JoeinAR 1,949 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 Jurassic Shark 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Score 770 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, Steve McQueen said: Am I wrong, or is he commending Williams for taking a diverse array of influences (Jazz, Stravinsky, Ravel, Massenett) into unique music that has broad public appeal? @Bespin? @Chewy? Correct. Immediately before that, he also said something like "he opened to the wide public and audience the music of the 20th century", and that he (Desplat) finds it fantastic. A very nice comment. SteveMc and TownerFan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bespin 8,480 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 He's says he will never be able to write better music than John Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Stu 15,495 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 Self-honesty is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,055 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 John Williams is The Man. - Jurassic Shark, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy 2,388 Posted December 11, 2018 Share Posted December 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Steve McQueen said: Am I wrong, or is he commending Williams for taking a diverse array of influences (Jazz, Stravinsky, Ravel, Massenett) into unique music that has broad public appeal? @Bespin? @Chewy? That's exactly what he said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toothless 963 Posted December 12, 2018 Share Posted December 12, 2018 14 hours ago, Score said: Correct. Immediately before that, he also said something like "he opened to the wide public and audience the music of the 20th century", and that he (Desplat) finds it fantastic. A very nice comment. Yep. He also says that Williams managed to merge in his music various styles that you would not think about and that it made people listen to something they would not have listened otherwise. Score 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TheUlyssesian 2,478 Posted December 30, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 30, 2018 Has this been posted? Desplat: John Williams' Catch Me If You can should have won everything. His opening titles is forever. Just for that he should have had the oscar. Done. Genius. Once, SteveMc, Will and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbellamy 6,278 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Not sure if it was ever posted here but I do remember that interview/quote at the time. “It’s forever,” perfect. Desplat certainly worships Williams, it’s very sweet. Few more here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TheUlyssesian 2,478 Posted January 27, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 27, 2019 Patrick Doyle asked to pick his top 3 scores ever: The Godfather, E.T. and Close Encounters. SteveMc, Once, Locrius and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasey Kockroach 2,344 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 No one asks me my top 3 scores, what's Patrick Doyle got that I don't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMc 2,674 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 A Scottish accent. Kasey Kockroach and Incanus 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 A relative measure of fame and succes? Kasey Kockroach and Ollie 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incanus 5,714 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 5 hours ago, SteveMc said: A Scottish accent. Indeed. Charming Scottish brogue, the key to his success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 11 hours ago, TheUlyssesian said: Patrick Doyle asked to pick his top 3 scores ever: The Godfather, E.T. and Close Encounters. I'm sure Stepmom was a close 4th. artguy360, mrbellamy and Bayesian 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,055 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, crumbs said: I'm sure Stepmom was a close 4th. Follow by Rosewood! 11 hours ago, TheUlyssesian said: Patrick Doyle asked to pick his top 3 scores ever: The Godfather, E.T. and Close Encounters. I wonder when those scores will get proper rereleases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewya 360 Posted March 6, 2019 Author Share Posted March 6, 2019 Just found this, some old comments on Williams by Nico Muhly: "Movies with scores by John Williams are always satisfying; it’s always just interesting enough that you don’t want to kill yourself and always splashy enough that you feel like you are In the Movies. So, that’s fun. I think he’s the only person who can even come close to doing an okay job of ytt.]" "I do like those John Williams scores because he knows his way around the orchestra, and he knows his way around character development through music." I can't find the exact comment right now, but I also think he said something among the lines that the Star Wars scores work fine in the films, but on their own, he is not really eager to listen to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,055 Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, Lewya said: I think he’s the only person who can even come close to doing an okay job of ytt. What's ytt? 4 minutes ago, Lewya said: I can't find the comment, but I also think he said something among the lines that the Star Wars scores work fine in the films, but on their own, he is not really eager to listen to them. I'm not eager to listen to Nico Muhly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewya 360 Posted March 6, 2019 Author Share Posted March 6, 2019 I also found this about Andrew Norman and his connection to Williams - Star Wars in particular - perhaps the leading American composer of his generation. LOS ANGELES — When Andrew Norman was growing up, “Star Wars” was the only film his family owned on video. “We watched it every weekend for, seriously, years on end,” he said in October, during a short hike up a steep hill near his home. Fascinated