Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

I would like to offer this up, for any comments, observation, dissection or discussion.

Scelsi Swallows the Buddha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWGQ-1ao7w4

It was inspired by the work and musical philosophy of Giacinto Scelsi.

This note may be of some interest to the listener:

'Scelsi is best known for writing music based around only one pitch, altered in all manners through microtonal oscillations, harmonic allusions, and changes in timbre and dynamics, as paradigmatically exemplified in his revolutionary Quattro Pezzi su una nota sola ["Four Pieces on a single note"]'

Thank you in advance for any responses to the work.

 

Views: 1193

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Michael, I feel I want to communicate with you, and I would like you to communicate with me, and simply answer this focused question.

[Your qualification of communication styles, or of what you may think discussion is "for me" or "for you," {a game or not a game} appears in my view a bit peripheral to the subject being discussed in this context, but please don't take that as a personal criticism. It's not. ].

You claim that Kristofer made no false statement. I gave an example of a false statement that he made.

In addition to the statement I mentioned in the last post, Kristofer also said, “I feel I'm well within my right to ask you, are you [specific name provided], or are you taking credit for her work? It's one, or the other.”

When he says, “It’s one or the other,” do you believe beyond any reasonable doubt that is a true statement? Are there other possibilities, or must it be "one or the other," in your view?

That’s the main question I had in my last post.

Could you, at the very least, answer yes or no, or make a brief qualified statement in response? An explanation of why you think what you do would be helpful, but I am not asking for that. Just a brief response to that question. I respectfully request you omit generalizations about my modes of responding, opinions about what you think "I expect people to accept," or any characterizations of people's styles of communication. For now, at least. And please don't take that request in such a way as to think it personally critical or insulting. The request is made simply to keep the focus sharp.

I just want to know what you think is factually true, regarding the statement, "are you [such and such a person] or are you taking credit for her work? IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER."

Your answer can help me gauge a number of things.

I do detect a possibility for improved communication, all around, and on all sides.

It may be as if ice is thawing and breaking up.

We can be grateful to many individuals for this.

See, you are attempting to control my thinking. More game-playing. Setting rules by which I must respond. You're literally telling me how to think! Can you not see that this is extremely irritating to people? You obviously have severe control issues.

 

Hello Michael. You said, "you are attempting to control my thinking. ... Setting rules by which I must respond." -- You may wish to reread what I wrote.  I made a request.  There was no "must."  I said, "could you ...?"  I said, "An explanation of why you think what you do would be helpful, but I am not asking for that." I was deferential, and mindful of your freedom to choose.  I used the words, "I respectfully request ... "  I did not try to control your thinking.  No one can do that. But you appear not to have understand what I said.  I’ll offer here a simpler question, without even the slightest hint of a request, much less an attempt "to control your thinking."

 

If I posted a thread containing a particular discussion about the reputation and merits of Sibelius, would you ban me?  

 

You sent me a private email a while back, if you recall, saying you would. In fact, you told me you took down a thread that I started to revive a civilized conversation about Sibelius. Then you sent me an email message saying,  “If you repost it again, you will be banned.” Those were your exact words.  I wonder if  you have changed your mind on that issue.

 

I set no rules for your answer.  (I didn’t last time).  I am not trying to control your response.  (I didn’t last do that time, either). I am not telling you how to think.  (Nor did I try to do that in my last post).  You have complete freedom, which I would never think of attempting to abridge, even with the merest suggestion. How could I?  Answer however you wish, with as few or as many words as you like.  

 

(I might hope you will answer without threats or a ban, but I have no way of "controlling" whether or not you do that). 

 

 

 

 

michael diemer said:

See, you are attempting to control my thinking. More game-playing. Setting rules by which I must respond. You're literally telling me how to think! Can you not see that this is extremely irritating to people? You obviously have severe control issues.

Interesting interpretation of the word “doxing,” Kristofer.  Let's see if Michael thinks I was wrong to reveal the contents of his message to me. It will be interesting to hear his opinion.

 

However, I hardly think it is doxing (or libel, or slander, or defamation, or a violation of privacy) for me to reveal the contents of my own email, sent to me by another member of this site, about the business of this site.  I am afraid you still don't understand the concept of doxing, as you've shown repeatedly.   [Example:  Imagine Michael were a member of another discussion web site, and someone came from that web site to this one, took the contents of my email here, and brought that to the other site.   If he also took additional information from other sites, in order to malign him, or hurt his reputation, that could conceivably be "doxing."  I offer that example in case you are really interested to understand doxing, and to know what it is.  But you can read more about it you like.  I think you will understand it eventually, if you don't already. ]

 

By the way, I have heard you complain of "censorship" before. 

