Four Walls (1944). John Cage /we must accept what that thing means/

I Ching image via Wikipedia

Via Endless Possibilities, gtra1n takes John Cage to task:

To love some­thing we must accept what that thing means and stands for, and know­ing more about Cage now, I reject most of the things he means and stands for. His phi­los­o­phy is deeply impor­tant and should be a per­sis­tent chal­lenge to the thought of every per­son who seeks to make and present cre­ative music. But his own real­iza­tions of that phi­los­o­phy, the mature works that seek to remove inten­tion and expres­sion, are eth­i­cally and aes­thet­i­cally prob­lem­atic; artist must say some­thing to us (even if they say noth­ing, but that only works once), they must reveal and admit some idea that we can con­sider.

I remain fascinated how Cage's aesthetic stance perturbs people, particularly their views of Cage the artist/philosopher versus Cage the composer. 

I also assume Cage would not have approved of my calling him my "favorite" composer, as it would intrude on the actual experience of listening without expectation. I can live with this contradiction.

I hppen to have been listening to Cage's music all morning and can't get enough. Yesterday, I read the first (free) chapter of the John Cage biography by Kenneth Silverman. I supposed it's my duty to buy and read the whole thing although the author may or may not think and write as well as the subject. But first, I need to listen to more of Four Walls (rdio):

 

Comments

[Doug Laustsen]

I really enjoyed Silverman's biography, and it's definitely worth your time. I think the book also tempered some of my adoration with a much more well rounded understanding of Cage.

[Dave Seidel]

Thanks, I've been meaning to get this. I'm well primed for it after reading Kyle Gann's very enjoyable 4'3" book.