by John Williams’s classic score, Mr. Norman decided when he was young that he wanted to be a composer. Little on the surface of “Split” resembles Mr. Williams’s scores, but Mr. Norman’s symphonic works are suffused with cinematic scope. “It’s all swirling around in my head,” Mr. Norman said of his childhood fascination with “Star Wars” and video games. “But I think it has more to do with storytelling, now, than the actual musical gestures.” https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/arts/music/andrew-norman-on-loving-star-wars-and-pushing-musical-boundaries.html ["Norman was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan, but grew up in Modesto, California. His father was an evangelical pastor; in childhood, Norman played keyboards in church bands. It was repeated viewings of Star Wars, with John Williams’s thrilling score, that first attracted him to the idea of composing. Lush neo-Romanticism infused much of his early work, which received performances at the Modesto Symphony. As his education proceeded, first at USC and then at the Yale School of Music, he underwent a crisis: His encounters with masterpieces of modernism caused him to reject what he had done up to that point and to doubt his forward path. In an interview with William Robin, for the New York Times, Norman recalled telling a professor: “I would rather quit composing, period, than be viewed as a neo-Romantic, or a reactionary, or a naïve composer.” The problem is a common one among young composers: how to find a voice that absorbs contemporary currents while retaining the expressive urgency that drew you to composing in the first place. In a series of works in the first decade of the 21st century—the orchestral piece Sacred Geometry; Gran Turismo, for eight violins; and an extended trio titled A Companion Guide to Rome—Norman not only solved this problem but found a voice singularly his own. He is the rare living composer whom you can recognize from just a few bars of an unknown piece. At the heart of a typical Norman passage, you find straightforward harmonic or melodic materials. For example, the final movement of Play is based around a bright little squiggle in the key of A major. But such half-familiar fragments are thrown into a kaleidoscopic swirl, fragmenting and reconstituting themselves before one’s ears. An almost childlike simplicity is folded into musical processes of dizzying energy and complexity..." https://www.musicalamerica.com/features/?fid=321&fyear=2017] 22 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said: What's ytt? Should be *it I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toothless 963 Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Did not know where to post this... Fabulin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted March 9, 2019 Share Posted March 9, 2019 What is John Williams saying about other composers? What are composers saying about other John Williamses? If Cinderella's shoe fit perfectly, why did it fall off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewya 360 Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 Michael Daugherty: "The wonderful music of John Williams is old school: you hear counterpoint, counter melodies, great orchestrations, changes of tempo and rubatos. I must say, I miss the old days of film music; the scores of Alfred Newman, Max Steiner and Bernard Herrmann for example. That way of composing virtuosic film music may come back someday, but at the moment we are in a very technologically driven world of film music, that, in my personal opinion, has inhibited the creative possibilities." Joni Wiljami 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TownerFan 4,983 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 On 3/13/2019 at 6:07 PM, Lewya said: Michael Daugherty: "The wonderful music of John Williams is old school: you hear counterpoint, counter melodies, great orchestrations, changes of tempo and rubatos. I must say, I miss the old days of film music; the scores of Alfred Newman, Max Steiner and Bernard Herrmann for example. That way of composing virtuosic film music may come back someday, but at the moment we are in a very technologically driven world of film music, that, in my personal opinion, has inhibited the creative possibilities." That's a beautiful quote. Where did you find it? Jurassic Shark 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewya 360 Posted March 14, 2019 Author Share Posted March 14, 2019 https://michaeldaughertycomposer.com/interviews/michael-daugherty-discusses-his-creative-process-with-robert-raines/ TownerFan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewya 360 Posted May 1, 2020 Author Share Posted May 1, 2020 This is the first comment I have ever seen from Philip Glass on John Williams. A stupid interviewer by the way. Philip Glass on John Williams (from 2002) - Glass basically said that Williams is very talented, but not an inventor - he writes his music by just creating new packaging, not inventing a new musical language. Interviewer: Arrived in the 21st century, the best-known and most creative composers of classical music mainly work in Hollywood. Would you confirm any influence from them? Glass: No. We're talking about composers who discover something new, who invent it, who develop a new musical language. Interviewer: And Williams, Horner, Zimmer? Glass: No, no. They just repack things, they recombine. But inventing and recombining are very different things. It's the same in pop music, not everyone just recombines, there are inventors there too, you just have to know the difference. Bob Dylan, that's an inventor. Just like Paul Simon, the Beach Boys in the 60s / 70s or Frank Zappa - something really new was invented. John Williams, James Horner, they are very talented, but they are not inventors, they write their music by just creating new packaging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 So what is innovative these days? Joker? Thanks, I'll take the repackaging. Edmilson and crlbrg 