bad paper

try as you might, you cannot imagine how long and boring the 300 pages are about this one stravinsky piece. the piece is only a half hour long. that’s ten pages a minute. ok, myabe it’s less than 300 pages, but it feels like 300 pages. the author has figured out where every single note came from and how the plan to include it changed over time and he wants to tell you all about. Stravinsky miscopied a note from a melody that he was stealing. But when he realized it was wrong, he didn’t fix it, he exploited it. That note appears in the following 50 locations where it is surrounded by the followign 50 things. Also, people used to think all peseant songs and powems had the following stresses and here are the stresses and here is how every major russian composer before stravinsky transcribed the stresses, but then some guy figured out that they weren’t stressed that way at all and look, stravinsky didn’t use the odl stressing pattern and he put in rests in the music wherever he felt like it and here’s 789362562345796892345 examples of where he put rests with long discussions of the stress patterns of the 23801641036735 poems he may have been quoting.

fall break starts thursday night . . .

Celeste Hutchins
Proseminar
Stravinsky Paper

As a composer, I found Svadebka to be very interesting. Specifically, I was intrigued by Stravinsky’s use of source material and how his plan evolved as he worked on the piece. This is a compositional model that I would like to employ with my project around Joan of Arc, by using material that an expert in the field (or a person from that time, or in Stravinsky’s case, a peasant) would recognize as appropriate. Stravinsky had an easier time collecting source material, as the tradition that he taped was within the memory of living people and because of the giant book of collected wedding songs that he was able to draw upon.

Taruskin goes into perhaps too much detail regarding to origins of the motifs of Svadebka. It was interesting to read about how Stravinsky became so familiar with the source material that he was able to write prototypical folk songs, but perhaps this could have been expounded upon at less length.

I watched a tape of this piece with new choregraphy and I watched it before I did any reading, so I do not know how much of the “acting” originally written was present in the production. The music, however was superb. This piece has some rythmic motifs that are similar to those in Rite of Spring, but since they both cover similar themes of “virgin sacrifice,” this seems appropriate.

(While I question the notions connecting virgin sacrifice and marriage, I understand that they may have been connected Stravinsky’s mind.)

The diversity of source material is apparent in the piece. The first clear instance of chanting is somewhat surprising, but also wonderful and perhaps my favorite part of the piece.

It was also interesting to read about how the modes in Svadebka were related to Medieval modes, something that Taruskin assumes his audience to be familiar with. I look forward to re-reading that section as my research project progresses.

Celeste hutchins
Graduate Pedagogy

I attended ARHA 213: Monastic Utopias. The class topic is architecture of Christian monastic buildings before 1300. to talk about this, the teacher uses two slide projectors which show pictures of architectural drawings and photographs of extant buildings or ruins or woodcuts of what the buildings used to look like or art from said buildings. He uses a laser pointer to point out whatever features that he is discussing. This class takes place early in the morning in a dark classroom, but when I was there, all the students appeared to be awake.

The use of slides leads to students facing away from the professor, since he sits at the back of the classroom by the slide projectors and the slides are projected onto the front wall.

Periodically, the professor will stop lecturing and ask the class leading questions, either ones that they know the answer to or ones that the only know part of the answer to. He will use their answers to fill in gaps in discussed material or to go on to new topics. Sometimes he asks questions which they can only guess at and when someone makes an obvious answer, he will say something like, “I would completely agree, but other evidence says it’s exactly the opposite.” His initial agreement acts as praise to the student and his subsequent disagreement gets the other students attention and helps point out that answers are not obvious. He may then explicitly discuss pedagogy and talk to students about how to reason from evidence. I talked to him after class and he said that his highest hope was that students learn to ask the right sort of historically relevant questions.

When the professor makes an important point, he may highlight it by spelling out the vocabulary word that he just used, thus cueing students to write it down. He uses the history of architecture to explain trends in Christianity, for instance that pointing out that one church’s crypt is an exact replica of another church’s crypt, because the second church was gaining power and the first church wanted to ally themselves with the power and legitimacy of the first church. Thus, he talks about political developments through architecture and architectural copying. this is like a music history class, which also touches on politics and how it affects written music.

