Church of Acousmatic Truth
MANIFESTE
Ah, contemporary classical music—a domain that often feels like a self-congratulatory, hermetically sealed club. It’s hard not to raise an eyebrow at its obsession with intellectualism at the expense of visceral impact, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the legacy of Pierre Boulez.
The man was undeniably a genius of structure and technique, but his music often feels like a masterclass in alienation.
One gets the sense that Boulez viewed emotion as a vulgar intrusion into his pristine sound-world, and that any audience foolish enough to desire a human connection should be exiled to the barbarous lands of Romanticism.
Boulez's relentless advocacy for serialism and his quasi-dictatorial influence over the direction of 20th-century music created an unfortunate monoculture. His disdain for approaches that embraced tonal ambiguity, let alone outright tonal centers, pushed countless composers to contort themselves into his rigid mold or risk irrelevance.
Music became more about proving one’s intellectual bona fides than embracing the sheer joy and chaos of sound.
Contrast this with musique concrète—finally, a branch of contemporary music that dared to shatter the ivory tower and embrace the messy, wonderful cacophony of the world.
Musique concrète said: "Why limit yourself to the notes you can squeeze out of an orchestra when the entire sonic universe is at your fingertips?" It reveled in the raw material of life: the hiss of a tape, the hum of a fridge, the roar of a train, and the voice of an ordinary person.
In musique concrète, every sound is a potential protagonist, not just those sanctioned by a score.
There's something deeply democratic and infinitely rich about that philosophy. It says that music doesn't have to be esoteric; it can be found in the rumble of the everyday, accessible to anyone with ears and imagination.
Where Boulez often turned his back on the visceral, musique concrète embraced it. Sure, there was structure and experimentation in the work of pioneers like Pierre Schaeffer, but it was structure in service of exploration, not exclusion.
It celebrated texture, nuance, and the unexpected beauty of the ordinary—a reminder that the world itself is a kind of vast, vibrating symphony.
Perhaps contemporary classical music could use a little less Boulezian orthodoxy and a little more concrète openness to possibility.
Instead of erecting walls around "serious" music, we could open the doors to the richness of the everyday sounds that surround us, the ones Boulez might have deemed too banal to consider. After all, isn't the point of music to connect us to the world, not wall us off from it?
My Cool Links
© 1997 CRMI Productions. Made with love and HTML 3.2