Re: Re: Re: Re: 0'00" is a joke...
David Badagnani <[email protected]> Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.john-cage |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Great discussion. I can't think of any better use for this list! If 0'00" is not the duration of the piece, why is it entitled that? From all this discussion, I'm still not sure I understand that. Is the lack of time in the title metaphorical? And is there not at least a hint of humor? First came the white paintings, then the silent piece of 4 minutes and 33 seconds' duration, then the very loud piece of no duration...it simply seems to be taking an idea to its logical extreme. -- David Badagnani Kent, Ohio USA >________________________________ >From: Matt Rogalsky <[email protected]> >To: Vitor Rua <[email protected]> >Cc: [email protected] >Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 4:09 PM >Subject: [silence] Re: Re: Re: 0'00" is a joke... > >OK, you pulled me in to make one more reply. > >On 2011-10-25, at 4:01 PM, Vitor Rua wrote: > >> oh pleaseeeeeee... not even einstein will think that this composition must be performed... unless they perform on a warm whole or something...theres no DURATION !!!!! > >The title of this piece is not its duration. The score instructions make that clear. > >>> think of some of the more abstract Fluxus era compositions by La Monte Young and others, for instance, which really are not really performable in a concert hall sense). >> >> I have performed almost all the pieces > >But not all.. because some cannot be performed in a concert-hall sense. >Such as: "This piece is little whirlpools in the middle of the ocean" (that's from memory, please forgive if I am paraphrasing) > >OK, bye! That's the end of my contribution to this discussion! > >in friendship, >Matt R > >