The teacher will break up the class a bit. He spends a while lecturing from the slides and then will pause to take or ask questions. He might then return to the slides or lecture without the aid of pictures. When he’s taking questions, he may quietly advance the slide, thus cueing students that he’s ready to move on when they are. when he’s giving the lecture he may signal important points through spelling, or stress in his voice. He occasionally will make a joke about the material, lightening the mood and perhaps signaling a change in importance in the material. for instance, he mentioned something in passing about St Cruddedon and made a remark that the saint’s parents must not have liked him very much, or they would have named him David or Bill. The students only laughed a little at this (it only deserves a little laugh), but it did relax them a bit.

Talking about Tuning

I’m scheduled to teach “anything” to my seminar on Wednesday. I though I should tackle tuning. This talk is just written and the sound samples and diagrams have not yet been generated.

what is Just Intonation?

Lou Harrison said that “Just Intonation is the best intonation.” An intonation is a type of tuning. Just tuning is a tuning that uses fractions. In just intonation, pitches are set using whole number ratios. To understand this, let’s look at the harmonic series.

Harmonic Series

The fundamental is the base frequency. (sound sample)
The first overtone is twice the base frequency. It’s relationship to the base frequency is 2/1. In other words, the base frequency * 2 = the first overtone. this makes a perfect (or just) octave. (sound sample)
The second overtone is 3 times the base frequency. It makes an octave plus a fifth. this fifth is perfectly in tune with the base frequency and the first overtone. (sound sample) but is an octave too high to use in a scale between those two notes. We can divide it by 2 to make it an octave lower. this new pitch, the fifth between the base frequency and the octave, is related to the base frequency by a ratio of 3/2. (sound sample) The three comes from it’s place in the harmonic series. The two comes from dividing it down to be in the first octave.

2’s and octaves

All notes in the first octave, will be between the ratios of the base frequency, which is 1/1 and the octave, which is 2/1. If something is too small, it is below 1/1, and if it’s too large it’s over 2/1. We can transpose it to the correct octave by multiplying or dividing by 2.

Therefore 2’s are very important for transposition, but they don’t change a pitch, except by octave. If the base frequency is C and we multiply it by 3, we get a G. If we multiply it by 3/2s, we also get a G, but in the first octave. so 2’s are “for free” you can multiply and divide by them any time you need to change the octave and you will still have the same note as before, just an octave higher or lower.

Inversion

the inversion of a fifth is a fourth. So we can invert the fifth fraction to get a fourth. the inversion of 3/2 is 2/3. But 2/3 is too small. It is not between 1/1 and 2/1. We can multiply it by 2, to get 4/3, a perfect just fourth. (sound sample)

You can do this with any tuning fraction. Invert it to find the inversion, then multiply or divide it by 2 to put it in the correct octave.

Pythagoras

3/2, the perfect, just fifth is a ratio made up of small, whole numbers. Small numbers sound more in tune because they are lower in the harmonic series. 3/2 is the most in-tune sounding note that you can get aside from the perfect octave.

There’s a story that pythagoras was walking by blacksmith shop and heard very harmonius sounds. After experimenting with the smiths, he discovered two excellent intervals, 3/2 and 9/8.

9/8 is a major second and since it still has small numbers, it sounds really good. (sound sample)

From this, he hypothesized that good rations were made up of powers of 3 over powers of 2 and their inversions. You know that the circle of fifths will eventually take you through all 11 notes in an octave. According to pythagoras, you can use this to tune all the notes. First, turn the first two strings as a perfect 3/2 fifth. Then tune from the 3/2 to the next fifth, a 9/8. then tune from the 9/8 to the next fifth, the 27/16. Notice that everyone of these ratios is a power of 3 over a power of 2.

Lattices

You can create a chart of these (pass out handout) called a tuning lattice. a lattice of powers of 3 over powers of 2 is called a Pythagorean tuning lattice. The line on your handouts at the top is a pythagorean tuning lattice. Below that, is chart of them in oder of the notes in the scale. Notice that E, the third is not a small number ratio. It is 81/64. This was considered ok at the time because thirds weren’t considered consonant. Notice also, that the octaves don’t line up. The octave, instead of being 2/1 is 243/128.

this is a sound sample of the tuning lattice going around the circle of fifths. (sound sample). This is a sound sample of it climbing the scale diatonically and then chromatically (sound sample). And this sound sample shows the difference between 243/128 and a 2/1 octave.

