Comments/Critiques/Rants about My String Quartet #5

[Jeff Harrington]

I just deleted Adam's last comment on my blog, which was a quote from Dennis Bathory-Kitsz about how these forums have no real criticism, but mere back-slapping. Rather than continue the passive/aggressive circus that my blog has become since a few folks attempted to 'intervene' in my continuing use of tonality, I've decided to invite comments and criticisms about the piece here, in a public setting. I don't want my announcement, on my blog, to be a forum for ad generis critiques of my style(s). It is disrespectful of the great performers and it's disrespectful to me.

Instead, let's talk about it here. Maybe a little steam needs to be let out. But please, critique the piece and not me! FWIW, and as I posted on my blog, when I announced the piece in 2001 on rec.music.compose, similar fireworks occurred. Just for fun here they are. Now, just for the record, I was being a little bit snide in my response, because the critic, orangie, had been attacking me for months and was frankly a little bit weird.

Announcement from 2001 for Tetra-Mnemosyne VII on rec.music.compose

For those that haven't heard the piece, it flirts with classical tonality from the 19th century from time to time and this seems to freak people out. Are these harmonic gestures week and inappropriate? Do they add anything to the piece? Do they weaken the piece? Do I integrate those harmonic gestures succesfully into the motoric processes? Do the transitions work between the different stylistic spheres? Whatever questions you can think of - go for it.

Here's the recording:

String Quartet #5 - Performed by Quatuor de Orchestre 2021 Live in ...

Here's the score:

Score to Harrington String Quartet #5

[J.C. Combs]

Hey, I like it quite a bit. I mean, its beautiful!

But consider this: If Morton Feldman or Ligeti asked me what I thought of one of their works, I'd probably tell them to piss in a gutter (hit the edge). And then they'd probably laugh at me and ask who the hell was I? ;)

That sort of explains the problem of composers giving other composers their opinions with personal taste involved.

[Shane W. Cadman]

I agree with J.C. (except for telling Ligeti and Feldman to piss in a gutter). :-)

A few thoughts:

Maybe if everybody prefaced their critique with "If I wrote this piece, I would have . . . " ???

I think that one of the assumptions around here is that we know what we're doing. So if a composer makes a work that they are confident about and happy with, does it matter what other people think?

Also, what's more important: approval from our self, our peers, or the audience?

Maybe if we open up a section for critiques on works in progress only?

Is anyone prepared to change their piece based on critiques?

I think the support and encouragent to keep doing what we do (regardless of style) is one of the most valuable parts of this group.

By the way, it's nice to agree with J.C. on something. ;-)

J.C. Combs said:

Hey, I like it quite a bit. I mean, its beautiful!

But consider this: If Morton Feldman or Ligeti asked me what I thought of one of their works, I'd probably tell them to piss in a gutter. And then they'd probably laugh at me and ask who the hell was I? ;)

That sort of explains the problem of composers giving other composers their opinions with personal taste involved.

[Jeff Harrington]

Well I think there's some real conflicted feelings here about the (and my) use of tonality. It mostly comes from European avant-gardists who are typically appalled by my lack of irony. Plus, I have to be gracious cuz I'm the host, but I felt bad that I deleted Adam's comments; I just don't want any bad feelings here and I want open discussion.

Well thought out critiques of music are very rare these days. I tell myself, of course, I'm not going to even consider anything - but you just never know where insight into possible improvements will come. And ultimately this thread is just a gesture of peace. ;-P

And this thread is about letting people blow off steam - in full view of everybody.

Shane W. Cadman said:

I agree with J.C. (except for telling Ligeti and Feldman to piss in a gutter). :-)

A few thoughts:

Maybe if everybody prefaced their critique with "If I wrote this piece, I would have . . . " ???

I think that one of the assumptions around here is that we know what we're doing. So if a composer makes a work that they are confident about and happy with, does it matter what other people think?

Also, what's more important: approval from our self, our peers, or the audience?

Maybe if we open up a section for critiques on works in progress only?

Is anyone prepared to change their piece based on critiques?

