort of happened naturally, based on intuition or sth (and that this point in the composition was of particular importance - sth along these lines).

>
> Cheers

Marc S schrieb am Donnerstag, 21. Dezember 2023 um 10:34:20 UTC+1:
> Dan Koren schrieb am Donnerstag, 21. Dezember 2023 um 06:30:16 UTC+1:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaKSc1XaXRE
> >
> > Atkinson's reviews resemble automobile reviews in
> > which the reviewer examines every nut and bolt of
> > the vehicle. What a waste of education!
> I don't believe Atkinson intended this to be a review, it's an analysis (judge the content by what the content is trying to achieve). And I think one can gain quite a bit out of it.
>
> Composing music requires pedanticism. This is something you need to change your mind about I guess ;)
>
> Anyway, ofc composing music requires more than just pendanticism, it also requires some sort of inspiration. Adorno once mentioned how he was discussing a certain composition of Schoenberg (it's been while since I heard it; I think it was in his discussion with Stockhausen) with the composer himself; and there was a part in thmposition about which Schoenberg said that he didn't know why he composed it that way, that it sort of happened naturally, based on intuition or sth (and that this point in the composition was of particular importance - sth along these lines).

*Correction; it was indeed in his discussion with Stockhausen, but I got a few things wrong.

Summary:

Stockhausen explains how he sometimes doesn't understand what he is composing, and that this might sound absurd to other people. To which Adorno replies that this reminds him of sth Schoenberg once told him wrt to his Wind Quintet; that Schoenberg said that he didn't understand this composition. And for Adorno this actually indicated some sort of innovation in the musical language (sth spontaneous, sth which was not understood at that time, but which we can understand now (and that likely Schoenberg would understand it now as well)). Adorno further elaborates that music isn't sth static, and to understand Bach today means also understanding Schoenberg and vice versa. etc etc.

>
> >
> > Cheers