N-limit tuning

That last example demonstrates why mixing in other numbers than just three is a good idea. People often use 5’s, 7’s and sometimes higher prime numbers like 11’s. Your tuning system draws it’s name from the largest prime number that you use. A tuning that used 2’s and 3’s is a 3-limit tuning. One that uses 2’3, 3’s and 5’s is a 5-limit tuning.

(if I have time)

5-limit tuning

(Draw on blackboard) this is a tuning lattice of 5’s. This note 5/4 is a just third. The ratio has much smaller numbers than the pythagorean third. This is the pythagorean third (sound sample). This is the 5-limit third (sound sample). there’s almost a quarter-tone difference between them (sound sample).

N-limit lattices

When you are drawing lattices, every new prime number gets a new axis. so a tuning lattice could be thought of as an N-dimensional array, where N is the number of prime numbers. this one, with 5’s and 3’s is a two dimensional array. If we added 7’s, we’d need a new axis and we’d have a three dimensional array.

We can add notes to our lattice that are multiples of 5’s and 3’s. (draw on blackboard) All of these notes are the note right below it multiplied by 3/2s. Remember before, that multiplying fractions was raising them. Like 3/2 * 3/2 makes a note a fifth above. So because all of these notes are multiplies by 3/2s, they are all a fifth higher than the notes below them.

this is useful for two reasons. One is that 6/5 is the smallest numbers ratio we’ve yet seen for d#, the minor third. (sound sample). So adding lines like this helps us find extra ratios. the other thing that it’s good for is transposing. All of these notes are the same as the ones right below it, but raised by a fifth. So you might use this when you modulate to a new key.

Uses of Lattices

composers use lattices like these to figure out what tunings they want to use in their piece and then manipulate them for key changes and transpositions. they then use this to give instructions to instrumentalists or to program them into synthesizers.

One composer that uses tuning lattices to figure out how to tune her instrument is Ellen Fullman. She uses larger prime numbers to tune the many strings of her Long String Instrument. This track is based on a sweep of the harmonics of a C chord. (sound sample)

Research for this semester – maybe thesis

Celeste Hutchins
1 October 2003
Proseminar
Research Proposal

I would like to research music from around the last section of the 100 years war. I am specifically interested in music somehow related to Joan of Arc. For instance, after she raised the Siege of Orleans, a mystery play was written in her honor, which has been performed nearly every year since. I don’t know anything about the music attached to this play, but would like to find out how much it has changed over time and if early transcriptions are available, so that I can analyze the music. If this music is unavailable, I will instead focus on music she might have heard, including the liturgical music performed at Dom Remy, her local cathedral, or the music played then at Charles’ court.

I am interested in this topic because I would like to write a Mass for Joan of Arc (since she’s a saint) and eventually an opera and I would like to represent her with music that would have been somehow meaningful to her. I don’t know what research has been done on this topic, but I’ll be talking with Professor Alden about it. Also, I will be in France over fall break and hopefully will be able to do some research then.