I think the support and encouragent to keep doing what we do (regardless of style) is one of the most valuable parts of this group.

By the way, it's nice to agree with J.C. on something. ;-)

J.C. Combs said:

Hey, I like it quite a bit. I mean, its beautiful!

But consider this: If Morton Feldman or Ligeti asked me what I thought of one of their works, I'd probably tell them to piss in a gutter. And then they'd probably laugh at me and ask who the hell was I? ;)

That sort of explains the problem of composers giving other composers their opinions with personal taste involved.

[Dave Seidel]

I find it difficult to criticize the work of other composers. I can state whether or not I like it or can relate to it. On the critical side, I suppose I might under some circumstances note if I found it lacking in internal consistency. But I think I would rarely (if ever) cavil about the choices that composer has made. For me, either it works for me as a listener or it doesn't, and I am not interested in detailed analysis.

In this case, I happen to enjoy the piece and it is always wonderful to hear an energetic and successful performance. As far as your choice of materials goes, it's all fair game, and this piece is, IMO, not only internally consistent but also (if it matters) consistent with the eclectic concerns I hear throughout your work.

[Iván Sparrow]

I've arrived a bit late to the action, and between the Blog and the Forum I'm somewhat lost. Nonetheless, I will add some comments:

1. Jeff, congratulations on the performance of your work. To have performances of our work is in a way the completion (or staying alive) of a composition, so these are very special occasions, even more so if the performance is good, such as this one.

2. I believe it is unfair and just plain neurotic to verbally attack a work of true artistic aspirations (whether they reach them or not) that someone is sharing. It is unfair because the easiest thing to do is talk or write, but to endeavor in music creation is another matter. It's neurotic because usually the attacker is projecting him(her)self in the attack, be it his(her) insecurities, prejudices, inabilities, lack of talent, or intolerance.

3. I think that it's always better to give and propose something of value than to try to demonstrate something has no value. It might have to do with the difference between progress and evolution. History has shown which is merciless and which is (sometimes painfully) enriching. If I don't agree with or have serious issues against something, I try to propose something else, be it creatively or textually (that's why I got a freakin' blog!).

4. Of course I have my opinions and I'm not always polite with what I say. But critique can either be helpful or a weapon. If it is the first, then critique will help to learn. If the second, critique will do harm, even if it's not intended.

5. We all make mistakes. Although some will never know they did (consciously at least), probably like that orangie guy.

[J.C. Combs]

"plain neurotic." -quote

I know many (composers) are weird, but neurotic? You might be onto something. /scratches chin.

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

Greg, I love that summary!

Back many threads ago when I made the comment about too much back-slapping, I meant that in a more general way. As composers, we often know when a piece works, irrespective of whether it matches our taste or theory. Sometimes we have clues as to why or why not: the length, the coherency, the 'sheen', the care, the daring, and even how we perceive an audience might feel about it.

Often we talk about experimenting. That's hardly meant in a scientific sense, is it? More about whether we're taking a risk with, say, common perceptions or our own habits. But experiment or risk does imply some measure of success or failure.

Maybe I'm just thick-skinned. Or maybe I've had honest responses. (You get pretty honest responses in Vermont, for sure -- no blasé city audiences!) A composer I respect a great deal once told me something was a wretched piece, and told me why. I just stuffed the ego down and listened ... and learned a lot. In fact, it changed how I composed because that critique allowed me to do more rather than less.

I watch audiences carefully, how their muscles change, whether they are on the edge of falling asleep or falling off their chairs with excitement. There's feedback from performers (including those that won't play a piece for than once) and, least important, reviewers.

So everybody somehow tells us things about our work, everyone has an opinion and in my experience almost everyone expresses it. Except composers.

And so, yes, I have opinions (and I think experienced and wise ones sometimes) about the music I hear. If I'm asked, I'll say. When Jeff posted his piece the first time via Facebook, I responded immediately, writing, "Strong and coherent start to finish. I love how it slowly develops, shifting in a very minimal-bird-flipping kind of way. And the wake-up at about 15:50 ... so cool. I always say with a student: No arbitrary repeats -- we'll hear it again. Make a change each time. And there it is, a perfect illustration. Constant change. Fine work."