Do you have an opinion about that issue, or are you afraid to say so?  (I would not blame you if you were).   Do you think an open discussion of the merits or demerits of Sibelius should be allowed or banned?

 

-------

 

In any case, you have work to do if you are to solve your riddle.  Hadn't you better get busy on that?  Have you worked out why you are misinterpreting the data you looked at, and the info on youtube?  Roger figured out why part of the false dichotomy is false, so he’s ahead of you. Have you been able to go beyond your customary binary logic, to entertain the notion of three or more possibilities, as opposed to simply two?

 

Your reasoning:  Either the person in question is both A and B (A and B are the same person); OR A is the author of the work, and B is not the author of the work. -- That is the formulation you have embraced.  “It is one or the other,” you affirmed.  Might there be a different possibility? Or several?  This is not a discussion of an infinite number of universes, or anything that complicated.  This is simple finite mathematics and basic logic.

 

Or maybe you wish to discuss music.  American Music, French Music, Russian Music, Native American Music, or any kind of music?   Baroque, Classical, Romantic or 20th century Music?  If we don't talk about it sometime, we may soon forget what music is.  What do you think of Pierre Boulez?

 

 

 

 



Kristofer Emerig said:

... that's egregious doxing right there.

Ondib Olmnilnlolm said:

  

You sent me a private email a while back, if you recall, saying...

If you say so, Kristofer.

Didn't you just say that a while back, or something similar.

I don't entirely lack stamina, but I miss the musical aspects of the forum discussions, so I am going back to that, if you don't mind, at least for the moment.

I left you a message on the Pachelbel thread, written in a somewhat amical tone, and in accordance with one of Michael's wiser statements, made the other day.

"No enemies here, just friends helping friends."

I am making a list of in my own mind of composers that may be interesting to discuss and post threads for.

I am starting with Boulez.

I am most certainly not going to try to start another one about Sibelius, so my question for Michael is theoretical rather than practical.

There is no reason to upset anyone with my lack of enthusiasm in that area, and the confession that I am not a Sibelius Maven.  So I will leave that be for now.

I wonder if anyone here thinks that ORPHEUS can be considered a composer, even though we don't have a very extensive record of his work?  I might offer him up next.

And here I was, hoping Chris would just hop in and kill it all. With fire. Lots of fire.

Thanks Chris. Yes, we moderators are human beings with feelings, as the Reaper Forum puts it! To expect beings as mercurial as composers to be always in control of their emotions, thoughts and actions, is, well, it's just not going to happen.

Re: my Sibelius thread, the reason I closed it was because the poster going by the initials OO was, in my view, introducing too much negativity into the  thread. Perhaps I should have specified that the thread was to be about Sibelius exclusively, not an opportunity to disparage him by comparing him to other composers. If you don't like him, fine, stay out of the thread. Just another way this poster inserts themself into threads in a way to redirect them and ultimately control them. As the OP, I have a right to mold the thread as I see fit. When it became clear that OO was not going to respect this, I closed the thread, which was I thought, a very mild action. OO then, very passive-aggressively, copied it and re-posted it. Twice. Which prompted me to send OO a warning.

As for OO publicizing my private email to him/her, I couldn't care less. There is of course no true privacy on the net. we all run this risk constantly. Put your cards on the table and let the chips fall where they may.

Thanks, Chris. Yes, the moderators are composers and usually post as plain ol' members of the site. I, personally, consider it good practice to announce when I'm posting wearing the moderator hat. I'm wearing that hat right now.

I normally don't butt in when I feel a particular moderator has taken responsibility for a thread that needed his/her assistance, which I believe Gav has in this instance. I happen to concur with Gav, for reasons derived on my own.

As moderator, I am asking that any people stop implying, hinting or outright saying (in any form) that Ondib is Charlotte Wellen or has claimed ownership of her work. Doing so, or insisting that Ondib prove otherwise to the community is, in my opinion, bullying. Stop it. 

Gav Brown said:

Ondib has contacted me and assured me that the work is his and that the other name is just a mistake. I believe him.

I thank Chris, Janet and Gav for their work to maintain peace on the forum.

 

I am content to return to the discussion of music, composers and compositions.   



Janet Spangenberg said:

Thanks, Chris. Yes, the moderators are composers and usually post as plain ol' members of the site. I, personally, consider it good practice to announce when I'm posting wearing the moderator hat. I'm wearing that hat right now.

I normally don't butt in when I feel a particular moderator has taken responsibility for a thread that needed his/her assistance, which I believe Gav has in this instance. I happen to concur with Gav, for reasons derived on my own.