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,055 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 Glass hasn't been inventive since decades ago, now he just repackages his own mannerisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Thor 7,493 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 4 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said: Glass hasn't been inventive since decades ago, now he just repackages his own mannerisms. That is true. The recent TALES FROM THE LOOP score is, in fact, an example of Glass approximating Max Richter's approximation of Glass. But the interview is from 2002, he was more cutting edge then. It's in circumstances like the above that someone should just put IMAGES on the table for him to behold. That being said, there is definitely a need for innovation and invention, but that's only one criterion by which to judge music, and sometimes not even the most important one. Many times, it's just as important to play around with conventions to create an emotional response based on expectations. We would have an incredibly stale musical landscape if invention was always the only legitimate criterion. aviazn, crlbrg, Bayesian and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,055 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Thor said: That is true. The recent TALES FROM THE LOOP score is, in fact, an example of Glass approximating Max Richter's approximation of Glass. But the interview is from 2002, he was more cutting edge then. I wouldn't say he was much inventive back then either, but at least he wasn't as self-plagiarizing as he's been the last decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 Wow, massive amount of respect lost for Glass off the back of snobbish comments like that. Since when was inventiveness the only criteria upon which to judge someone's music? Oh, but they're "talented," how thoroughly patronizing. And as for the interviewer? 12 hours ago, Lewya said: Interviewer: And Williams, Horner, Zimmer? Well, that question alone speaks volumes about his intellect on the subject. SteveMc, Martinland, Arpy and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Marian Schedenig 8,191 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 42 minutes ago, crumbs said: Wow, massive amount of respect lost for Glass off the back of snobbish comments like that. Since when was inventiveness the only criteria upon which to judge someone's music? Oh, but they're "talented," how thoroughly patronizing. That quote is of course taken out of context, but nowhere in what's been posted above does he say that inventiveness is the only criterion, or necessary, or that he has no respect for "talent". It's certainly true that Glass's primary claim to fame is his co-invention of "minimalism" and his very distinct style. Williams is a master at what he does, and that includes writing themes, dramatic structures, orchestration, and changing his style according to the needs of the film (often radically - see Images and Rosewood). But in the grand scheme of things, "invention" isn't what he does. Joni Wiljami, SteveMc, KK and 6 others 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Stu 15,495 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 Just now, Marian Schedenig said: That quote is of course taken out of context, but nowhere in what's been posted above does he say that inventiveness is the only criterion, or necessary, or that he has no respect for "talent". It's certainly true that Glass's primary claim to fame is his co-invention of "minimalism" and his very distinct style. Williams is a master at what he does, and that includes writing themes, dramatic structures, orchestration, and changing his style according to the needs of the film (often radically - see Images and Rosewood). But in the grand scheme of things, "invention" isn't what he does. The rational post I was too lazy to write, thank you! Marian Schedenig and Miguel Andrade 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor 7,493 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 25 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: That quote is of course taken out of context, but nowhere in what's been posted above does he say that inventiveness is the only criterion, or necessary, or that he has no respect for "talent". No, but it's inherent in the quote. All the context we have is the interview; if there was anything else said, we don't know it. While he doesn't say it's the ONLY criterion, he puts unnecessary stress on it, compared to the other things. Otherwise, there would be no point mentioning it in the first place. 25 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: It's certainly true that Glass's primary claim to fame is his co-invention of "minimalism" and his very distinct style. Williams is a master at what he does, and that includes writing themes, dramatic structures, orchestration, and changing his style according to the needs of the film (often radically - see Images and Rosewood). But in the grand scheme of things, "invention" isn't what he does. Exactly. Williams' qualities lie elsewhere. That's what Glass fails to comprehend, or "embrace", to so speak. crumbs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Thor said: No, but it's inherent in the quote. All the context we have is the interview; if there was anything else said, we don't know it. While he doesn't say it's the ONLY criterion, he puts unnecessary stress on it, compared to the other things. Otherwise, there would be no point mentioning it in the first place. The rational post I was too lazy to write, thank you! Seriously though, I see your point @Marian Schedenig. I just found his comments totally dismissive of what Williams has achieved as a composer, and found his analogy to pop music writers particularly condescending. That is just my interpretation of his comments and yes, they could well be taken out of context. I'd be curious to hear the complete interview. Arpy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Marian Schedenig 8,191 