Sleep-deprived paper

Celeste Hutchins
Proseminar
24 September 2003
Ruth Crawford Seeger Paper

Ruth Crawford was composing music at a time when an American compositional identity was just forming. Her influences and compositional tools place her in a matrix, where ideas and skills pass from composer to composer and from teacher to student. The ideas that she used are still reverberating through American composition.
Charles Seeger taught his students, including Ruth Crawford, about neumes, a musical idea that he gained from his historical research into early music. He also taught this to Cowell, who passed it on to his students, including Lou Harrison. Harrison was so taken with the idea and made such heavy use of it, that the first item in his Music Primer is an explanation of neumes and how to use them. His methods are the same ones that Crawford used. The item ends with “Henry Cowell taught me most of this.” (Harrison p 1)
The Theosophy and mysticism that Crawford embraced still echoes though American music as well. The KPFA archives contain a collection of tapes of Dane Rudhyar speaking about various Theosophical subjects. When I was cataloging the archive, I noticed the unusual titles and subject matter and asked Charles Amirkhanian about them. He spoke very highly about Rudhyar and Theosophy in general. Extrapolating from the number of tapes of him in the KPFA archives, I assume that he must have been able to influence a large number of people.
Theosophy also appears in Robert Ashley’s Opera, Perfect Lives. Ashley opens each section with, “These are some songs written about the Corn Belt and the people living it. Or on it.” One of the main characters is a Theosophist, something mentioned early in the series. In a later episode, Ashley focuses extensively on the Theosophist character and a number of Theosophist themes are discussed in detail. He repeats the phrase, “without coincidence” several times. If it is indeed without coincidence, it seems that the presence of theosophy in the opera is recognition of the theosophical composers from the Corn Belt, including Crawford. What more naturally belongs in an opera about the Midwest than a discussion of the worldview held by so many composers from that area?
In a more controversial vein, Crawford is also emblematic of American composers through her sexual orientation. As you (Professor Slobin) said in class, “It must mean something if so many of the major American composers of the 20th Century were gay.” It is, of course, impossible to make definitive statements about deceased people’s sexual orientations, and I cannot presume to know that Crawford was bisexual or perhaps even a lesbian, given that she clearly didn’t identify as such. However, from the reading, it’s clear that Crawford went though many of the same experiences that queers typically face.
Crawford was clearly questioning her sexual orientation while she was at the MacDowell Colony, and with good reason. Being repulsed by the idea of physical intimacy with a member of the opposite sex whom one is romantically involved with is a normal experience for closeted gay people, but, I’m told, is somewhat unusual for heterosexuals. After Gene left the colony, Crawford turned to a woman, Marion Bauer, for comfort. She agonized about her lack of desire for Gene, but the claimed that she nearly slept with Bauer. Tick very tellingly writes, “Crawford called [this] the ‘Lesbian’ subject.” (p 107) The “Lesbian subject” is very clearly a weighty one and something that she must have thought deeply about. With a “healthy curiosity, [she mulled] over the words of a lesbian poet at the colony who was after her to begin an affair. ‘You have to know what you are experiencing before you can sublimate it, she wrote . . ..'” (p 98) Thus she is willing to consider the idea of sexual expression only when it occurs in a lesbian context.
Therefore, Crawford was in flux. She continued to identify as straight, perhaps unaware of the idea of bisexuality. Her Methodist upbringing and current social mores probably pressured her intensely. There are no currently known examples of “statements in Theosophical literature either condemning or accepting homosexuality as unnatural or unnatural.” (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_theo.htm) Theosophy would not have provided her with a gay-positive refuge. More than being in flux, she was also in crisis. “Was she sexually damaged? She despaired of knowing.” (Tick p 100)
This crisis provides a possible analysis of her worry about being able to have a family and a composing career. If one is repulsed by the idea of procreating, of course one will find reasons not to have a family. Crawford’s worries and ideas about sexuality are familiar to me, as a lesbian with a religious upbringing. She shares a large part of the gay experience. These experiences also demonstratably affected her writing as they were occurring, as her romantic crises caused writer’s block and her rejuvenation when Bauer got her creative juices flowing again. They also may help explain some of her wishy-washiness throughout her compositional period. She was someone in crisis, with an uncertain sense of identity and who was wrestling with large personal questions. Is it any wonder, then, that she felt overwhelmed by writing an orchestra piece even though she had written large pieces before?
This string quartet that she wrote instead is masterful. It has beautiful use of dissonance and a melodic character, with a unique voice. It’s certainly a smaller piece than a symphony and it makes it tempting to speculate what amazing things she might have written, had she not stopped composing and subsequently died before she could start again. It’s also tempting to speculate on why she stopped composing. Did she find compositional strength in her personal uncertainty? (Facetiously: Does a gay (or questioning) identity compel one to compose?) Speculating further, if she indeed was a lesbian, then why did she marry Seeger? Some people agonizingly question their sexual orientation only to discover that they are straight. Or, she may have been bisexual. Perhaps she merely changed. Sexual orientation can be fluid. I have a friend (who wishes to remain anonymous) who describes the (now discarded) heterosexuality of her youth by saying that, “[she] was a willing, even enthusiastic participant.” It’s worth noting that a large portion of Crawford and Seeger’s courtship took place via letters, so she could achieve the meeting of minds that she craved without the specter of a possibly alarming physical expression looming immediately over her.

