The End...?

            When I look back at this quarter, I really think this Musical Content course was more about art appreciation more than anything else. For the first few weeks of class, we discussed about different forms of visual art and how they conform to Thomas McEvilley’s 13 content carriers. If I were to be honest, I never quite liked visual art. Call me naïve but I always thought visual art was boring (it never quite “spoke” to me quite like music did), and I always dreaded those times when my family would attend art exhibits or go to art galleries and museums. I feel like this course really taught me how to look beyond what is blatantly there, to consider any meaning that might not be so apparent on the surface. If you think about it, in a way simply painting a picture representing a scene or bunch of objects can only hold so much meaning. By looking at other things such as the medium, verbal supplements, scale, duration, historical context, attitudinal gestures, formal properties, and more, an artist is able to implement so much more meaning into a piece of work. I especially liked it when we viewed the supplemental films in class about the Running Fence project and the quirky Japanese performance titled “Dumb type OR,” and discussing the works of art in class really helped me to see beyond what those works are simply perceived as.

            As this is a music class, I felt like everything transfers over very nicely to the sonic-side of things. It was really helpful to find musical examples of the 13 carriers. I feel like I now know many more ways of implementing meaning into a piece of music. As an aspiring music educator and composer of educational music, I feel like this can be really helpful in writing music that has the ability of speaking powerfully to the students and the parent audience members. I feel like a lot of composers of music for young bands these days simply write pieces that conform to the typical ABA forms and just tacks on a random title to make it sound “cool.” They don’t go beyond that—what if composers of these educational pieces went beyond the title and started telling a story through the performance context? What about using special orchestration techniques or instruments (materials)? Or scale (what if there’s a piece that involves every single musician in a school’s choir, band, and orchestra program?)?

            With ways of verbally expressing what I am trying to convey, I now feel like I have more guidance as I write my music. Well, it’s not simply about being able to verbally express what I want to portray, but it’s also about understanding what I am trying to say.

            As for the unit on Mechanical Reproduction, I felt like it was a little more difficult to grasp—but from what I got out of it, it seems like there are ways in which we can take advantage of newfound technology and use that to add meaning to a work of art. For instance, we talked about the limitations of certain mediums such as LP records and how many artists take advantage of the time limit and the construction of the disc itself to add extra meaning to their works. Actually, a few hours ago I just finished a paper on music from the video game series Final Fantasy for my analysis of pop music class, and I realized that the music from the earlier games from the series are more interesting because the composer had so many limitations, yet he was able to bypass the constraints to still get his ideas and points across. For instance, the Nintendo entertainment system is only able to produce three pitches at once, and so one song I analyzed (the overworld theme from Final Fantasy 2) made use of implied counterpoints and harmonies in a moving bass-line, giving the illusion that there are multiple lines (much like Bach’s cello preludes). My point is, as composers who are surrounded by evolving technology we are able to take advantage of what is available in order to get even more ideas across.

            As implied, I’m already beginning to make connections between this class and many of my other classes, and I feel that it won’t simply end here! This course was great—it was a very eye-opening and helpful class. Thank you!  

The Best Piece of Music in The World, Ever: the Theme from Schindler's List

            One of my most favorite pieces of music in the world is the theme from the movie Schindler’s List, which was composed by the academy-award winning film composer John Williams. Actually, my fascination with this piece was also present back in high school; when my AP music theory teacher asked us to share our favorite piece of music, this was the piece that I brought to class. To me this piece is a very powerful expression that—because of the historical context of the film—can be closely tied to the historical events during the holocaust and the horrors that surrounded that dark era, as well as the glimmer of hope that Oskar Schindler offered.

            The theme itself makes use of melodic and harmonic devices that are commonly used to convey sorrow and despair. For instance, the melody makes use of the “sigh-motif” (in a minor key, from scale degree 6 to 5), giving the piece a melancholic “sighing” quality. The melody also uses many unresolved and repeated minor 7^th leaps that make the music feel unsettling and emotionally hollow. The music also utilizes several deceptive cadences that help propel the feeling of anguish.

            Of all the instruments that could have been featured in the theme, Williams chose the violin, one of the most expressive instruments ever created as so many details could be implemented into the playing of it. The usage of vibrato and portamento, as well as a dynamic range that could diminish to niente, gives the violin a human voice-like quality that no other instrument can imitate. Moreover, the violin is closely tied to Jewish culture (mainly due to the musical Fiddler on the Roof). It also evokes images of a people who never really belonged anywhere, fleeing from persecution all throughout history; as families of Jews immigrated to the United States, they brought along their highly portable violins as their primary music-making instruments.