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 You're putting words in his mouth. He was asked a specific question, and he answered that question. More than that, Glass's entire M.O. (modus operandi) suggests that he himself is more interested in invention than in some other aspects of the art, so groundbreaking, inventive composers will naturally be the more interesting to him, or close to his heart. But that still doesn't imply a disregard for those whose focus lies elsewhere. Unless we want to deride Glass for not counting Williams among his favourite composers. Which would be absurd (but not always quite against some tendencies on this board). oierem, Miguel Andrade and Jurassic Shark 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor 7,493 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: You're putting words in his mouth. He was asked a specific question, and he answered that question. More than that, Glass's entire M.O. (modus operandi) suggests that he himself is more interested in invention than in some other aspects of the art, so groundbreaking, inventive composers will naturally be the more interesting to him, or close to his heart. But that still doesn't imply a disregard for those whose focus lies elsewhere. No, I get that, but it is that very attitude that IMO limits the scope of what music is, and can be. He's free to have his preference, of course, but the way he talks about 're-packaging' and 're-combination' for anyone that isn't 'inventive' is highly derogatory and surprisingly ignorant. It's his choice of words that are problematic here, the rhetoric. Arpy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 12 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: But that still doesn't imply a disregard for those whose focus lies elsewhere. Look, context is everything, but to me these comments are dismissive of his work: Quote They just repack things, they recombine ... John Williams, James Horner, they are very talented, but they are not inventors, they write their music by just creating new packaging. Yes, the questions in this interview are specific to the topic of inventiveness, but Glass disregards the occasions where Williams has written original music not derived from existing works. I'm not saying Williams hasn't taken inspiration from the masters of classical music (because clearly he has), I just feel Glass' response (and his pop song analogy) was dismissive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Lewya 360 Posted May 1, 2020 Author Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 5 minutes ago, crumbs said: I'd be curious to hear the complete interview. Here is the full interview (http://www.planet-interview.de/interviews/philip-glass/33560/ in German, I used Google translate so not every thing is spot on): Glass hasn't even seen Titanic by the way and was annoyed by it. Composer Philip Glass about composing, writing, about Hollywood composers who don't invent anything and about his taxi license Interviewer: Mr. Glass, how many hours have you composed today? Glass: When I'm traveling, like right now, yes, I write quite often and a lot. But even if I have a quiet hotel room, I can hardly compose more than four hours a day. Interviewer: Is there a daily workload that you prescribe yourself? Glass: No, I don't prescribe anything, but I have a lot to do. I always have to deliver my works at a certain time, there is no way around it. When I'm at home in the United States, I usually work ten to twelve hours a day. I start at 8 a.m. and stop at about 11 a.m. But I have lunch and dinner with my family - for me it is a normal, pleasant family life. Interviewer: Twelve hours, every day is not a little. Glass: Yes, maybe. I have finished four projects since last December. The film music for "Naqoyqatsi", the third part of the trilogy by Godfrey Reggio, a piece for Broadway "The Elephant Man", then the music for "The Hours", a film with Nicole Kidman, a bit more mainstream. And I have just finished working on my opera "Galileo Galilei". That may be a lot, but the fact is that I really like all of these projects. I could have canceled a project, but no, I wanted to do them all. I am like a child on a child's birthday who always wants to eat the whole cake alone. Interviewer: When you compose, create new works, are you always looking for a new musical language? Glass: I think I had a pronounced musical language very early on, which then changed again and again. If you look at "Einstein on the Beach" in 1969 and then the music that I write today, there is a huge difference. For example, when I write the film music "Naqoyqatsi" today, it is a challenge because it has to be different than my music for "Koyaanisqatsi" or "Powaqatsi". On the other hand, I always have the same tools that I have to change a little for every film. Or let's take "The Elephant Man", a very specific stage play, which is a big challenge for me. Because every theater project has its specific requirements and the music has to function differently for each project. So working on the theater always gives me the opportunity to take on a new challenge and that means that I have to keep reshaping my musical language. In other words, my music for "The Elephant Man" wouldn't match "" Galileo Galilei "at all, it just wouldn't work. When I started Galileo, I had just finished working on" Elephant Man "an hour earlier , but I was wearing a different shirt, so to speak. Interviewer: And were there moments in your composer career when the shirt did not fit? Glass: Yes. But I will say that now in retrospect. I play about 40 concerts a year with the ensemble that I played with for the first time in 1968. I often use the opportunity to play my early works. And then I realize that this music has tremendous energy, but that it is written in a way that I can no longer do today. Then my brain changed. Playing my early works is always like a journey through time, but I also notice that the audience is now much more interested in my old music than it was when I wrote the pieces. Interviewer: