art, sound, music, space , time... these are all things that are relative to one's own personal perception. You may listen to the wind howling between the trees and call it music, I call it white noise. To each his/her own.
@ROBJACKSONTOP WHAAAAT?U KNEW JOHN CAGE? WOW ROB I LOVE THIS GUY...I REMEMBER FLYING 2 FRANKFURT GERMANY HOW WE WAS DOING A GRAFFITI MURAL JUST BLASTING THAT SONG HE PLAYED THE PIANO WITH CALLED IN A LANDSCAPE...JOHN CAGE IS WORLD WIDE!!!
I don't get it, he says he wants the sounds to create a "sculpture" and then goes on to say he doesn't want the sounds to pretend to be a bucket. Don't sculpures pretend to be something? Please enlightenme, someone
WOW HE WAS IN NEWYORK? DID HE LIVED THERE? IM BORN AND RAISED IN NY AND STILL HERE..I WISH I WOULD,VE MET JOHN CAGE AT THAT TIME..IN 91 I WAS ONLY 17..I LOVE JOHN CAGE..IN A LANDSCAPE IS A CLASSIC
@SchmarrnVormBier I think Cage departs from music as sonic expression, favoring music as sonic activity. I agree, if I understand you correctly, that Cage's difficulties in understanding music (he admits as much with respect to hi studies of harmony) informed the direction he took. But I feel his direction was where his enthusiams took root --- so rather than merely avoiding and denegrating what he couldn't do, he actively sought out a new path, and with great love.
@SchmarrnVormBier So your view is that Cage's aesthetic direction was determined by his disability --- or by a resentment against the achievements of great composers?
I think he is someone who is passionate about sounds and that is something to admire, after all, passion of any sort is amazing. However this is more of a passion than a valuable insight.
If I saw a painting on the wall, I might catagorize it as art, but not philosophy. It may EXPRESS a philosophy, much as a word may express an idea, but a word is not an idea, and art is not philosophy.
@Jorbz150 I don't think you can earnestly approach Cages work without a realization that to him, the two are one. Otherwise you miss at least half the equation.
@aindrikovs I would beg to differ, since art is an autonomous realm of human expression and individual freedom, that connects and moves someone enough to translate its meaning and answer what it means to them. Cage has done that in this interview and in various of his literature.
@6pwner No, it is not. Art is created, and philosophy often comes from observation and analysis. Art may express philosophy, but it is not philosophy, nor philosophy art.
@aindrikovs why can't art be philosophy? Or philosophy, art? I don't see why they have to be mutually exclusive; certainly they don't have to be the same at all times, but they don't have to be separate at all times either.
@aindrikovs I agree. In fact, Cage has often been called a musical philospher than a composer. How could he possibly have "composed" 4'33"? He didn't, he thought of it :).
@sinatrabone what about Marcel Duchamp's Fountain? whatever the position, it's still a urinol. like silence. it is what we call it, until we give it another meaning. then it's art
@327409427 If you follow Cage's own example, you take responsibility for your own dislikes, and question them. Rather than simply "moving on" you move through the dislike. You ask yourself why you cannot enjoy these sounds. You ask if there is any way to come to enjoy them. It is listening itself that is beautiful, rather than music --- is Cage's attitude. So if you don't like Cage --- ask yourself why. I am ready to discuss Cage with most anyone. His music is an enigma.
an sculpture needs materials to exist, a picture needs paint to exist, music needs sound, and even more, a certain form or structure to exist. Music depends on some IDEA that holds it together because it is made of a material that we can't see or touch, and that is the magic of music: it is lost in time and somehow remains in our memory. Music is the art of expressing something through sound you useless A-hole. Your work is either bad music or it is simply not music. It is trash.
@1udwi6 You started with some kind of argument, then you defaced it with name calling. Why? I imagine you are offended by Cage's offerings. Any thoughts?
@theamazingtoot Cage is very well known. And as for noise being a part of music or not, there are numerous examples of noises being used in popular music, or in popular music becoming a kind of noise in and of itself. The question of noise versus music is worthy of more careful consideration. Consider how various sounds and noises can become pleasing. Or consider how annoying music can be in different circumstances, bothering us even more than some other noises. Neighbor's music,
Well in a way the sound of traffic directly reflect what it is - sometime it's chaos - sometime just long droning sounds... emotions or ''states'' can be understood - there are different kind of traffic and they do different sounds.
Why would a person who harboured such deep hatred for music be a composer? Everyone included himself would be better off if he stuck to picking mushrooms.
@DaCapo2010 He has a different notion of music, I don't think it's necessarily hatred. You could possibly see it as an almost completely different form of art using the same basic means, namely sound.
@Duuuuuuuuuudeeee Different? No doubt. Valid? You got to be kidding! He believed that random noise is more interesting than compositions that are composed to express something. While its perfectly fine to hold such beliefs, it begs the question: why did he bother to compose at all? The very act of composing contradicts his own beliefs and what he just said in this clip.
Of all western composers past and present John Cage is the only one I can say unequivocally is a fraud.
@DaCapo2010 He really is not a fraud. There was a serious purpose in what Cage did, though the humor in doing such things was not lost on him. Given the beliefs Cage had, though, your question is a serious one. Why did he bother to compose at all? He did not merely compose, he composed a lot. He was very active, and very disciplined as well. Do you suppose a charlatan without a serious purpose would have been as comitted as he? That is a question equally as serious as the one you asked.
