Yesterday evening I attended a junior recital at the Hockett Family Recital Hall. The recital was for Junwen Jia, an alto saxophonist, and was in fulfillment of the degree of Bachelor of Music in Performance.
Out of all the recitals I've been to, I'd have to say this one is the most unique. While the last two were a more classical genre, all of the compositions in this from the 20th century. Right off the bat, I could see connections to the modernist style of sound and composition we studied in class. It was extremely difficult for me to sense phrasing and cadences. It was quite hard for me to tell the difference between the first two pieces, as the textures were the same, with the same instrumentation of sax and piano. The saxophone itself I feel is definitely an instrument that creates a modernist-style sound when played in a concert setting. While I'm used to hearing it in jazz, hearing it as a part of concert music is a completely different experience.
Another way I felt the music embodied a modernist style was through the structuring and flow of the compositions. In the second piece, it was almost as if he would play for quick 1-2 minute bursts, and then completely stop for about 20 seconds. The end result was very disjointed, and it was almost as if he was giving a small sample of the various styles.
The last piece of the program was my favorite. It featured a marimba, and once again the use of instrumentation was what made it so interesting to me. If I were to hear that a saxophone and marimba were going to be doing a duet, I would automatically assume it was some sort of smooth jazz in a hotel lobby or something. This piece proved that wrong for sure. The piece once again had that modernist feel to it. There were lots of fast scale runs (what seemed to be on the whole-tone scale) and dissonant chords from the marimba. The two instruments varied between playing in unison and a call-and-response type structure, further creating a feeling of 'organized chaos' if you will.
Overall, I really enjoyed this recital, even if it was not at all what I was expecting to begin with.
The Rite Of Spring is a ballet created by one of the great composers of the 20th century, Igor Stravinsky. As seen through The Rite Of Spring, Stravinsky's musical composition proved to be forward-thinking and ahead of its time, as he helped set the scene for future modernist 20th century music. This ballet was in fact so different than anything that had been produced before that a riot broke out during the it's premier in Paris. Rite Of Spring effectively demonstrates the popular aesthetics of modernism in the 20th-century through it's various musical elements.
The first musical element that Stravinsky fiddles with is instrumentation. Although we have seen alterations to the overall instrumentation in music before (such as the complex and unique combinations of strings, horns, etc. in the romantic period), Stravinsky takes it to the next level. Rather than just add layers of instruments (stratification), he puts the instruments in musical situations that are very different from what they were supposedly created for. An example of this is shown immediately at the beginning of the ballet. A single bassoon plays a distant melody at a very high register - extremely high for a bassoon. This creates an uneasy feeling and almost a sense of awkwardness. Furthermore, this uneasy tone parallels the ballet's story, as one could say it represents the cautious attitudes of animals and people coming out of their winter hideouts for the beginning of spring.
The second musical element expressed to a great degree is that of rhythm, or rather lack thereof. If anything, this in my opinion would probably be the biggest reason for the riots at the Paris opening, as Stravinsky chose to stray away from the common belief that music should have a common meter, if even have one at all. This is seen almost entirely throughout the opening piece, but around the 2:30 mark is a great example. As more instruments are added to the piece, the listener begins to quickly lose any sense of rhythm whatsoever. Rather than nice melodies fitting together perfectly and on beat, Stravinsky barrages the audience with a harsh, arhythmic jumble of sounds, perfectly relating to the 20th century aesthetic of stratification, as the layers keep adding on. This is not the only time we see this, as Stravinsky alternates between moments of chaos and moments of calm. At around the 14:30 mark, near the end of the opening piece, we hear this again. However this time bass drums and cymbals are added, creating even more chaos. The fact that the usually beat-steady percussion ensemble now sounds like a train-wreck further relates to the point explained earlier regarding instrumentation. The audience is expecting the bass drum and cymbals to keep a sense of order for the music, however it simply appears to be causing disorder. However, this piece is not entirely arhythmic. In fact there are certain points where there is a definite beat. Even with this being the case, Stravinsky still finds a way to make a unique sound, and make it difficult to find a meter. At around the 3:30 mark, the strings play a low, pulsing repetition of a single note. Instead of having the 'strong beat' on every second, third or fourth beat (which would make it easy to lock down a common meter), Stravinsky adds strong beats in a more random fashion: one on the second beat, one on the fourth, again on the second, then on the fifth, etc.
The last musical element that helps express these aesthetics is melody. In the 20th century, Stravinsky as well as many composers and musicians began to use the whole-tone and pentatonic scales extremely often. In the opening minute or so of the piece, we hear the solo bassoon playing on the whole-tone scale. As with the case for most of the musical elements, the use of the whole-tone scale adds a feeling of randomness and awkwardness, as certain tones do not seem to fit together well at first listen. This relates to the modernist aesthetic of disjunction, and is seen commonly in music of the time with the increase of dissonant chords and distant melodies.
Stravinsky's Rite Of Spring is a perfect example of how music can reveal the specific aesthetics of a time period. This particular piece expressed modernist ideals like stratification and disjunction through it's particular musical elements such as instrumentation, rhythm, and melody. By altering these elements, Stravinsky essentially paved the way for what was to come in 20th century music.
Outline
Thesis: Stravinsky's Rite Of Spring demonstrates popular aesthetics of modernism in the 20th-century through it's various musical elements.
P1: Instrumentation - adding layers of instruments, as well as making them play in unusual situations. Relates to modernist aesthetic of stratification.
P2: Rhythm - Often arhythmic, with a jumble of instruments. Relates to stratification and fragmentation.
P3: Melody - whole-tone scale, relates to disjunction.
Yesterday afternoon I attended a senior recital in Ford Hall, in the music school. The recital was for Robert Oldroyd, a horn player. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this recital. One main reason I enjoyed it was because of how unique it was - I wasn't really expecting the different types of instrumentation that accompanied the horn.
For example, the opening piece was a duet - one horn and a piano. I guess I don't listen to classical music very much, but I can honestly say I've never heard a piece with only those two instruments. Besides the fact that I was surprised by the instrumentation, I felt as shit piece was similar to music we have studied from the enlightenment. I say this mainly because of the phrasing and melodies. Everything seemed fairly predictable, as phrases always seemed to 'come back home' (end in a PAC). The melody was a bit more repetitive than I'm used to hearing in that style of music, but then again, I don't listen to the genre much. That all being said, I definitely enjoyed the piece, as both musicians did a great job at conveying a joyous, almost dream-like mood.
The next piece, Room-Music Tit-Bits, was quite different. Rather than just having two instruments (piano and horn), there were five on stage. These instruments consisted of the horn (of course), an oboe, a clarinet, a bassoon, and a flute. From a phrasing standpoint, I thought it was similar to the first piece in the fact that it was fairly predictable. However, unlike the first piece, instrumentation was obviously completely different. The fact that it was now an all-woodwind ensemble was definitely less foreign to me, as that's something I've heard many times.
One other song that stuck out to me was "Elegie". In this piece, the pianist came back on stage. However, it wasn't this weird horn/piano combination that threw me off this time. Even with the same instrumentation of the first piece, it sounded COMPLETELY different. I couldn't follow the phrase pattern at all. The music seemed disjointed, with random bursts of loudness and purposeful (hopefully) screeches from the horn. It wasn't just the horn doing these outbursts either, as for the most part the song seemed to be a call and response between the two instruments. Overall, while wouldn't particularly have enjoyed listening to this for leisure, it was interesting. What came to my mind immediately was the Beethoven pieces we talked about, with random notes that would startle his audiences.
In the end, I greatly enjoyed the recital. It was different that anything I've ever really heard before.