What were your expectations in that regard at that time? Glass: When I wrote "Einstein on the Beach" in my 30s, I had a relatively large audience. I was very happy about that, but I didn't expect it at all. I started with my ensemble in 1969 in front of a very small audience. I never expected to become a famous composer. I no longer believed in the existence of an underground composer, just the type who writes all his life for a small group of passionate fans, no longer. That was at 32. When "Einstein" came and later "Koyaanisqatsi", when I was 41, I was really surprised. Of course I was very happy because it meant that I could live a life as a composer. Because up to my 42nd year I had a part-time job, actually nothing unusual for the conditions in the USA. I had decided not to become a music teacher or professor, even though I had the necessary academic degree. That would have put me too far from my job as a musician. I say that for me. Others can write and teach music, some even very well. But I can be schizophrenic. So I had to earn my money differently, and I thought I would have to do it my whole life. The view changed for the first time when I received the order for my opera "Satyagraha" from the Dutch Opera Rotterdam and shortly afterwards the order for "Akhnaten" from Stuttgart. Only then did I see that I can live from composing. But, I wasn't sure yet. So I extended my taxi license for two more years until I was 43. Interviewer: Wow! Glass: No, I didn't have to use it at the time, but I always had it in my pocket - for safety. The next extension was due when I was 45 - I left it there. Interviewer: Would you recommend the taxi license to a young American composer today? Glass: Yes, that's one of the best ways. The streets are a bit dangerous, of course, that's right. But you can drive your hours whenever you want. I was registered as a taxi driver, but if I wanted to go on tour for three weeks, I just did it, the taxi center didn't care. It's not a particularly stable job either. When I needed money, I went to the headquarters and got the keys. As a taxi driver, you also have no boss, apart from the passengers, of course. But when I didn't like them, sometimes I just got out, finished and left - I had my own strategy. I liked driving a taxi, I could also take a taxi at night, which I did a lot. Only, New York, the city and the streets are not safe. I was also glad that I no longer had to drive. Interviewer: What is your favorite car to drive today? Glass: Oh, I have no idea. We have other cars than yours in Europe, I know that much. But my wife hasn't let me behind the wheel for a while, she always takes the keys away from me. She thinks I'm a terrible driver. And I have to say: she is right. If you ever come to New York, take a taxi. Interviewer: I will surely get to know a number of composers. Glass: Not only composers, many authors, actors and filmmakers drive taxis in New York. Interviewer: So a composition student shouldn't have too high hopes for a full-time job as a composer? Glass: It is possible, but very difficult. I would definitely encourage the student to try it. But I also tell him that he must always enjoy his work, his music and his life as a composer, at any point and at any time. Because if only success - especially financial - brings him joy, he won't get very far. Above all, I advise young composers to keep playing their music. I think that the only way for a composer to get attention in any way is that the music has to be performed, people have to listen to it. If we leave this decision to our music to others, no one will hear it. Then you have to send your music to the orchestras, you have to wait for the answer, it takes a long time and does nothing. By the way, my son is also a musician. I told him that he should take pleasure in what he does. Because it could be that the great career does not come to anything. Whether he will be discovered one day as a great singer or songwriter - we don't know. Interviewer: Some of your contemporaries among the composers write a lot, generally about music, but also specifically about their works. Do you like to write about music? Glass: No, not necessarily. Some composers are quite good at it, and they also like writing books about music, especially about their music. I only wrote a book and today I write a few articles every now and then. It takes a lot of time to write. And when I ask myself whether I should write a book or a new piece of music, the answer is quickly found. Interviewer: Do you think that a concert audience should understand every new work, even without explanations by the composer? Glass: What does 'understand' mean? Let's take repertoire music, Schubert, Brahms or Mahler, if you ask the audience if they 'understand' the music - most of them can't read music at first, and if you specifically ask them about a work, they may hardly know anything about it. It may be a little different in Europe, but in the United States the audience is not so educated. But the audience can really like the music. My father is the best example: he loved music very much, the most different styles, but he could not read music or knew anything about music, in a technical sense. As for writing, especially ideological, that's a small industry in Germany, isn't it? Interviewer: Why in Germany of all places? Glass: I don't know, but when I travel I see a lot of how people live and how they work. And in Germany I noticed that there are many scientists. who write about music, not just at universities and colleges. Why not, after all there is an audience for it. But if you published a book on the theory of minimal music in the USA, hardly anyone would read it. Interviewer: And you don't mind that people in your home country are not so interested in these aspects? Glass: No, I don't mind. On the contrary, it also means that I don't have to write these books. I'm actually happy about that, so I finally have more time to compose. I think you have to see these things in the context of the social environment. If I were a