I listened to it twice more today, and that opinion hasn't changed. It bears repeated listenings (another criterion of mine) and offers surprises every time. It is rich with expectation and reward. Even though it's something that I would never write, it offers substance. If there's anything to critique, it's that it is a little too short and still seems to have more to say -- though practical issues would probably preclude making it longer.

A complete contrast is Ádám Kondor's cello partita. Can it be any more different from Jeff's? It has an extended set of expectations and an enormous seductiveness. You'll notice I won't talk in technical or stylistic terms; they are ultimately irrelevant to me and, though I'll grit my teeth until my gums bleed saying it, I really agree with Jeff about the notion of passion -- and the partita has it as well. I listened to all of it, and will listen again; I got lost in it, losing my attention (a good thing) and becoming one with its sound. For a hard-shelled person like me, that's hard, but Ádám's piece pulled me out of my objectivity (dammit!).

These pieces are passionate and expressive because, I feel, the composers believe in them ... not in a self-directed navel-gazing kind of way, but at a level of visceral commitment. That's what I mean about us, as composers, being able to tell what works. We get that -- even if it seems to be ('merely') a numbers piece or a straight-out experiment. So we should speak -- and listen.

Dennis





Greg Hooper said:

I didn't see Adam's post as that bad, He obviously thought the work interesting enough to really think about a response, and he has been a very positive contributor here - maybe from visual art I am used to people being quite blunt. But it is just a view that is expressed - as I posted elsewhere at least with music people can't destroy the work itself- unlike with visual art. On the other hand Jeff's response is also pretty reasonable - if Adam can get passionate then why not Jeff or anybody else.
Someone says - tonality is regressive you should stop that now - you reply don't be such an old-fashioned dumb-ass telling me modernist cliches about progress. Then they say - yes but tonality should be used in the knowledge of its historical referents and you reply why should I be a slave to history as an 'Idea' and not act freely from my own intuition, which can be seen as an embodied history. etc etc

[James Ross]

"I've been writing music for 40 years, and I
certainly know what music should sound like. "

Hilarious ...

orangie has an open invitation to come and shit all over my music anytime he'd like.

I realize I'm not working on nearly as high a level as you are Jeff, and maybe the stakes aren't quite as high for me either, but how can you let something like that bother you? Is the work of any living composer unanimously applauded? If someone has a problem with your work then they just do, that's all. You can't shake someone's firm beliefs no matter how hard you try. Nod and smile and in the words of Mr. Zappa, "let it whizz by your pants."

And the Quartet sounds damn fine to me ... Is that a worthless opinion?

(And, Adam seems to be more of an upright cat than orangie, wouldn't you say?)

[Jeff Harrington]

Thanks guys! James, I really don't want to talk about Adam, but since you asked - it's something that is very personal for both Elsie and I and it's something that we have constantly battled. We call it 'the style problem.' When we meet somebody who ultimately thinks we're just 'wrong' to be writing like that.

It's insurmountable. It's one of the main reasons I never get performed in the US. It's probably the main reason why my performances are almost never by new music ensembles, but by professional musicians (which frankly is a good thing!). What Adam was criticizing was not this one piece. It was my entire approach for the most obvious reasons - because my approach is just 'wrong', 'dead', 'played out'. It's frankly a kind of prejudice.

What set me off was James' response. And that's what Adam was encouraging - a generalized critique of my attitude towards composing. And frankly, I've been there for 30 years (now I sound like orangie) and it never stops just there. Not only do I use tonality, I also have beats. Not only do I have beats and tonality, I also have melodies. I have expectations in my forms. It's a litany of things about modernism that I reject and that's the problem.

Because I absolutely reject modernism, I've been told, since 1978, that I'll have no career, that I'll ruin my reputation, that there is no chance in hell that I'll ever be taken seriously. I've been told this for decades now and to have Adam, who I thought, frankly was a friend, to tell me this same shit again - hell I can put up with it once... ok, twice... ok, now he's asking for other people to pile on. It's now an 'intervention.'