Grumpy paper

Celeste Hutchins

Proseminar

17 September 2003

 

Harrison writes in his Music Primer,

To Avoid the Monstrosities that might be done to your vocal works in
translations, make one version yourself directly in the international language
endorsed by UNESCO – Esperanto. This language is particularly musical anyway,
more so, I think, than the majority of ethnic tongues, which, like Topsy, “just
growed.” (p 22)

Harrison
is clearly very serious about Esperanto, even going as far as to teach it
through a gay organization in San Francisco and to write several E-o (E-o is
the “official” Esperanto abbreviation for “Esperanto”) manifestos. Amy Cook,
Lou‚’s sign language instructor, describes him as “passionate” about E-o. So
much so that in his primer, he goes so far as to list Dr. Zamenhof, inventor of
Esperanto in his list of the most influential figures of the nineteenth
century.

Morris,
Blake, Zamenhof, Whitman & maybe Dolmetsch – Darwin too & Thoreau;
those are the great geniuses of the west in the 19th century, the
ones still disturbing, awakening, arousing, fertilizing & revealing us. (p
41)

The E-o “movado” was equally taken by Harrison,
sending a delegation out to meet him in Tokyo, when he arrived for the 1961
East-West Music Encounter in Tokyo. (Miller p. 57) Similarly, the E-o community
at San Francisco State provided him with a premiere of his work, La Koro
Sutro
. Charles Amirkhanian, former
music director of KPFA (and current director of Other Minds), recalled the
concert in an email,

I do remember attending that concert and it was
packed. I think it was in Knuth Hall in the Music Dept. and they used Lou’s
first gamelan, the American gamelan built w/ Bill Colvig. We did find a tape in
the archives of Lou speaking about that time about that gamelan, made with
metal pipes used normally to route electrical lines. The conduit was ground
down by Bill using an oscilloscope to get exact tunings. Lou was wild with
enthusiasm about the sound and tuning and that Bill could pull off this
miracle.

About
the lectures, Amirkhanian said, “We do have a recording, I think, of the 1972
performance of La Koro Sutro. We don’t have the lectures. I guess there wasn’t
much hope of broadcasting an entire lecture in Esperanto.” Despite KPFA’s fears
of an insufficient audience, Miller reports that “329 participants from
twenty-eight countries” attended the lectures. (p 64) ELNA, the Esperanto
League for North America sells a CD of La Koro Sutro, via their E-o book catalog. They describe it saying,
“[T]his collection by the world famous Lou Harrison is . . . a masterpiece in
any language. An innovator of musical composition and performance who
transcends cultural boundaries, Harrison’s highly acclaimed work juxtaposes and
synthesizes musical dialects from virtually every corner of the world.” (http://esperanto-usa.hypermart.net/butiko/butiko.cgi)
He was awarded a lifetime honorary membership to ELNA and is well known
throughout “Esperantio.” Someone
on an E-o email list concerning music asked, “Cxu ekster Lou Harrison neniam
ekzistis emo, ‘serioze’ verki pri iaj esperantaj poemoj?” Do there exist,
outside of Lou Harrison, serious works with Esperanto poems? (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/per-esperanto-muziko/message/232)

         Despite
how seriously Lou took E-o and how seriously the movado takes him, Miller clearly does not take this
seriously. For instance, she describes the premiere of La Koro Sutro as taking place, “during a week-long seminar at San
Francisco state University.” (p 64) It is extremely likely that the “seminar”
was actually NASK, La Nord-Amerkio Sumera Kursaro, an annual E-o language summer school, which, “[p]rior
to 2002, . . . was hosted for 31 years at San Francisco State University.” (http://www.esperantic.org/educationalprojects.htm)
On the same page, she says that “this postconfrence” followed “the 1972 World
Esperanto Convention in Portland.” There does indeed exist an annual
international convention of E-o speakers. The correct name for this is the Universala
Kongreso
.

         She
similarly fails to accurately report names of E-o organizations when talking
about the 1961 Conference in Tokyo, saying, “Harrison wrote to the fine arts representative
of the International Esperanto Association in Tokyo.” (p 57) I would very much
like to read a copy of this letter, but I can find no mention of such an
organization via Google searches in English or E-o. There does exist a Universal Esperanto Association. There also exists a “passport
service,” which provides the kind of lodging and translation services that Lou
received from the representative of this mysterious organization. There also
exists a Japana Esperanto-Instituto,
which has existed continuously (except for 1944) since 1906. Many organizations
in Japan that want to reach an international audience use E-o, including some
scholarly journals. I have an impression of Japan as an extremely wired
country, so it seems like the “International Esperanto Association in Tokyo”
would be mentioned somewhere on-line.