            As film score is united with all of the other components of a movie (screenplay, acting, cinematography, set design, sound editing, etc.), one cannot deny that the story also plays a very large role in contributing to the content of the piece. The film is an account of the acts of Oskar Schindler, a German during the Second World War, as he initially decided to hire Jews for cheap labor in his factory. During the course of war, he notices the highly disturbing and cruel acts that are committed against the Jews and eventually develops a heart for the suppressed group. He kept the Jews in his factory safe during the course of the war and attempted to save more lives.

            The most powerful scene was near the end when Schindler realizes the sacredness of life and is deeply ashamed that he did not do more to save more lives. As he wept, he thought about all of the things he could have done: if he sold his car, or even his Golden Party Nazi badge, he could have used that money to save many more lives. Inevitably, the melancholic theme makes a reprise in this scene.

            I also really admire Schindler himself. Even though humans are so easily pressured to conform to the common beliefs and practices of those around them—no matter how wrong or rotten those things are—Schindler took the step to look beyond those boundaries and respect others because of their worth as human beings. Through his acts and beliefs, he demonstrated honor and loyalty toward the Jews, which are two qualities that I really admire.

            As mentioned above, the art of film is really a unity of many other forms of art. For me, whenever I hear the theme from Schindler’s List, I cannot help but associate it with particular scenes and characters in the movie. This, in combination with the instrumentation choice and melodic conventions, is why the theme from Schindler’s List is one of my most favorite pieces.

The Main Theme: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad5Ma6AGkGk

The music played in the particular scene mentioned above ("I Could Have Done More"):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYkB1t6X64s

Technology: how it affects the way we create and consume media/art

           Walter Benjamin’s “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” is an article addressing the authenticity of a work of art in different types of mediums as technology improves throughout time. The article discusses different ideas that are tied to art and technology—such as the decay of aura—and extensively talks about film, as the essay was written in a time when that medium was being developed.

            The whole idea of the “decay of the aura” is interesting. The essay warns readers that methods of mechanical reproductions (either by the use of printing presses, photography, or film, among others) has the ability to be nothing compared to the actual object that these methods of reproduction are trying to imitate; there is a big difference between looking at a photograph of a piece of art and holding the actual thing in hand. In fact, I’ve had first hand experience in this: I was fortunate enough to hold one of Picasso’s ORIGINAL paintings (a distorted, yet elegant picture of a clown for his grandson). It wasn’t a very “pretty” painting, but the fact that Picasso painted it—I guess that’s what made it “extra special,” in an informal sense. If I were to see that painting in an art book containing many other pieces of art, I would not hold as much value in that experience, since the photograph of those pieces of art are stuck in a single perspective (the perspective of the camera lens), and so it simply feels less real—the aura of the original has been diminished.

            As always, with the progression of time, people’s thoughts on certain things (art, cultural practices, etc.) change as well (Rock music is one example that comes to mind). I really think that people’s perception of something like photography has really changed as well. At the time the essay was written, photography was still something that was new and unwieldy, and so the “art of photography” was not yet mature. Yet, as an amateur photographer 75 or so years after the essay was written, I can say that you can do numerous things with a single snapshot. There are so many things you can take from the real world (lighting, perspective, angles, proportions, color composition, and more), and by using those aspects to your advantage, you can definitely “compose” a picture that shows people something that they would not have noticed normally. In a way, you can use the “limitations” of the camera to reproduce something that cannot be seen with the human eye. In a sense, that can be art as well!

            Electronic technology nowadays is so much better than it was decades ago—and it’s constantly improving! Cameras are able to perform so many more functions, including zooming, macro shots, re-focusing, and different color saturations. Furthermore, the quality of the pictures has definitely improved as well. With a more versatile camera, one is able to use those functions as tools to accentuate certain aspects of a picture, and in effect, create art that was difficult, if not impossible, to create before these technological advancements.