@DaCapo2010 I think you take his "hatred of music" too seriously. It was rather, that he preferred the experience of listening with a kind of intensity of openness to listening for things he could expect, such as one finds in the various idioms of music. Yet he also loved music, and from a very early age was very interested in perhaps discovering or inventing something new for music. I think what he discovered was non-music, and a means of applying non-musical sound possibilities.
@periclesolon If liking the music of John Cage and similar composers makes me pretentious then so be it. I'm pretentious and loving it. Go fuck yourself if you think there's something inherently bad about being pretentious.
He prefers nature to art. If one is an artist, and one feels this way, it puts the artist in an awkward position. It is a paradoxical situation. Cage speaks from this position and works from this position. And this can lead to misunderstandings on the part of the public. I also think it may easily lead to misunderstandings on the part of the artist himself --- or non-understandings. So Cage is fair game for criticism as far as I am concerned. But do the critics understand Cage's dilema?
John Cage was not a real artist, rather a court jester. He was an influencial figure but this is no longer relevant. Music will always consist of tones and noises which are organised and have some aesthetic value.
@K0MP0NIST "Music will always consist of tones and noises which are organised and have some aesthetic value." Do the tones and noises have aesthetic value? Or does their organization have the value, or does the organization lend to the sounds/noises their aesthetic value? Or can appreciation of beauty come from other sources? Do you not enjoy sounds that are not subordinated to the plans of a composer? Rain? other sounds?
Cage just seems so content with things just as they are, yet he helped change the world of art and music. His love for sounds and his kindness give me hope that someday, I will meet someone like him. One of the greatest musicians/philosophers of this century.
His candid outlook on ambient sound is probably one of the most foundational forms of artistic appreciation; appreciation for the art found (or heard) in everyday life, outside of any composite structure. To have exercised this outlook as part of the body of his musical works just goes to show how inspired he was by the world around him.
@cormano64: Well put. I didn't put a lot of thought into this, it just came to me in a post a few months ago: The only thing that makes a genius different from the rest of us, is that he/she is able to eliminate the signal to noise ratio.
4 me this not about music but Cage’s choice to embrace his automaton, someone should have introduced him to the work of Gurdjieff and locked him in a room until he got the damn point. As for the music there are some pieces I like ie (Dream) but for the most part it’s just chaos. There is no beauty in accidental randomness
@nmybox "There is no beauty in accidental randomness". Do you really believe that? I do not live by the water, and when I got home today I saw a living crawfish in my driveway, just after learning that my cat was run over by a car. The juxtaposition of these two events has no immediate meaning or connection to me that I can easily name. Yet they happened just like that, and I am struck by some beauty in that. Any thoughts?
@Tengent But in order to create music I must have the intention to express a thought. Everything that has been performed and sold as music has been created with the intention of expressing a thought, even the piece silence is created with the intention of expressing a thought because one establishes that it is a piece of music by having the thought to do so.
@Dolphidood I create music because I like the way it sounds, that is all. The same applies to what I enjoy listening to. I'm not sure I understand you completely. Does this example agree with your view? The Rite of Spring is designed to express the thought of creativity or going against the grain. ?
@Tengent Then you are expressing your love for the sound, love which is a thought being a feeling. What you listen to has been played because its an expression of a thought, a thought that can be a feeling or an idea. So music is sound that is used to express a thought/ thoughts. When nature is used musically it is done with the intention of expressing a thought. i.e. the piece Silence was silence USED with typical musical application and so it was still created to express a thought.
@Dolphidood Cage had intentions, and many things to express, and alas he had some kind of taste as well, despite all his talk of getting beyond the same. But his process of composition usually imposed obstacles to self-expression --- interrupted his expression, and challenged his own tastes. If there is an idea behind his works, I would say that is the idea --- that his own ideas are not the only ones you'll hear, his self is not the only one you'll hear expressed with his compositions.
@nobodady1 Sorry, I think I understand. I would think of what you have said as any piece of art is made up of features from nature and pieces of art that already exist. If that's the case then I would hear other ideas in his music. Its the combination of these things that express the thought. I would not say though, that he can create a piece of art with personal thoughts other than his own.
@Dolphidood But in many instances Cage did not choose the content of his works. One example is 4:33. All he chose were durations of listening. Other pieces used radios, in which any sort of content is, or will be possible, including possibly expressions he would not agree with or even hear himself. Yet, there is an idea that governs this openness, and I would agree that this idea is expressed, or at least demostrated in performances of his works.
@nobodady1 He still chose it though by his intention of incorporating the things that go with a typical piece of music with something that is not considered music in order to express a thought. I assume that this thought is 'openness' but he still created the piece by putting two elements together with at least one of them concerned with sound.
@Dolphidood Yet we understand, don't we? that hearing the word "openness" which expresses a thought, is not at all like listening to a piece of music, or having some other experience that demonstrates this thought in action. I would say, moreover, that many other notions may occur to a listener --- many possible ideas or feelings that can be found in the experience, many of which are private, some of which are shared with the composer, or with other audience members, etc..
@nobodady1 I'm really sorry but I'm trying to fully understand what you mean by saying things and testing them. We understand or at the least I understand because it means accepting possible contradiction to rules that we try to lay down and I am forming patterns/ associations in my memory all the time and so when they are contradicted new information I experience the idea that he was potentially trying to portray however it was still conveyed with sound.