         Lou
took sign language as seriously as he took E-o, yet it merits hardly a mention.
Amy Cook (who was my housemate for a few years) taught Lou sign language twice
a week, in 1.5 hour sessions from 1991 until 1996 or 1997. I talked to her by
phone after finishing Miller’s book. Amy was unhappy to learn that she was not
mentioned in the book, since she was very close to Harrison. During the time
she was my housemate, Lou called her and said that he and Bill Colvig wanted to
adopt her and told her she should find and fill out the appropriate paperwork. She
considered this offer, since her own parents are gone, but in the end, decided
against it. I remember this happening, star struck as I was, that Lou
Harrison
was calling her up on the
phone!

         During
all the time that she taught Harrison sign language, Cook reports that he never
once mentioned his deaf former roommate, who is mentioned twice in the
biography. Cook explained that Lou’s neighbor George, which whom Lou was very
close, had gone mostly deaf. Her classes initially included Bill, but her
dropped out very quickly. After that it was Lou, George and Marian, George’s
girlfriend. Harrison was the organizer of the class. He was enthusiastic and “unafraid”of trying new signs. He “would go to any deaf event he could go to.” Cook
recalled a flying with Harrison to Seattle to see a sign language play and was
struck by his generosity in paying her way. He combined some of his interests
in constructed languages by reading about gestuno, an international sign
language, similar in motivation to E-o.

            Cook
painted a less saintly image of Harrison than Miller. She said, “He had a lot
of things going on . . . internally‚” and said that, “he seemed complicated”
and to be ‚”going through complicated stuff.” She went so far as to call him “high
maintenance.” She attributed some of this to health problems, such as pain in a
nerve in his face, and some to his “brutal” schedule. He was booked a year in
advance and always seemed to be writing something. He worked hard and continuously,
writing, traveling and teaching gamelan at Cabrillo Community College. He was continuously
doing something, if not working, then partying and was generally very
passionate about everything. Cook hypothesized that he welcomed the relief of
the sign language classes and so created unintensive lesson plans. He would stop
everything else that he was doing during the lesson time and objected strenuously
if he was disturbed during that time.

            His
sign language lessons started in 1991, which would have been during the
creative crisis that Miller reports him suffering around the first Gulf War. When
I asked Amy about this, she thought and said that eventually, he was always
writing, but said that she recalled him working on something even when they first
met. I asked her if this might have been Homage to Pacifica and she explained that although she was a music major
at the time and a percussionist, he gave “social cues that [music was] not an
avenue of conversation.” She could and did ask him questions about music and he
would answer them, but he looked bored when he did. She recalls him having a
bust of Ives in his house. When he found out that she didn’t know who Ives was,
he became exasperated.

            Lou
was ‚”thunderous.” He was “used to having his way” and would “storm around”
until he got it. However, his thunder was all sound and fury signifying
nothing. He yelled at Bill, but Bill’s hearing was poor and Bill didn’t take it
personally. Amy never saw tension between them. They were clearly in love, she
reported.

            Miller’s
biography of Harrison is similar to Cowell’s biography of Ives in that they
both were written during their subject’s lifetime and were both written by
people who were fans of their subject. Unsurprisingly, they both have a tendency
to fawn. Miller however, unlike Cowell, is sloppy with her subject matter and
should strongly consider collaborating with an Esperantist before another
edition of this book is released.

Taking him on!

Celeste Hutchins

Proseminar

10 September 2003

Postmodernist Ives

 

Kramer is correct in
concluding that Ives is not a “pre-postmodernist.” Although Ives aesthetic is clearly very forward thinking,
his intentions are not and he borders on being a romantic. Kramer’s article starts
with a definition of postmodernism “as a recurrent movement within modernism.”
Despite working with a definition that frees postmodernism from time
constraints, it still supposes that a “pre-postmodernist” would embrace current
cultural values. This situation would be exception, especially since music
tends to lag 50 years or more behind the other arts in following
movements. Ives, as a
transcendentalist, is no exception. Cowell, in his biography of Ives, (really a hagiography) Charles Ives
and His Music
,
identifies Ives as a follower of Emerson. Cowell writes, “By that time Emerson’s thinking had been shaping
American minds for more than sixty years . . ..” (p. 8) Ives is thus not at the
forefront of philosophical thought, but identifies with the values of a
previous generation.