            On the other hand, I think especially nowadays when cameras are so prevalent in society (every cell phone now contains one!) and in an age of digital memory storage, people get into the habit of randomly taking shots of EVERYTHING without taking careful consideration of how they are taking the pictures. In fact, digital technology has pretty much also affected the way people live life—the way people distribute and consume culture. In an age when people’s “lives” and “thoughts” are floating around the internet in the form of digital pictures and digital videos on websites such as facebook and youtube, it is so much easier to distribute these mediums to the public. In a way, this allows ANYONE to become an artist, but at the same time, since individuals have various levels of artistry, there are also a lot more “amateur” works floating around the web. Sure, people can really use this digital distribution—coupled with technological advancements—to really share the beauty seen in the world, but in a way it’s also easy to expose “not-so-great” works to others as well. I also feel that with so many “low quality” works floating around the net, people could either become a little more desensitized to “good” pieces of art or perhaps they will be able to see the “true beauty” when they see a well constructed piece of art. I think this definitely ties into the main point that Benjamin was trying to get across: that these new forms of media are not necessarily bad, but one should carefully consider of how it is used.

            These ideas can be brought over to other forms of media as well, such as film and music. As mentioned in the article, film is a very odd medium to work with, as it allows one to paradoxically see something that they cannot usually see on a normal basis, yet, it feels so detached and soulless since what is captured on screen was actually seen through the eyes of a video camera; film can only progress horizontally in time and capture a single perspective, forcing the viewer to “take the ride” that is stuck on a rail. Like photography, film has developed into a medium that can really convey artistic ideas, and by utilizing so many different aspects of the world (again: angles, lighting, perspectives, proportions, etc.) one can really communicate an artistic idea to an audience. Furthermore, film can now be seen as an art that encompasses much more than simply pointing a video camera at the right things at the right time. In films/movies from Hollywood, so many other things can go into the creation of a whole new universe—costume design, characterizations (by the actors/actresses), set designs, film score, screenwriting, etc. With the unity of all these smaller components, filmmakers are really able to create imaginary worlds that the everyday person can escape to. And with the advent of digital manipulation and special effects, filmmakers can really create something that was unimaginable at the time that the essay was originally written.

            Technology has also certainly changed the way music is created and listened to! As a music technology minor, I know that technology could really be used to alter and capture sounds, which can then be used to create a work of art that shows the listener the beauty of sounds and acoustics. With so many different types of microphones and methods of using the microphones (using multiple microphones, angles, directions, room acoustics, distance from the source, etc.), the possibilities for recording a sample are ENDLESS. Also, with the creation of computer programs such as logic, bias peak, c-sound, and max-msp, one can really create NEW sounds that could only be imagined in the past. And with programs that can harvest and alter overtones (one component that can really alter timbre), one can create an even larger amount of new sounds!

            With the dawn of youtube and other media distribution sites, as well as digital music on ipods with the cheap white earbuds, the way people listen to music has changed. I feel that people don’t quite listen to music as carefully anymore; it is usually something that people would play in the background when they do other work (in fact, I’m listening to Eric Whitacre’s album “Cloudburst” right as I am writing this!). In other words, people listen to music passively. With youtube as well, it is so easy to distribute music, and with so many “videos” (of the song/piece), people can just easily browse through everything with the click of a mouse. As with film and photography, almost anyone can create something that is artistic, yet at the same time, there are also possibilities for “low quality” works.

            All in all, I think this all ties back to the message that Benjamin was trying to get across—that technology could really change the way people create and consume art, and it can both be positive and negative; it all pretty much depends on how utilize technology to consume and create media.