@Dolphidood I think you may be having trouble understanding me for other reasons. You are attributing words to me that I have not said anything about. For example, "testing". You are talking about rules and contradicting rules. I'm not talking about any of those things. Yet it occurs to me that you are using my interaction with you to ask your own questions, which may have nothing to do with my ideas. In that way, your questions exemplify the issue at hand despite misunderstandings.
@nobodady1 Well "testing" meaning that I'm saying things to see if it lands with what you're saying, not implying that that is something you said. I'll get this straight, I am against music being as vague as the word reality because I believe there are rules and so I am trying to make a definition or at least show that a definition can be made. I am not trying to waste your time, I am just not very good at understanding what someone is getting at sometimes. Please can you clarify.
@Dolphidood I'll clarify, if you do. Rules for what? Definition of what? Music as vague as the word reality? I'm not sure what you are saying. Rules for music making? Definition of music? Music that is simply ordinary reality, rather than composed according to rules? Am I hitting on something here? Thanks for continuing to work with me on this. Most people are not humble enough to admitt confusion.
@nobodady1 The person I initially replied to said "What isn't music" and this got to me because it didn't make sense and so I am trying to think of rules that anything has to meet in order to be music so that not everything is music. Definition being a soft word for rules. I compared reality because its a vague word and I don't feel that music is vague, I think there are a set of rules behind what all music needs to be. I think its the expression of a thought with use of sound. That's okay.
@Dolphidood OK. You are responding to a rhetorical question. "What isn't music?" To answer this question literally isn't difficult. An envelope, an antelope, an ant, a ghost, the Civil War, a bucket. There are many examples that are not music. It becomes difficult when we refer to sound events as music or non-music. Cage himself suggested that if we have a problem calling certain performances or compositions "music", we could use another word. Then the problem would change.
@nobodady1 That's just it. I'm not simply trying to answer the question; I am arguing against the implication that everything is music by making a suitable definition that allows the freedom to produce anything with sound and call it music, at the same time as stopping things like the Civil war being called music. What is essential is that it has an intention behind it, the intention of making art with sound and that covers all sound events regarded as music including John Cage's work.
@Dolphidood You are in favor or against calling the production of sounds music? I understand you are against any THING being music --- i.e. the Civil War etc.. Cage used non-intention in his compositions. But he did so intentionally, and according to different rules which he would impose on himself as he composed.
@nobodady1 I am in favour of calling the production of sounds music so long as it has the condition that it has been produced with the intention of creating art with sound. "But he did so intentionally", then it was still the intention to create art with sound.
@Dolphidood I have often had moments or even eras in my own understanding which have been wide open. During these periods I had often thought all things were one thing --- I could think of the whole cosmos as music, or as vibrations or whathaveyou. But in those moments I was, rather than seeking a definition of music, I was seeking to apply what I had already regarded as music TO other things. The more I did this the more musical the world seemed, and the more plausible such expressions were.
@nobodady1 I assume you're expressing a feeling that I've also had. I sometimes have rare moments where I understand a concept so clearly but always in a geometric way where its nothing more but a shape that fits a hole and puts my conscious efforts to shame. I guess my intuition of music doesn't "fit" the notion that its everything so I wanted to make it as concrete logic but then if it were that then how would it be wrong?
@Dolphidood I think that one defines one thing in terms of what is not that thing. In this video Cage actually distinguishes "what we call music" from "sounds acting". In the context of the discussion on this vid, Cage is distinguishing his compositions from those that are more "musical". But in other contexts he is defending what he composes as music. When he is doing the former he is narrowing the discussion and drawing distinctions. In the latter, he is expanding and blurring distinctions
@nobodady1 Yes, there must be comparison for there to be reference including definition. Thank you very much for sharing your views, talking to me about this and having some patience; its very rare that I can leave a discussion on this site without being insulted.
@Dolphidood Thank you. I feel I gained a new understanding working things out with you. As for the insults, I think when people spend their time taking shots at people they don't know, and under cover of anonymity they resemble snipers rather than thinkers. If I am patient at all, I would say I have you to thank, and John Cage, too. He is a model of that quality.
This explains everything! I've been following Cage, even through his tonal/formal notation phase, and I've gotta say.....this gives good insight into the 4'33 concept. I love it! Duchamp is the shit as well :D
Cage's approach is nice because something is fundamentally childlike about it. A child waking up in the morning loves to hear clatter coming from the kitchen; it's the music of home and has comforting familiarity. There's rhythm all over the place; feet on stairs, trains on tracks. Great authors have sounds and sense perceptions in their work all the time, including James Joyce. There's music in many sounds, including words. I like languages because each language has its own music.
@Lolicorez.. Art has no limitation.. It doesn't have to be sweet, or good, or even interpretable to one.. Art is what the artist does.. There are painters who display a blank canvas.. If you say that john cage's works are not art, then you would say even picasso's isn't, even pink floyd's isn't.. N as for you, i suggest you do
Stop trying yo sound smart you commenters
thejerk1126 16 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
see our video response + homage to this great original thinker.x
TheSmack77 3 days ago
Absolutely juvenile!
lourak 1 week ago
If anyone else were saying this stuff, we would immediately label them pants-crappingly insane.
But he's John Cage. So it's okay.
tubeswampy 1 week ago
I read the name Johnny Cage...
jpaulos 1 week ago
art, sound, music, space , time... these are all things that are relative to one's own personal perception. You may listen to the wind howling between the trees and call it music, I call it white noise. To each his/her own.
kingjojothegreat 1 week ago
So he is talking his profession out of existence...