composer in Germany, I would probably also have to write something about music so people don't think I am an idiot. At home, nobody expects that from me. I also have no natural need to do this. Writing may be good enough to train the brain, but it doesn't make me a better composer. Interview: Who are the most influential composers of the 20th century for you? Glass: In the beginning it was definitely Debussy, Schönberg and Stravinsky, these three. And everyone was equally important. For me personally, Debussy had a greater influence than Schoenberg, but everyone wanted to approach the problem of creating order in the world of tonality - the end of romanticism, the dissolution of tonality, it had all caused a lot of confusion. Everyone has found different ways, new ways of composition. There followed a period of 50, 60 years in which people worked on these ideas and many wonderful works were created. Next I find John Cage important and influential. He started a new discussion about music in the 1960s that changed music a lot. His own music was hardly ever played - he was just one of those who wrote books about music. And we composers have read these books rather than the normal audience. His generation of composers was very influenced by his thoughts. Interviewer: Arrived in the 21st century, the best-known and most creative composers of classical music mainly work in Hollywood. Would you confirm any influence from them? Glass: No. We're talking about composers who discover something new, who invent it, who develop a new musical language. Interviewer: And Williams, Horner, Zimmer? Glass: No, no. They just repack things, they recombine. But inventing and recombining are very different things. It's the same in pop music, not everyone just recombines, there are inventors there too, you just have to know the difference. Bob Dylan, that's an inventor. Just like Paul Simon, the Beach Boys in the 60s / 70s or Frank Zappa - something really new was invented. John Williams, James Horner, they are very talented, but they are not inventors, they write their music by just creating new packaging. Interviewer: Are you watching the films that use this music? "Titanic" for example, have you seen it? Glass: No. I was very annoyed about "Titanic" anyway, because it was the year that "Kundun" was nominated for four Oscars, also for my film music. (James Horner won the Oscar for Best Film Music with his score for "Titanic", editor's note). I've met James many times, as well as Danny Elfman or Elmer Bernstein. I also play concerts in L.A. every year, in the past few years these have been mostly projects where we played live music for films. They often come to my concerts. Then I can’t avoid them either, I don’t want to, because we have a good friendship. They master their craft very well, but they don't invent anything. Interviewer: When I was talking to Michael Nyman about two years ago, he was very disappointed that he hadn't yet received an Oscar for his film music. Glass: I don't think Michael has even been nominated yet. Interviewer: Indeed, but why are composers like Mr. Nyman or Philip Glass so keen on the Oscar? Glass: You don't know? - You really don't know? It's clearly about money, money and more money (laughs). Let's take my studio in New York, there is a recording studio and there is the publishing house, ten permanent employees. My studio has become a very productive place for me to write film music, to stage a stage, an opera - but I need assistants and people who take care of everything. This is my small business, which I ultimately finance through my music. I don't get any money from the government, but not in the United States, there is no money that would be available to us composers. So the money comes in through orders, performances, all my activities. And film scores - I've already written a few - they take a lot less time than an opera, for example. But they bring just as much money. But it is very rarely the case with film that you are musically free. "Kundun" was such a film, where I had a completely free hand musically and could do what I wanted. Martin Scorsese gave me a blank check, so to speak. An ideal situation, I worked in a commercial context, but had my artistic freedom. Unfortunately, this does not happen very often. But I want to mention another aspect of the Oscar for film music: last year, Tan Dun was awarded for his music for "Tiger & Dragon", a Chinese composer from the Beijing Conservatory. The previous year was won by John Corigliano, a composition teacher at the Julliard School, a very well-known music college in the USA. So these are composers who don't have much to do with Hollywood. But the Academy Award is now part of popular culture. And not many composers enter and leave this world. I very much respect what Tan Dun has achieved because on the one hand he won this prize, but on the other hand he continues to write operas. It's easy to go to Hollywood and stay there. Coming and going as you want, however, is extremely difficult. Interviewer: Critics have already referred you to the corner of popular culture, every now and then you read about the 'pop star' Philip Glass. Have you ever seen or felt like a pop star? Glass: It's easy. For example, if Paul Simon sells 2,000,000 records, I sell 20,000. So I'm two decimal places from Paul, two zeros. It may be that I get as much space in the newspaper, but the two decimal places do not change anything. If I were to sell 200,000, it would still be a decimal place. I've even sold some of my CDs over 200,000 times, but only a few. Yo-yo Ma, if he releases a record, he will surely sell 200,000 pieces. Is he a pop star now? Yes, he is a popular interpreter of classical music. He is also a very interesting man who tries to find new ways of interpreting classical music. Or Gidon Kremer, a pop star? Yes, maybe, look at how he reinvents the violin repertoire, the things he did with Piazzolla and what he did with me. There are obviously ambitions to develop something new, in the instrument and in the interpretation. But