The Running Fence: Process vs. Final Product

            The Running Fence is a process-based artwork created by Christo and Jeanne-Claude, which started in 1972 until it was taken down after being completed for two weeks in 1976. When the artwork was initially proposed, many people disagreed with the concept of it and wanted to prevent the execution of the work, as it is unlike any piece of traditional art that ordinary people have experienced before. People were quick to accuse the proposal, claiming it to be tasteless, pointless, and a waste of time and money. On the contrary, this work is so much more than a simple physical structure in space. When one looks beyond the fact that the work is only a colossal fence, one will begin to understand that this work brings together a whole community and shows everyone the pure essence of humanity and the beauty and nuances of the community—whether it be the people or the surrounding landscape—that people fail to realize upon first glance.
            This work utilizes 5 of the 13 content carriers: accompanied text, medium, scale, duration, and context. The title of the piece is called Running Fence, which helps describe what the colossal structure is: it is a fence that runs along the hills of the Sonoma and Marin Counties in California for 24 miles. The name also gives the work an active image, as it runs from one place to the next; it is more than just a stagnant object that is taking up space. The running image is also used to outline one of the purposes of the work: to show the beauty of the context that it is in—the landscape—as the fence runs along the hills. Christo and Jean-Claude specifically chose that particular area to execute their work because of the rolling hills and the sheer beauty of the yellowing country landscape that is juxtaposed by the vast azure Pacific. The physical object itself—the white curtains—emphasizes the colors of the sky as the sun rises and sets, and the movement of the curtains shows the movement of the wind as it passes through. Just the fact that this work is a structure shows that it is something to be beheld by the audience, as it something that is physically in existence rather than an abstract concept. The vastness of the fence helps emphasize the beauty of the area: it is so much more than just a small snippet land, but it’s really the whole landscape that is beautiful. The duration of the work also adds meaning to the work. By taking a few years to set up, it really allows the community members to work the land and really appreciate the landscape. The two weeks that it is up allows the public to take notice of the work as well as all that surrounds it, as the fence runs along the natural contours of the hills. Once the work is taken down, it really allows everyone to see the land in a different way than before and truly appreciate the land for what it is.
            Even though there seems to be a large emphasis in the final product of art, I believe that some of the content is also rooted in the process of creating the art. Christo and Jeanne-Claude toured the west coast and settled with that specific spot; the process of selection shows that careful consideration was given before choosing a spot for the execution of the work. The process of getting the work to be adopted by the community also adds to the content of the work. The struggle with the town council and with the law was necessary to juxtapose with the achievement that came afterward. Later, by bringing the whole community together (another point of scale) to work on this project, it emphasizes the collaborative efforts of humanity as it attempts to achieve a large task that cannot be achieved by one person alone. The process during the execution of the work would consist of a couple years of physical labor in the land. All in all, I think approximately 70% of the work is rooted in the materiality while 30% of the work is rooted in the process.
            Process is a very interesting factor in a piece of art. Many people are only focused on the final product, yet there is so much that happens during the course of the creation that adds to the meaning of a piece of work. By knowing the background information of a work, understanding the conception of the particular work, and keeping in mind all that the work has been through during its creation, so much content can be added to the work of art.
            I actually really enjoyed getting to know this piece of art. I suppose you can say I am very naïve: in the past I never quite appreciated forms of visual or conceptual art, as I never really saw a purpose in it. Yet, as we’re learning that the beauty of a piece of art does not merely lie in a final visual product, I have to say that it’s been a very eye-opening experience for me. By watching the documentary of the Running Fence, I’ve grown to appreciate that piece of art and all the work that was put into it. And I suppose the same can be said for music: I never quite appreciated contemporary music, but by understanding the importance of knowing the many aspects of content, I don’t think I can ever see music the same as I used to see it.

The Thinker (Test Post)

"[The Thinker] depicts a man in sober meditation battling a powerful internal struggle."
-Wikipedia :)

Greetings, and welcome to my blog! As this is my first time keeping a blog, I am unfamiliar with proper "blog etiquette." Do I keep my name and identity a secret? Is it required for me to pour my heart out in my blog posts, or should I keep my posts straight forward and at a minimum?

...Or are there no rules to comply with?

Anyway, this blog was created for the Music Composition course at Northwestern University called "Content," or, as I like to call it, "Musical Content." "Content" is simply too terse, haha ^^

A little bit about myself (without giving too much away, I suppose): I am an undergraduate music composition major at Northwestern University interested in writing educational music (as in, music for young school ensembles) with the goal of teaching middle school and high school students more than simply playing "notes and rhythms."

Through the course of this class, I wish to think more about the notion of "content" in music. Can words really be used to describe something that is so abstract to begin with? Can objective observations really be used to explain the functions and inner workings of something that is already so subjective to begin with? Is it possible to have something that is not concrete represent a concrete idea or thought?

What exactly is musical "content?"

Will I be able to take the knowledge that I learn from this class to write music that is meaningful, convincing, educational, and fun to students?

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see if I'll get these questions answered! Or perhaps these questions won't be answered at all, and if not, that is totally fine. I hope this class will help me grow as a composer :) And even if that doesn't quite happen...I hope this class will give me a whole new perspective of humanity, and ultimately, the things that comprise of this world.

Cheers!