NihilNominis 2 weeks ago
@ROBJACKSONTOP WHAAAAT?U KNEW JOHN CAGE? WOW ROB I LOVE THIS GUY...I REMEMBER FLYING 2 FRANKFURT GERMANY HOW WE WAS DOING A GRAFFITI MURAL JUST BLASTING THAT SONG HE PLAYED THE PIANO WITH CALLED IN A LANDSCAPE...JOHN CAGE IS WORLD WIDE!!!
spainoner 3 weeks ago
I don't get it, he says he wants the sounds to create a "sculpture" and then goes on to say he doesn't want the sounds to pretend to be a bucket. Don't sculpures pretend to be something? Please enlightenme, someone
Stektanudlar 3 weeks ago
"There are two things that don’t have to mean anything; one is music, the other is laughter" Agree
palteonato 4 weeks ago
______________
guzsaj 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
guzsaj 4 weeks ago
WOW HE WAS IN NEWYORK? DID HE LIVED THERE? IM BORN AND RAISED IN NY AND STILL HERE..I WISH I WOULD,VE MET JOHN CAGE AT THAT TIME..IN 91 I WAS ONLY 17..I LOVE JOHN CAGE..IN A LANDSCAPE IS A CLASSIC
spainoner 1 month ago
@spainoner I knew John for about 30 years. We presented numerous concerts in San Francisco and Portland. He was so dear to me.
robjacksontop 3 weeks ago
I love his Laughter!!!!
ViTO4DTR 1 month ago
Shut it John... I'm trying to be quiet here..
freakpower2008 1 month ago
this guy must've did some mad shrooms back in his day, damn! whats next, are we gonna listen to the grass grow??
AnalogUnderdog 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
10 justin bieber and 10 stockhausen song at the same time
/watch?v=xTiwpr7gcP8
andrewillis21 1 month ago
@SchmarrnVormBier I think Cage departs from music as sonic expression, favoring music as sonic activity. I agree, if I understand you correctly, that Cage's difficulties in understanding music (he admits as much with respect to hi studies of harmony) informed the direction he took. But I feel his direction was where his enthusiams took root --- so rather than merely avoiding and denegrating what he couldn't do, he actively sought out a new path, and with great love.
nobodady1 1 month ago
@SchmarrnVormBier So your view is that Cage's aesthetic direction was determined by his disability --- or by a resentment against the achievements of great composers?
nobodady1 1 month ago
2:37 "I love sounds just as they are ..." *silence* ... *HOOOOOOONK*
Freistaat1918 1 month ago 5
In my neighborhood the most beautiful sound of silences happens at 4:00 am. Pure silence is amazing.
KCTrebs 1 month ago 2
To me..sound is like religion.
You take from it what you want or need.
You can create sound, music, vibration, whatever you wanna call it. You can sculpt one sound into another sound or just enjoy listening to it.
Without sound in my life I think I'd go crazy. On the other hand perhaps I'd find inner peace..who knows !
Each to their own, but the sound of that traffic would drive me bom boms !
SONGSTICKS 1 month ago
I think he's a genius! The way he composes I just love!!!
oboepercussionist 1 month ago
this man is the product of a shit load of marijuana, and a man alone in his apartment listening to traffic
hoolahan461 2 months ago
@hoolahan461 is there something wrong with that?
jacobcampbell123 1 month ago
@jacobcampbell123 not at all, actually inspiration
hoolahan461 1 month ago
@hoolahan461 what a fuckin idiot you are
TheMagicRealist 1 month ago
@TheMagicRealist Aren't we all?
kshitigarbhadasa 1 month ago
ridiculous pretentious fool
devaloki 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey everyone check out my video "The Probability of Chance" on my channel! A tribute to John Cage!
Jusstfnsk8 2 months ago
I think he is someone who is passionate about sounds and that is something to admire, after all, passion of any sort is amazing. However this is more of a passion than a valuable insight.
ec123456789able 2 months ago
lovely man!!
magicrisin 2 months ago
I love that Kant quote at the end. Perfect!
DavidAMIs 2 months ago
I think his cat wants him to be quiet.
TheJstokes11 2 months ago
Where I can get this interview? Is it on any dvd?
anndreacristal1986 2 months ago
this guys a genius but i cant admire some of the sounds he does lol
gamershrader 2 months ago
Great interview. What's the source?
alexandersness 2 months ago
@nobodady1 @Dolphidood Interesting discussion, you two. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, that's all too rare on YouTube. Take care.
xjtbarnesx 3 months ago
This guy was a real genie
MonsterHunterFailer 3 months ago
in italian?
cccaaaoo 3 months ago
This aint art, thats philosophy.
aindrikovs 3 months ago 32
@aindrikovs Is there a difference? I always find that the two can be interchangeable at times
saxamaphoneguy1 2 months ago
@saxamaphoneguy1 ofcourse there is a difference... phlosophy is about think about something and so on . art is about creating something
ulkord 2 months ago
@saxamaphoneguy1 Yes, there is a difference.
If I saw a painting on the wall, I might catagorize it as art, but not philosophy. It may EXPRESS a philosophy, much as a word may express an idea, but a word is not an idea, and art is not philosophy.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago
@aindrikovs How we define art is relative.