His song, The Things
Our Fathers Loved

similarly esteems a bygone era. In this case, it idealizes community bands like
the one Ives’ father conducted. It
praises small town life, which, as Kramer points out, was already
disappearing. Thus it represents
“nostalgia for the unattainable,” and promotes nostalgic values. He has similar
romantic yearnings in other works. Cowell describes a short piece for vocalist and piano. Ives notes that four measures of the
piece would sound better played on a string quartet than a piano and a quartet
should be used for those measures if possible. “Four string players are not usually on hand at a song
recital to play just the four measures that sound better with strings than they
do with a piano, but of course from the composer’s point of view they should
be. Ives exclaims: ‘Why can’t a
musical thought be presented as it is born?'” (Cowell p. 10) This idea of spontaneity could have
come directly from one of the romantic poets.

Kramer’s claims as to
Ives’ misogyny are also amply documented. In the song An Election, the vocalist sings,
“some old women: male and female.” That line certainly “conforms to what classical psychoanalysis calls the
masculine protest.” (Kramer p. 183) Cowell approvingly records Ives’ (masculine) protest against Haydn, “Easy
Music for the sissies, for the lilypad ears of Rollo!” (p. 10) Rollo is
explained in a footnote on the same page, “An imaginary gentleman named Rollo
is a familiar of the Ives household – one of those white-livered weaklings who
cannot stand up and receive the full force of dissonance like a man.” Thus Ives’ dissonance stems not from a “[search]
for new presentations . . . in order to impart a stronger sense of the
unpresentable,” (Lyotard) but from “a dread of being feminized.” (Kramer p.
183) This is especially clear when
Ives complains about the New York Symphony Orchestra’s response to Washington’s
Birthday
. They asked him to cut out some of the
dissonance. He wrote, “They made
an awful fuss about playing it, and before I got through, this had to be cut
out, and that had to be cut out, and in the end, the score was practically emasculated.” [emphasis mine]
(Cowell p. 68) Dissonance is thus very clearly linked in Ives’ mind to manliness
and virility.

Kramer also describes
flute as phallic. (p. 197) Although this may seem absurd, given the flute’s current association of
femininity, the flute was recently considered a manly instrument. Flutist Polly Moller told me that one
hundred years ago, the flute occupied the cultural position currently held by
the electric guitar. Middle class
white boys learned to play them and tried to master them, much like some of
them now try to sound like commercials for Guitar Center. Therefore, if Ives’ use of the flute is
designed to convey manliness, it is intended to convey the culture of the white
male middle class.

            Kramer
goes on to describe Ives as homophobic, based on his misogyny and fear of
emasculation. Ives’ disassociation with Cowell seems to confirm this, however I
disagree with the thesis that misogyny leads directly to homophobia. Sometimes
male homosexuality is presented as a hyper-manliness, for example in the
drawings of Tom of Finland or among the Brown shirts of 1930’s Germany. In any case, Cowell’s writing reveals
no tinges of discomfort as he joins Ives in condemning Rollo and the sissies. However, if “Ives’ obsessive degradation of the feminine” is any sort of
a “response to the social conditions surrounding concert music in the late nineteenth
century,” (Kramer p. 183) then Cowell’s approval could similarly stem from
social conditions surrounding male homosexuality. Perhaps both of them were avoiding the sissy label – applied
to male musicians and gay men alike.

            Ives’
desire to avoid “pretty little sugar plum sounds,” (Cowell p. 10) is clearly
evident in his masterwork Symphony No. 4. At one point, a violin plays a romantic line, while another
instrument plinks discordantly in the background, as if mocking it. This is followed by a tumult of
patriotic music, blaring furiously away, finally coming to a climax. Immediately after the climax is a break where the
audience laughs nervously in the recording that I listened to. It is a spectacular and occasionally
overwhelming work. Ives wanted “to
strengthen and give more muscle to the ear, brain, heart, limbs and feat!” [Ives’ emphasis] (Cowell p. 10) His work is strong and can and should
be enjoyed despite his troubling politics.

