Violence Begets Violence
And people wonder why there's so much violence in the world, what with heads of major orchestras in collusion with a mad bomber. Someone get that man a chainsaw--or tie him down before he hurts anyone.
Careful, that program you read could self-destruct; and if Pierre's on the podium, I'd be cautious of drinking from the fountain.
And is it me, or does anyone else agree that it is in excessively poor taste to pull this quote in the same sentance with the numbers "9-11"? Call me overly sensitive, but...
Careful, that program you read could self-destruct; and if Pierre's on the podium, I'd be cautious of drinking from the fountain.
And is it me, or does anyone else agree that it is in excessively poor taste to pull this quote in the same sentance with the numbers "9-11"? Call me overly sensitive, but...
posted by Daniel at 8:31 PM
4 Comments:
Since the quote is what Dickie's referring to when he says that it caused Boulez trouble after 9/11-that he was questioned by the fuzz-I don't think it's in bad taste. If it was a joke about buildings being blown up with people inside, I'd say it was in bad taste.
I wonder, because while he does say it caused Pierre trouble, he also seems to agree with it. Or perhaps he means we ought to blow up a few thousand seats, leaving the others remaining?
Boulez's take, to me, has always been violent--to root out the infidels, leaving only the pure standing. He said Ravel wrote music for whorehouses, that Shostakovich was not a person, and that any composer who did not see the necessity of the 12-tone system was essentially useless. Now I know he didn't want harm to come to anyone--unless, of course, they used a key signature.
But perhaps you are right. I am, after all, a wee bit sensitive on this topic.
I actually meant nothing bad about Boulez--we all say dumb things in our youth, and the violence of the period is mirrored in his reactions (though I cannot back up what Stockhausen said; the ego, the vanity, the envy, 'twas all rather creepy)--but was more concerned that this chap seemed to agree with him. Not blow them up so much as blow them down--to size, I suppose.
And I guess his comment about Shostokovich is only funny if you agree, but I still think it represents a really unconvivial attitude from that camp--we are right, you are not people--that is dangerously close, in thinking, to fascism. And that should scare all of us. Has nothing to do with Shostokovich, really, or your opinion thereof. More to the point: it seemed like people in that period, and their million little heir apparents, took their own opinions and tastes so seriously, that they figured if 1) they did not like the music or 2) it did not fit the "acceptable" trajectory of music, than that person was not worth anything but the most derisive comments, dehumanization, and (and this is a leap here), perhaps their death would have been celebrated. To me, revolutions or no, that's dangerous thinking.
And as to Boulez's comments, has he EVER, in his avuncular dotage now, issued any kind of retraction? That book is still very much in print, I believe. So yes he said it then, but it is there, unblemished, for the reading now.
Alas, with a birthdate just five days into the 1970s, I missed all of that, so can only read Boulez's comments with Gen X "everything-is-equal" TV-culture-soaked eyes. They sound violent to me. But what do I know? Seriously, I am not throwing up my hands but confessing the generation gap of which I am constantly reminded. So the revolutionary rhetoric--in which more than Boulez indulged no doubt--slips past me, context-wise.
And as for the 9-11 reaction, yes, I meant it when I asked if I was being hypersensitive. A wee bit too close to the WTC on that day, so the very mention of 9-11 raises eyebrows--and when I see it invoked cavalierly, I shudder, pulse, and sweat. Clearly an overreaction, though I do stand by my distrust of Dickie's wishy-washiness, experience or no.
And as to Boulez and his remarks, books can be withdrawn or edited, I guess--though of course he said a zillion other things, but people remember this because its so extreme. If he's said "First thing we need to do is get tits into the opera house," I suppose he'd be even more often quoted.
Wait, will that now happen to me.
I've seen the error in my off-the-cuff remarks. There shall be no more.
Post a Comment
<< Home