DavidAMIs 2 months ago
@aindrikovs Where does one begin and the other end?
emdotambient 2 months ago 31
@emdotambient at 7.
dracublah 1 month ago
@emdotambient There is nothing.
rlevanony1 1 month ago
@emdotambient There isn't a place where one "begins" and the other "ends".
They are not on the same lines,
they are two seperate things, not on the same scale.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago
@Jorbz150 I don't think you can earnestly approach Cages work without a realization that to him, the two are one. Otherwise you miss at least half the equation.
emdotambient 1 week ago
@aindrikovs The philosophy that fuels his art. These ideas are expressed in much of his music.
DarkZekeX 2 months ago
@aindrikovs I would beg to differ, since art is an autonomous realm of human expression and individual freedom, that connects and moves someone enough to translate its meaning and answer what it means to them. Cage has done that in this interview and in various of his literature.
ModernCapitalism 1 month ago
@aindrikovs anything can be art
aardfay 1 month ago
@aardfay Then why don't we just say "something", instead of a "a work of art".
"A work of art" takes longer to say.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago
@Jorbz150 well I don't even use that expression. I find it kinda pretentious. I mostly call things like that by their names, or just "things".
but: all it takes is for someone to call it "art" for something to be art. it's subjective.
aardfay 2 weeks ago
@aardfay I disagree.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago
@aardfay If all art is is something one person calls art, then something being art is rather meaningless.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago 2
@Jorbz150 not really "call", but "see as" art. but, yes, I believe it is meaningless.
studying the reasons why they see something as art or not is what is interesting
aardfay 2 weeks ago
@aindrikovs philosophy is the art of life
6pwner 1 month ago 3
@6pwner No, it is not. Art is created, and philosophy often comes from observation and analysis. Art may express philosophy, but it is not philosophy, nor philosophy art.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago 2
@aindrikovs why can't art be philosophy? Or philosophy, art? I don't see why they have to be mutually exclusive; certainly they don't have to be the same at all times, but they don't have to be separate at all times either.
mrgrtbt 3 weeks ago
@mrgrtbt It's neither art, nor philosophy. It's just words. Sounds. That we take in and interpret.
saotomi5102 3 weeks ago
@aindrikovs art often is philosophy.
redfairy100 3 weeks ago
@redfairy100 No, art often expresses philosophy.
Jorbz150 2 weeks ago
@aindrikovs I agree. In fact, Cage has often been called a musical philospher than a composer. How could he possibly have "composed" 4'33"? He didn't, he thought of it :).
sinatrabone 3 weeks ago
@sinatrabone what about Marcel Duchamp's Fountain? whatever the position, it's still a urinol. like silence. it is what we call it, until we give it another meaning. then it's art
aardfay 2 weeks ago
Aren't unicorns great.
ilovebamboocharlie 3 months ago
You either like John Cage or you don't. If you don't, then move on to something else.
327409427 3 months ago
@327409427 If you follow Cage's own example, you take responsibility for your own dislikes, and question them. Rather than simply "moving on" you move through the dislike. You ask yourself why you cannot enjoy these sounds. You ask if there is any way to come to enjoy them. It is listening itself that is beautiful, rather than music --- is Cage's attitude. So if you don't like Cage --- ask yourself why. I am ready to discuss Cage with most anyone. His music is an enigma.
nobodady1 3 months ago
an sculpture needs materials to exist, a picture needs paint to exist, music needs sound, and even more, a certain form or structure to exist. Music depends on some IDEA that holds it together because it is made of a material that we can't see or touch, and that is the magic of music: it is lost in time and somehow remains in our memory. Music is the art of expressing something through sound you useless A-hole. Your work is either bad music or it is simply not music. It is trash.
1udwi6 3 months ago
@1udwi6 You started with some kind of argument, then you defaced it with name calling. Why? I imagine you are offended by Cage's offerings. Any thoughts?
nobodady1 3 months ago
@1udwi6 You don't get it.
hughh20 3 months ago
@hughh20 of course not.
1udwi6 3 months ago
What a great guy.
832486426 3 months ago 2
YOU'RE NOT BEING SILENT RETARDED JOHN CAGE!!!!
theamazingtoot 3 months ago
sound? more like NOISE retard.... it's not part of music...no wonder no one knows about this man cuz he's obviously lost his brain
theamazingtoot 3 months ago
@theamazingtoot Cage is very well known. And as for noise being a part of music or not, there are numerous examples of noises being used in popular music, or in popular music becoming a kind of noise in and of itself. The question of noise versus music is worthy of more careful consideration. Consider how various sounds and noises can become pleasing. Or consider how annoying music can be in different circumstances, bothering us even more than some other noises. Neighbor's music,
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 man u wasted your time... i didnt even bother reading all that ;)
theamazingtoot 3 months ago
@theamazingtoot you are not the only reader on youtube. Many others may read it. So I don't feel I have wasted any time at all. No problemo, man.
nobodady1 3 months ago
mu·sic [myoo-zik]
noun
1. an art of sound in time that expresses ideas and emotions in significant forms through the elements of rhythm, melody, harmony, and color.
TheFrenziedPianist 4 months ago
is this guy nuts?
kristinadamsfan 4 months ago
Well in a way the sound of traffic directly reflect what it is - sometime it's chaos - sometime just long droning sounds... emotions or ''states'' can be understood - there are different kind of traffic and they do different sounds.
heyitsfp 4 months ago
and i half expected him to be mute
abear902 4 months ago 43
@abear902 Or deaf
Kalle72 2 months ago
hes enlightened!