First responce paper

(Remember, a B is a failing grade….)
Celeste Hutchins
Proseminar
10 September 2003
Postmodernist Ives

Because Ives is too new to be played on commercial radio in San Francisco and too old to have directly influenced my own music, I’ve previously only listened to a very few pieces of his. Henry Cowell says in his biography of Ives, that Ives’ music is written about far more often than it is played. Sadly, I’ve done little reading about or listening to Ives before this week.
Kramer’s article starts with a definition of postmodernism “as a recurrent movement within modernism.” This definition surprised me. I had always understood postmodernism to be a refutation of the modernist idea that absolute truth exists and can be sought, something Lyotard calls “the nostalgia for the unattainable,” however, my understanding was that postmodernism is a current movement. The “post” of “postmodernism” always seemed to indicate that it came after modernism. My dictionary places postmodernism in the late 20th century. If last week, someone had asked me if Ives was a postmodernist, I would have replied, “Of course not. His work predates postmodernism by several decades.” Therefore, it comes as something as a relief that Kramer concludes that Ives is not a postmodernist.
Despite working with a definition that frees postmodernism from time constraints, it still supposes that a “pre-postmodernist” would embrace current cultural values and aesthetics. Presumably, Lyotard has some examples of very early postmodernists, but the vast majority of people with current values exist currently. Also, music tends to lag 50 years or more behind the other arts in following movements. Cowell identifies Ives as a follower of Emerson, 60 years after Emerson was widely read. Ives was certainly a maverick, but he was also completely a product of his time, both as Cowell describes him during his life and as Kramer more recently rediscovers.
Cowell’s descriptions of Ives “manliness” also mesh with Kramer’s thesis. Cowell describes a fictional man called “Rollo,” (a character impersonated in one of his string quartets) who was frequently mocked in the Ives household for being a sissy. Cowell’s writing reveals no tinges of discomfort as he writes about this in an approving tone. Kramer describes Ives as homophobic, which Kramer argues on the basis of Ives’ misogyny. Ives’ disassociation with Cowell seems to confirm this, however I disagree with the thesis that misogyny leads directly to homophobia. Sometimes male homosexuality is presented as a hyper-manliness, for example in the drawings of Tom of Finland or among the Brown shirts of 1930’s Germany.
Kramer also describes flute as phallic. Although this may seem absurd, given the flute’s current association of femininity, the flute was recently considered a manly instrument. Flutist Polly Moller told me that one hundred years ago, the flute occupied the cultural position currently held by the electric guitar. Middle class white boys learned to play them and tried to master them, much like some of them now try to sound like commercials for Guitar Center. Therefore, if Ives use of the flute is designed to convey manliness, it is intended to convey the culture of the white male middle class.
After reading Kramer’s article, I listened to Symphony No. 4. The first prelude has a Messiaen-like sound, where the strings create a texture much like the sound of the Ondes Martenot, over which the chorus sings a hymn, which the program notes identify as one of Ives’ favorites. (http://www.americanmavericks.com/prog_notes/june_09.html) The second prelude starts similarly, but with a more sinister and intermittently chaotic sound. The orchestra plays many differing motifs, which seem to have come from other songs, layered upon each other. They seem to vie for dominance over a marching band, martial drum line, in a conflict that ebbs and flows. The music is tumultuous and exciting – wonderful to listen to. The social values that Kramer reads into Ives’ work certainly seem to be present. At one point, a violin plays a romantic line, while another instrument plinks discordantly in the background, as if mocking it. This is followed by a tumult of patriotic music, blaring furiously away, finally coming to a climax. The audience laughs nervously at the break, in the recording I listened to. A short and lush movement follows, and then the final movement begins with a low quiet sound. The orchestra is again at odds with itself, and is reminiscent of the first movement and the preludes. There is a section with a detuned instrument. The rich texture breaks into a unified motif, which Kramer identifies as the hymn, “Bethany.” The motif is strong and moving, but the piece falls back into dissonance. The motif is thoughtfully restated over an uncertain background. Finally, the chorus returns, restating and transforming the hymn motif, without words.
I also listened to Three Quarter-tone Pieces for Two Pianos, a short piece for two pianos tuned a quartertone apart. The sound is highly unusual and a bit disconcerting. The piece seems to agree with Kramer’s thesis because of its inherently dissonant nature, which was considered manly at the time. (A review of Ruth Crawford Seeger’s work said that she could sling dissonances like a man.)
While I am disappointed but not altogether surprised to learn that Ives didn’t share my politics, I am quite pleased to have been introduced to his work.