As moderator, I am asking that any people stop implying, hinting or outright saying (in any form) that Ondib is Charlotte Wellen or has claimed ownership of her work. Doing so, or insisting that Ondib prove otherwise to the community is, in my opinion, bullying. Stop it. 

Gav Brown said:

Ondib has contacted me and assured me that the work is his and that the other name is just a mistake. I believe him.

Kristofer says, “Yes, I understand.”  But I am not entirely convinced he does.  His understanding of history may be slightly incomplete, or a bit skewed.  We don’t have to go back to the Nixon era (though we could say the doxing and slander we have seen done is like Nixon’s smear jobs, or his surrogates’ actions in the “dirty tricks campaigns”).  Actually, we can consult more recent history.  What we see is a bit more like what an “on-line reporter” did in 2010 to Shirley Sherrod. Some will recall: The reporter took information out of context, deliberately drew a false conclusion--“Obama has a black racist in his government”-- and campaigned to force the resignation of Shirley Sherrod from the Department of Agriculture.  He wrongly accused her of making racist statements she did not actually make, but repeated his allegations so many times – “Obama hires black racists”—that  it caused a stir.

 

Does someone here think he is “Woodward and Bernstein?” I don’t think anyone falls for a false comparison of yourself to any heroic figure of a past era, whose behaviors you have in no way emulated on this forum in recent days. It’s easy to repeat over and over false allegations. It’s not heroic.  I am not speaking of anyone’s moral character, but the “bullying” acts we are speaking of are more like those of Nixon’s hatchet men than they are like the courageous actions of  the Post’s Ben Bradlee or anyone who helped bring Nixon down. 

 

Kristofer, I would like to bring the discussion back to music, if you don’t mind.  In spite of polite and reasonable statements made by several people here, including Roger Stancill, Chris Alpiar, Gav Brown and Janet Spangenburg, you seem to persist in wanting to dredge this up again.  I have been friendly and amiable in several of my posts to you, recently, inviting you back to the discussion of composing, without animus, and with a  willingness to let all this go.  You just said very recently, on this thread, and I quote:

 

“I'm too busy to continue with this ravaging anyway, so I;m done.”

 

Are you done, or was that just an off-the-cuff remark?  When was the last time you posted anything about music?  Are you really done?  A simple yes or no will do.

 



Kristofer Emerig said:

Yes, I understand. It's the same sort of bullying which drove Nixon out of office and put Madoff in the slammer.
 
Janet Spangenberg said:

Thanks, Chris. Yes, the moderators are composers and usually post as plain ol' members of the site. I, personally, consider it good practice to announce when I'm posting wearing the moderator hat. I'm wearing that hat right now.

I normally don't butt in when I feel a particular moderator has taken responsibility for a thread that needed his/her assistance, which I believe Gav has in this instance. I happen to concur with Gav, for reasons derived on my own.

As moderator, I am asking that any people stop implying, hinting or outright saying (in any form) that Ondib is Charlotte Wellen or has claimed ownership of her work. Doing so, or insisting that Ondib prove otherwise to the community is, in my opinion, bullying. Stop it. 

Gav Brown said:

Ondib has contacted me and assured me that the work is his and that the other name is just a mistake. I believe him.

 

Kristofer, you say, “One must wonder why I am forbidden from asking a reasonable question on this forum…”

.

.

.

Why not answer one reasonable question, Kristofer? 

 

Is it at all possible that your allegation against me is false, and that you lack information (which others might have) that indicates your allegation is false?

 

It's just one question, which I have asked you five or six times, but which you have never answered.

 

Is it at all possible?

 

Very simple to answer.  Please answer that one question, now. Might the allegation be false?  Is it within the realm of possibility?

.

.

.

[P.S.I don’t think any of us are talking about Roger’s statement, which was made once.  He did research, changed his mind, and stated his view, for which he was told by you to “go away,” so you could choose to “be allowed to have your own opinion” on the matter. Roger did not repeat the false allegation, insinuation, innuendo, you have made—and still appear to want to make--over and over and over.]

 

[P.P.S. “People must wonder…” you said.  I think people might wonder what it meant when you said, “I'm too busy to continue with this ravaging anyway, so I;m done.”]

 

 

I don’t mind asking several times, but can we get back to the discussion music now?

 

Here is a nice recording of the entirety of Mozart’s Magic Flute:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et27CpqBvBE

 

All ends with the universal triumph of peace and concord (not to give too much way, to those who have not seen or heard the work).

 

The Ingmar Bergman film version is wonderful to watch, but some people might not like the fact that the text is actually sung, not in German, but Swedish.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGVO2hCi15w

 

 

 

 

Thread locked.

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2021   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service