TheRocksolid89 4 months ago
He was pure genius and is certainly missed !
327409427 4 months ago
Is it me or does he sound EXACTLY like kif, from futurama?
Spookaduke100 4 months ago
I wish everybody had as deep an understanding of music and sound as this man.
JulianBaynes1 4 months ago
3:01 epic laugh!!!
deandusk 4 months ago
i love how one of the video responses is stockhausen
ClownFishies 4 months ago
Why would a person who harboured such deep hatred for music be a composer? Everyone included himself would be better off if he stuck to picking mushrooms.
DaCapo2010 4 months ago
@DaCapo2010 He has a different notion of music, I don't think it's necessarily hatred. You could possibly see it as an almost completely different form of art using the same basic means, namely sound.
Duuuuuuuuuudeeee 4 months ago
@Duuuuuuuuuudeeee Different? No doubt. Valid? You got to be kidding! He believed that random noise is more interesting than compositions that are composed to express something. While its perfectly fine to hold such beliefs, it begs the question: why did he bother to compose at all? The very act of composing contradicts his own beliefs and what he just said in this clip.
Of all western composers past and present John Cage is the only one I can say unequivocally is a fraud.
DaCapo2010 4 months ago
@DaCapo2010 He really is not a fraud. There was a serious purpose in what Cage did, though the humor in doing such things was not lost on him. Given the beliefs Cage had, though, your question is a serious one. Why did he bother to compose at all? He did not merely compose, he composed a lot. He was very active, and very disciplined as well. Do you suppose a charlatan without a serious purpose would have been as comitted as he? That is a question equally as serious as the one you asked.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@DaCapo2010 I think you take his "hatred of music" too seriously. It was rather, that he preferred the experience of listening with a kind of intensity of openness to listening for things he could expect, such as one finds in the various idioms of music. Yet he also loved music, and from a very early age was very interested in perhaps discovering or inventing something new for music. I think what he discovered was non-music, and a means of applying non-musical sound possibilities.
nobodady1 3 months ago
Lovely lovely lovely lovely guy.
Just2Rusty 4 months ago
I really think this guy is high o.O
mannyo310 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is pretentious nonsense that contributes anything to the world. Random sounds are not music; that's absurd.
bayreuth79 4 months ago
Comment removed
gordonbeeferman 4 months ago
everything we heard is music........including fart :p
hanzun 4 months ago
Biggest fraud in "art" history. Ever. Ever.
aquamarinda 4 months ago
his laughs put shivers down my back
Thefatcatinthehat 5 months ago
Comment removed
petezilla 5 months ago
“There are two things that don't have to mean anything; one is music, and the other is laughter.” Immanuel Kant
This guy is genius...
(...both of them XD!)
Adrianozap 5 months ago
@Adrianozap Kant argue with that.
crazybay46913 4 months ago 2
@crazybay46913 Hahahahaha! Lol!
Adrianozap 3 months ago
john cage is most definitely an artist
observer6mm 5 months ago
@periclesolon If liking the music of John Cage and similar composers makes me pretentious then so be it. I'm pretentious and loving it. Go fuck yourself if you think there's something inherently bad about being pretentious.
MrNoak2 5 months ago
so much love for you john cage, and thanks for posting so much.
DamiaanVDW 5 months ago
Wonderful performance. :)
berickson925 5 months ago
@periclesolon Grow up.
MrNoak2 5 months ago
He prefers nature to art. If one is an artist, and one feels this way, it puts the artist in an awkward position. It is a paradoxical situation. Cage speaks from this position and works from this position. And this can lead to misunderstandings on the part of the public. I also think it may easily lead to misunderstandings on the part of the artist himself --- or non-understandings. So Cage is fair game for criticism as far as I am concerned. But do the critics understand Cage's dilema?
nobodady1 5 months ago 6
Comment removed
MrGuitaraddict1 3 months ago
John Cage was not a real artist, rather a court jester. He was an influencial figure but this is no longer relevant. Music will always consist of tones and noises which are organised and have some aesthetic value.
K0MP0NIST 5 months ago
@K0MP0NIST "Music will always consist of tones and noises which are organised and have some aesthetic value." Do the tones and noises have aesthetic value? Or does their organization have the value, or does the organization lend to the sounds/noises their aesthetic value? Or can appreciation of beauty come from other sources? Do you not enjoy sounds that are not subordinated to the plans of a composer? Rain? other sounds?
nobodady1 5 months ago
@K0MP0NIST You mad
bananasnvaseline 4 months ago
@K0MP0NIST that's right, but he posed a question with his piece of silence, and I think it's a valid question to ask.
LollYoung 4 months ago
Comment removed
LiliyaUgay 4 months ago
@K0MP0NIST absolutely share your opinion :)
LiliyaUgay 4 months ago
This man changed my whole perspective on how I listen to the world. If you can't relate to his idea's then why even comment on them?
arcinterrupter 5 months ago
He never used the word silence until the end of the video and that looked like someone dubded it into the film
MrFalconford 5 months ago
what a great man.
XxXxXJonathanXxXxX 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Justin Bieber is a faggot
CharlieFootcan 5 months ago
Does the interview should be translate in french please? (sorry for my english..)
