Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 0'00" is a joke...

Something that has zero duration is a physical impossibility, unless perhaps
we're talking about quantum effects.
That said, I always considered 0'0" to be not a joke, but a conundrum,
perhaps a musical koan, equivalent to the sound of one hand clapping. And
very clever.
<R>

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Vitor Rua <[email protected]> wrote:

> it´s your vision and i respect... but don´t agree...
>
> if 0`00``is a "part 2" of 4`33``... why should we do interpretations about
> what is not there?...
> what is there is that the piece is zero seconds of duration...
> if he wants to say absence of time measure he can put (thats the correct
> notation for that) a "O" !!! thats the sign for "no measure" used by all the
> contemporary composers...
> but its your opinion ... and its a valid opinion like others... like
> mine...
> best regards
> vitor rua
>
>
>
> On 25 Oct 2011, at 22:03, matteo pittoni wrote:
>
> As the partition talks about performing an *action*, and we try to recall
> the devotion to rational thought always showed by John Cage, I believe there
> is no reason to think that it should last *zero seconds*.
>
> As for the reason of the title, maybe he used this to suggest the *absence
> * of a time measure : thus, a temporal indeterminacy.
>
> In 4'33', there was a constraint on duration, but no constraint on any
> action ; maybe 0'00'' is meant to constrain the action (which must be *
> disciplined*) but not duration...
>
> Best regards,
>
> Matteo
>
>
> On 25 October 2011 22:38, David Badagnani <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
*Richard Friedman*
Oakland, California
*http://rchrd.com/*