none of us have ever sold as many records as U2 - that's the reality. If U2 only sold 200,000 records, their record company would cancel the contract in no time. So: we exaggerate. But we exaggerate because we enjoy it. It's fun to say Philip Glass is a pop star, fun idea actually. But in the end I'm a composer of the sort that people know the name but not the music, or that they know the music but don't know who wrote it. I'm such a pop star. crumbs, Marian Schedenig and Taikomochi 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 Thanks @Lewya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 8,191 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 He's not saying Williams is writing the same thing over and over again. But he's right that in the grand scheme of things, Williams will not be remembered as a revolutionary, or for any particular innovation - he didn't "invent" the symphony, like Haydn, or establish his own tonal language like Wagner, Stravinsky, or Schoenberg, or in fact his own influential style like Glass. He does generally take what's there already, and "repackage" it in his own voice and with his own musical and dramatic instincts. That's not derogatory, it's a simple fact. Goldsmith, in his earlier years, was more inventive, and even he might not be that relevant in that regard outside of introducing things to film music which had already been pioneered outside the film world. It would be interesting to list other established composers throughout history who were not particularly inventive. It does seem that mostly those that are widely remembered and respected for their body of works (rather than a few individual highlights) are indeed those who brought something decidedly new to the table, but certainly there must be highly respected ones who were just excellent artists and craftsmen, even if they didn't invent something of significance. Remco and Miguel Andrade 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Disco Stu 15,495 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 1 minute ago, Marian Schedenig said: It would be interesting to list other established composers throughout history who were not particularly inventive. It does seem that mostly those that are widely remembered and respected for their body of works (rather than a few individual highlights) are indeed those who brought something decidedly new to the table, but certainly there must be highly respected ones who were just excellent artists and craftsmen, even if they didn't invent something of significance. Braaaaaahms Miguel Andrade, crlbrg and Remco 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheUlyssesian 2,478 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 8 minutes ago, Lewya said: "The Hours", a film with Nicole Kidman, a bit more mainstream This sentence made me laugh and gives you all the perspective you need. Glass is from literally a different universe compared to Williams with respect to the kind of projects they do and their sensibilities. That Glass would call a dour depressing movie about repressed female desire, AIDs and suicide to be mainstream is hilarious. Fabulin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SteveMc 2,674 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 42 minutes ago, crumbs said: and found his analogy to pop music writers particularly condescending. Well, this is coming from a guy who used a Bowie tune as the basis for a symphony. He respects singular musical expression, be it "classical" or "pop." Glass represents a sort of edgy anti establishment. For him, Williams does not fit in either the category of the staid, stiff serialists or the postmodern rebellion against them that Glass himself was part of. Williams and other film composers are in an odd place. In a criteria dynamic that demands originality and individuality, these composers are too tied in to traditional idioms and not larger than life and non-commercial enough as musical personalities to be fully accorded the respect they deserve. Edmilson, crumbs, Remco and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor 7,493 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 13 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: He's not saying Williams is writing the same thing over and over again. But he's right that in the grand scheme of things, Williams will not be remembered as a revolutionary, or for any particular innovation - he didn't "invent" the symphony, like Haydn, or establish his own tonal language like Wagner, Stravinsky, or Schoenberg, or in fact his own influential style like Glass. He does generally take what's there already, and "repackage" it in his own voice and with his own musical and dramatic instincts. That's not derogatory, it's a simple fact. Goldsmith, in his earlier years, was more inventive, and even he might not be that relevant in that regard outside of introducing things to film music which had already been pioneered outside the film world. I agree with your basic sentiment, but I'm surprised you don't see the derogatory quality of his comments (or in the rest of the interview, for that matter). If it's not in the lines, it's definitely between the lines of his rhetoric. Look, I'm a Glass fan, and I appreciate honest comments (much like Horner in the famed Schweiger interview). These comments also don't depreciate my value of his music (just as I don't depreciate the works of Terry Gilliam just because he seemingly hates the work of my favourite director Spielberg). But I think his limited view of what 'good' music is, shines through very much in this interview. crlbrg and crumbs 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 13 minutes ago, SteveMc said: Williams and other film composers are in an odd place. In a criteria dynamic that demands originality and individuality, these composers are too tied in to traditional idioms and not larger than life and non-commercial enough as musical personalities to be fully accorded the respect they deserve. Really interesting observation, thanks for this. Gotta