Thumbsupforus 5 months ago
I wish I had the chance to meet him. But he died already and I wasn't even born yet. :|
Seraturedalene 6 months ago
Cage just seems so content with things just as they are, yet he helped change the world of art and music. His love for sounds and his kindness give me hope that someday, I will meet someone like him. One of the greatest musicians/philosophers of this century.
alexsweeley 6 months ago
His candid outlook on ambient sound is probably one of the most foundational forms of artistic appreciation; appreciation for the art found (or heard) in everyday life, outside of any composite structure. To have exercised this outlook as part of the body of his musical works just goes to show how inspired he was by the world around him.
PabzGLRP 6 months ago
@cormano64: Well put. I didn't put a lot of thought into this, it just came to me in a post a few months ago: The only thing that makes a genius different from the rest of us, is that he/she is able to eliminate the signal to noise ratio.
lesliarbuthnot 6 months ago
4 me this not about music but Cage’s choice to embrace his automaton, someone should have introduced him to the work of Gurdjieff and locked him in a room until he got the damn point. As for the music there are some pieces I like ie (Dream) but for the most part it’s just chaos. There is no beauty in accidental randomness
nmybox 6 months ago
@nmybox "There is no beauty in accidental randomness". Do you really believe that? I do not live by the water, and when I got home today I saw a living crawfish in my driveway, just after learning that my cat was run over by a car. The juxtaposition of these two events has no immediate meaning or connection to me that I can easily name. Yet they happened just like that, and I am struck by some beauty in that. Any thoughts?
nobodady1 5 months ago
@nmybox Someone should lock -you- up.
GregSidelnikov 4 months ago
@nmybox Nothing is really random, but I find those things you can't predict the most beautiful, accidental or not.
SairentoTenshi 4 months ago
He's not smarter than anyone else. He's just uncluttered by unnecessary overcomplication.
That's what makes him a genius.
cormano64 6 months ago
m k
bobyard123 6 months ago
What isn't music?
Tengent 6 months ago 22
@Tengent exactly...
violadude0987 4 months ago
@Tengent What isn't composed with the intention of expressing a thought.
Dolphidood 4 months ago
@Dolphidood Music can express thought? Music expresses music, and I believe that is all.
Tengent 3 months ago
@Tengent But in order to create music I must have the intention to express a thought. Everything that has been performed and sold as music has been created with the intention of expressing a thought, even the piece silence is created with the intention of expressing a thought because one establishes that it is a piece of music by having the thought to do so.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood I create music because I like the way it sounds, that is all. The same applies to what I enjoy listening to. I'm not sure I understand you completely. Does this example agree with your view? The Rite of Spring is designed to express the thought of creativity or going against the grain. ?
Tengent 3 months ago
@Tengent Then you are expressing your love for the sound, love which is a thought being a feeling. What you listen to has been played because its an expression of a thought, a thought that can be a feeling or an idea. So music is sound that is used to express a thought/ thoughts. When nature is used musically it is done with the intention of expressing a thought. i.e. the piece Silence was silence USED with typical musical application and so it was still created to express a thought.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood Cage had intentions, and many things to express, and alas he had some kind of taste as well, despite all his talk of getting beyond the same. But his process of composition usually imposed obstacles to self-expression --- interrupted his expression, and challenged his own tastes. If there is an idea behind his works, I would say that is the idea --- that his own ideas are not the only ones you'll hear, his self is not the only one you'll hear expressed with his compositions.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 Sorry, I think I understand. I would think of what you have said as any piece of art is made up of features from nature and pieces of art that already exist. If that's the case then I would hear other ideas in his music. Its the combination of these things that express the thought. I would not say though, that he can create a piece of art with personal thoughts other than his own.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood But in many instances Cage did not choose the content of his works. One example is 4:33. All he chose were durations of listening. Other pieces used radios, in which any sort of content is, or will be possible, including possibly expressions he would not agree with or even hear himself. Yet, there is an idea that governs this openness, and I would agree that this idea is expressed, or at least demostrated in performances of his works.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 He still chose it though by his intention of incorporating the things that go with a typical piece of music with something that is not considered music in order to express a thought. I assume that this thought is 'openness' but he still created the piece by putting two elements together with at least one of them concerned with sound.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood Yet we understand, don't we? that hearing the word "openness" which expresses a thought, is not at all like listening to a piece of music, or having some other experience that demonstrates this thought in action. I would say, moreover, that many other notions may occur to a listener --- many possible ideas or feelings that can be found in the experience, many of which are private, some of which are shared with the composer, or with other audience members, etc..