Fuck that. It has to stop. I've written a ton of music. More than probably anybody else I know. I do not deserve to be treated like an errant school boy any more. Plus, this is my fuckin' site and he's supposed to be my friend!

So really, think about it. I put up with it for days until I saw where it was going last night and I put an end to it. This thread isn't about rehashing his comments, it's about bringing him and us all back together. People want to bash my music - say it doesn't work - say it here. But don't say it where I'm trying to draw attention to - A PERFORMANCE - not my music in general. That and James' suggesting that I 'experiment' and go along with Adam's suggestion.

I guess I sometimes expect too much from Internet friendships... and that's my problem. I just don't want any hard feelings and I do want open discussion about these complex issues. This tonality thing is going to come back whether the European avant garde likes it or not. You already see Glass and Reich getting played all the time in France now. Minimalism is the gateway drug for the reintroduction of tonality. I saw after dropping out of Juilliard Grad school that somebody was going to eventually do it. The worst that could happen to me was that I either sucked or was too early. But if I worked my ass off I could have a career in SOMETHING NEW. Continuing the atonal avant garde tradition to me in 1980 when I first tried tonal music seemed to me to be an obvious dead end.

The fact that writing tonal music that sounds new is practically impossible is the real problem and frankly, it's why all this posturing about it being 'wrong' is being done. Trying to write tonal music that sounds fresh is so freakin' hard that only idiots try it. As I told Adam in an email, composers I respect usually always hate my music. Only real idiots, composers that think that they can write new tonal music like it. And that is also my curse. I exaggerate of course, but I think you can see my point. That's why I, like Dennis, don't and can't care what other composers think. I care what listeners and musicians think.

Not that I'm not reading this thread which has turned out really cool. Just awaiting Adam to say a few pithy, negative things! :) Of course, now he'll probably just kiss my ass too!

James Ross said:

"I've been writing music for 40 years, and I
certainly know what music should sound like. " Hilarious ... orangie has an open invitation to come and shit all over my music anytime he'd like. I realize I'm not working on nearly as high a level as you are Jeff, and maybe the stakes aren't quite as high for me either, but how can you let something like that bother you? Is the work of any living composer unanimously applauded? If someone has a problem with your work then they just do, that's all. You can't shake someone's firm beliefs no matter how hard you try. Nod and smile and in the words of Mr. Zappa, "let it whizz by your pants." And the Quartet sounds damn fine to me ... Is that a worthless opinion?

(And, Adam seems to be more of an upright cat than orangie, wouldn't you say?)

[J.C. Combs]

FWIW, and I hope you know, I generally skimmed the conversation and more or less was implying that I want everyone to experiment. The conversation was casual and I wasn't aware I was entering a touchy subject.

As I've stated, it was hypocritical of me to make any sort of critical observation on your blog post since I maintain my own blog with tight comment control (as do most artists) and it wasn't really thought out.

What I meant by experimentation probably had nothing to do with your conversation with Adam. I was referring to your microtonal works and alike which I'm quite fond of.

[Jeff Harrington]

JC, no hard feelings, FWIW, the reason I've been doing microtonal music in the first place isn't just because it's cool - it's so I can have a career at all. You have to have something vaguely modernist to be taken seriously. ;)

J.C. Combs said:

FWIW, and I hope you know, I generally skimmed the conversation and more or less was implying that I want everyone to experiment. The conversation was casual and I wasn't aware I was entering a touchy subject.

As I've stated, it was hypocritical of me to make any sort of observation on your blog post since I maintain my own blog with tight comment control (as do most artists) and it wasn't really thought out.

What I meant by experimentation probably had nothing to do with your conversation with Adam. I was referring to your microtonal works and alike which I'm quite fond of.

[Harriter88-aka terry harrington]

A scene from the fountainhead on the "Style problem",and Intelligencia's Chronic fear based disallowing and need to subjugate poeple trying to walk the path or their inner voices & convictions.