say this has been a really enlightening discussion, especially with all the contrasting opinions. Just another reason this forum is so damn fantastic. Remco and SteveMc 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 8,191 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 12 minutes ago, Thor said: I agree with your basic sentiment, but I'm surprised you don't see the derogatory quality of his comments (or in the rest of the interview, for that matter). If it's not in the lines, it's definitely between the lines of his rhetoric. Look, I'm a Glass fan, and I appreciate honest comments (much like Horner in the famed Schweiger interview). These comments also don't depreciate my value of his music (just as I don't depreciate the works of Terry Gilliam just because he seemingly hates the work of my favourite director Spielberg). But I think his limited view of what 'good' music is, shines through very much in this interview. I don't see it as derogatory. It's music that's not very interesting or "important" within the criteria that Glass is interested in and looking for, and that's ok. I'm a Glass fan, and I will say that is own style is very distinct and quite limited. I'm sure he couldn't write a score for a Star Wars film (not that he'd want to), or many other kinds of "mainstream" films, simply because he isn't skilled in writing that way, because he never had an interest to develop that skill. But I don't see that as a derogatory description of him. KK 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 11 minutes ago, Thor said: If it's not in the lines, it's definitely between the lines of his rhetoric. I agree. In the full context of the interview, you could read between the lines of several other comments (like his annoyance at Titanic simply because it was the same year he was nominated for Kundun; he didn't even see the film but saw fit to reiterate his point that composers like Horner don't invent anything). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KK 3,307 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 Cheers @Marian Schedenig for being the rationalist of this thread. Saves some of us time. Glass' comments aren't so much derogatory as they are an honest reflection on his own priorities. Many artists are driven by questioning form, and convention. Asking oneself "why". And there's rarely ever space, time or money to ask such questions in a film studio. His own music came from a period that rejected the establishment and conventions of music-making. So it makes sense that the idea of challenging normative expectations is his priority and preference (even if his own music hasn't done that in years...which is also okay). And in the concert world, or even pop, you're creating autonomous music for music's sake, so you have more freedom in developing or pushing forward a language or a school of thought. In film music, you're serving a picture and a genre first. So, if you work hard and train well, you become a master technician like Williams, and become virtuosically adept at dipping into multiple traditions of music-making to serve the needs of the story at hand. And like Glass says, that's not to say there aren't "innovators" in these forms, but for the most part, Williams isn't one. And that's okay. That's all Glass' comments are really pointing to. Anything else is just a projection of Williams fanboy bias. Lewya, Remco, Sharkissimo and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 8,191 Posted May 1, 2020 Share Posted May 1, 2020 32 minutes ago, Disco Stu said: Braaaaaahms I've never been a big Brahms fan, and perhaps that's why I can't put my finger on what his innovation was, but he certainly must have been a driving force in advancing the symphonic form, considering he has always been the figurehead of the non-Wagner side of contemporary music of his time. I imagine the "nationalist" composers of the 19th century may qualify, because their main influence was to bring their own country's musical idioms to the table, i.e. their "invention" is mainly integrating existing styles and idioms into the symphonic settings developed by others. That would include people like Dvorak and Smetana, possibly Brahms (but see above). What about the Strauß dynasty? They were the pop composers of their time, but certainly highly skilled in their craft and influential in shaping the direction of popular music (perhaps closest to how Steiner operated in shaping film music). Like the "nationalist" composers, they're held in high regard in their own way, and frequently performed by top orchestras, but few would list them as revolutionary influences on the musical language of later composers. And perhaps Richard Strauss? I'm a big fan, and his style was certainly at the height of the tail end of the main Romantic era, but perhaps his most defining aspects are how he refined programmatic symphonic settings and (often together with important literary figures) operas. Like Puccini's lasting feat was helping to popularise verismo. Come to that, was Verdi groundbreaking in any way, or is he mainly a major example of successful nationalist composers? Miguel Andrade 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SteveMc 2,674 Posted May 1, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said: I've never been a big Brahms fan, and perhaps that's why I can't put my finger on what his innovation was, That's the point. He was not innovative, he just carried the cosmopolitan Beethoven torch against the winds of Wagnerian chromaticism and the various nationalistic trends you speak of. And his craft and arrangement of the language he was given continues to be respected. Verdi also did not innovate language wise, but a gifted melodist and dramatist is a gifted melodist and dramatist. Ditto Tchaikovsky. In fact, I think Williams's place in music is not dissimilar from Brahms' in musicology terms, and, in musical terms, he is a heir to Verdi and Tchaikovsky (and Copland). Taikomochi, Miguel Andrade, crlbrg and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now