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 I'm really sorry but I'm trying to fully understand what you mean by saying things and testing them. We understand or at the least I understand because it means accepting possible contradiction to rules that we try to lay down and I am forming patterns/ associations in my memory all the time and so when they are contradicted new information I experience the idea that he was potentially trying to portray however it was still conveyed with sound.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood I think you may be having trouble understanding me for other reasons. You are attributing words to me that I have not said anything about. For example, "testing". You are talking about rules and contradicting rules. I'm not talking about any of those things. Yet it occurs to me that you are using my interaction with you to ask your own questions, which may have nothing to do with my ideas. In that way, your questions exemplify the issue at hand despite misunderstandings.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 Well "testing" meaning that I'm saying things to see if it lands with what you're saying, not implying that that is something you said. I'll get this straight, I am against music being as vague as the word reality because I believe there are rules and so I am trying to make a definition or at least show that a definition can be made. I am not trying to waste your time, I am just not very good at understanding what someone is getting at sometimes. Please can you clarify.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood I'll clarify, if you do. Rules for what? Definition of what? Music as vague as the word reality? I'm not sure what you are saying. Rules for music making? Definition of music? Music that is simply ordinary reality, rather than composed according to rules? Am I hitting on something here? Thanks for continuing to work with me on this. Most people are not humble enough to admitt confusion.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 The person I initially replied to said "What isn't music" and this got to me because it didn't make sense and so I am trying to think of rules that anything has to meet in order to be music so that not everything is music. Definition being a soft word for rules. I compared reality because its a vague word and I don't feel that music is vague, I think there are a set of rules behind what all music needs to be. I think its the expression of a thought with use of sound. That's okay.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood OK. You are responding to a rhetorical question. "What isn't music?" To answer this question literally isn't difficult. An envelope, an antelope, an ant, a ghost, the Civil War, a bucket. There are many examples that are not music. It becomes difficult when we refer to sound events as music or non-music. Cage himself suggested that if we have a problem calling certain performances or compositions "music", we could use another word. Then the problem would change.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 That's just it. I'm not simply trying to answer the question; I am arguing against the implication that everything is music by making a suitable definition that allows the freedom to produce anything with sound and call it music, at the same time as stopping things like the Civil war being called music. What is essential is that it has an intention behind it, the intention of making art with sound and that covers all sound events regarded as music including John Cage's work.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood You are in favor or against calling the production of sounds music? I understand you are against any THING being music --- i.e. the Civil War etc.. Cage used non-intention in his compositions. But he did so intentionally, and according to different rules which he would impose on himself as he composed.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 I am in favour of calling the production of sounds music so long as it has the condition that it has been produced with the intention of creating art with sound. "But he did so intentionally", then it was still the intention to create art with sound.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood I have often had moments or even eras in my own understanding which have been wide open. During these periods I had often thought all things were one thing --- I could think of the whole cosmos as music, or as vibrations or whathaveyou. But in those moments I was, rather than seeking a definition of music, I was seeking to apply what I had already regarded as music TO other things. The more I did this the more musical the world seemed, and the more plausible such expressions were.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 I assume you're expressing a feeling that I've also had. I sometimes have rare moments where I understand a concept so clearly but always in a geometric way where its nothing more but a shape that fits a hole and puts my conscious efforts to shame. I guess my intuition of music doesn't "fit" the notion that its everything so I wanted to make it as concrete logic but then if it were that then how would it be wrong?
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood I think that one defines one thing in terms of what is not that thing. In this video Cage actually distinguishes "what we call music" from "sounds acting". In the context of the discussion on this vid, Cage is distinguishing his compositions from those that are more "musical". But in other contexts he is defending what he composes as music. When he is doing the former he is narrowing the discussion and drawing distinctions. In the latter, he is expanding and blurring distinctions
nobodady1 3 months ago
@nobodady1 Yes, there must be comparison for there to be reference including definition. Thank you very much for sharing your views, talking to me about this and having some patience; its very rare that I can leave a discussion on this site without being insulted.
Dolphidood 3 months ago
@Dolphidood Thank you. I feel I gained a new understanding working things out with you. As for the insults, I think when people spend their time taking shots at people they don't know, and under cover of anonymity they resemble snipers rather than thinkers. If I am patient at all, I would say I have you to thank, and John Cage, too. He is a model of that quality.
nobodady1 3 months ago
@Tengent White noise.
RoboticusMusic 4 months ago
@Tengent Nothing...!
MrGuitaraddict1 3 months ago
Comment removed
iatetheinternet1 6 months ago
Comment removed
iatetheinternet1 6 months ago
Comment removed
iatetheinternet1 6 months ago
Comment removed
iatetheinternet1 6 months ago
This explains everything! I've been following Cage, even through his tonal/formal notation phase, and I've gotta say.....this gives good insight into the 4'33 concept. I love it! Duchamp is the shit as well :D
yeseniajoyas 6 months ago
He's probably more intelligent than we all together!
MrSanctuary86 6 months ago
I long to have Cage's view of the world. He seems so happy and appreciative of everything.
alexsweeley 6 months ago 2
"Sonata, what do you want from me?" (Fontenelle)
CaptainBluebear08 6 months ago
he is a great man
lqtm237 6 months ago
HE WAS ONE OF THE BEST MUSICIAN LEFT ALIVE OUT HERE IN NEWYORK..JOHN CAGE WAS THE GREATEST
spainoner 6 months ago
Cage's approach is nice because something is fundamentally childlike about it. A child waking up in the morning loves to hear clatter coming from the kitchen; it's the music of home and has comforting familiarity. There's rhythm all over the place; feet on stairs, trains on tracks. Great authors have sounds and sense perceptions in their work all the time, including James Joyce. There's music in many sounds, including words. I like languages because each language has its own music.
amerikanprincess 6 months ago
his love for sound and music reminds me of Vonlenska,
the music simply for emotive expression without the use of constructed languages.
he loves sound for what they simply are and do not demand for anything more..
art really has no limitation..
hollylaukris 7 months ago
I love what I get from John Cage. Simple as that.
rcoldman 7 months ago
@Lolicorez.. Art has no limitation.. It doesn't have to be sweet, or good, or even interpretable to one.. Art is what the artist does.. There are painters who display a blank canvas.. If you say that john cage's works are not art, then you would say even picasso's isn't, even pink floyd's isn't.. N as for you, i suggest you do