No, it can't. RNBO has its own set of objects that look, but are different from Max objects

Thank you KZbin!

Thanks for watching!

❤

Could we then make an argument for bop style music being modernism. While free jazz and noise music and even early black metal could be viewed as a post modernist expression?

I wouldn't say Penderecki and Lutoslawaski are post modernists since their work is easily classifiable as music and there's definitely a technical aspect to it . No direct challenge of the medium but definitely some sense of progress from tradition. Interestingly the former went back to tonal writing later in life. As far as Stravinskij and prokofiev are concerned modernists in a sense but mainly Russians ;) . Keep in mind that one of the main differences is the importance of technique that is only present in modernist thought while it's dismissed or even derided in postmodernism

Thanks, I would love to help but I have switched over to unity using puredata for sounds. I am not sure if the developer is still curating the project:(

I have read it and it's Philosophy of New Music, no article. It doesn't sound like you have read it, let alone understood it. I have studied Adorno and the whole Frankfurt school pretty well, I have a good foundation in philosophy and I don't think any of my points are off on the substance. It might be that they are simplified because of the format

@MicheleZaccagnini That is a ... weird answer, since I did not touch upon the content at all but you tried to and kind of failed. Also it's kind of a childish thing to respond with the exact same accusation that was thrown to you almost word for word but let's forget about that. Adorno conceived his Philosophy of new music as a complementary essay to the chapter about the cultural industry in the Dialektik der Aufklärung where his intention is more or less clear. The cultural industry highjacked art so that it makes the audience an easily subjugated populace under the market forces and makes it more easily manipulated, an entirely blind, speechless, herd - like mass. In hegelian terms, it makes art and culture a completely non-dialectical phenomenon, a positive reproduction of the already existing mass controlling devises of the "verwaltete Welt", i.e. the administered world. In view of music as portrayed in PNM, what is basically at stake is the degradation/exhaustion of all the technical tools given to music to express an authentic social resistance, or even just an alternative picture to this kind of world. This is the actual purpose. Art should not tell you that everything is fine, while your freedom is lost. He believes that Schoenberg has tried - not always successfully - to develop a kind of musical language that addresses this situation. The tonal material had exhausted its expressive capacity with regard to the new conditions, but the atonal system of Schoenberg was able to keep some of the old music's historical truth revealing function. Stravinsky, in his view, regresses, revitalizes some older aspects of music that may be impressive with the new musical techniques, but leaves all the dialectic of art , present in the European tradition behind and infantilizes the audience (very simply put, cause this is a yt comment section). You may agree or not with Adorno, but this has nothing to do with whether music should adhere or not to what people like etc. or that music should be exclusively academic etc. The problem with commercial music is not at all that ti is per se commercial. Music was always in the market place (stressed in the book as well). The problem is what commercialism TODAY represents and how it is reflected on the essence/material of this music itself. The fact that the avant-garde is no longer accessible to broad audiences is a side effect, maybe a necessary evil, but not at all a desirable feature! Also, I don't think that the case you are reporting here has anything to do with Adorno at all. It's just the academic field trying to defend one of its traditional castles. And, without knowing much about the prize winner, maybe their arguments should be heard and juxtaposed with the actual work at hand, instead of attributing everything to a prejudice coming from a bad interpretation of Adorno that they may or not have.

@@MicheleZaccagnini Btw, no one, absolutely no one who has a serious background in philosophy would ever say "i have studied the whole Frankfurt school" pretty well, unless of course you have a PhD in the field. The subject is immense... This is a very clear sign of superficial knowledge.

Viewing art as a dialectical tool to contrast market capitalism IS the problem with Adorno. Aside from the criticism of commodified art, which I completely agree with, his solution of using art itself as a tool for social betterment, a goal common to most Frankfurters, Benjamin in particular, is what I find completely wrong. What these modernists don't seem to understand is that art is not to be understood and used, it exists as something beyond comprehension and can only be lived, experienced as an incomprehensible phenomenon , you might call it esoteric knowledge. You are trying to "put me in my place" with your academic set of tools and you might think you know more than me, and maybe you do in terms of having read more about the subject. But the fact is that you,as Adorno, are unable to conceive beauty as a thing that stands on its own, without any need for justification or explanation, and definitely without any purpose. Those critical philosophers, the lowest kind imo, only saw things in an impoverished hegelian duality and with a cheap political agenda. Finally, if you think that Adorno had nothing to do with the making of the avant garde in music, you are mistaken. I know for a fact that his influence on many of the most important composers was crucial. And the influence was what I talked about in the video: confrontational attitude towards the audience. This is something that you cannot deny since I have it a a primary source: Nono, Boulez, Clementi etc. They all talk about it. Have you read the letters between Cage and Boulez? I didn't think so. You are trying to school me on the details of Adorno philosophy missing the larger point. As the saying goes when a wise man points at the moon...

@@MicheleZaccagnini what are you talking about? I never said he never influenced the avant-garde music. In fact he was the main influence of the Darmstadt Schule. What I'm saying though is that those academics protesting the Pulitzer price are probably just gatekeeping, and have nothing to do with Adorno's influence. However if they do, maybe they are right. "you are trying to school me on the details of Adorno philosophy missing the larger point." Wasn't the "Adorno Rule" the title of your video? Didn't I say from the first comment that most people (meaning musicians in this context) don't understand the point properly? A confrontational attitude towards the audience was never the central point of his analysis. That was my entire argument and you are not disproving it, nor did I miss the larger point. I was attacking a very narrow and superficial understanding of Adorno's philosophy of music as portrayed in the video as I saw it. Nothing less, nothing more. "But the fact is that you,as Adorno, are unable to conceive beauty as a thing that stands on its own, without any need for justification or explanation, and definitely without any purpose". Oh, come on. This is just naive... What a juvenile thing to say. Lets just leave it there, shall we...

That artistic expression changes with the times it's natural, that it moves "forward" as opposed to backwards or sideways is a profound misreading of the nature of such expression. It's the ideological bug that got engrained in our, Western, view of the world. Progress doesn't really exist anywhere outside of one's mind

Well said!

Those are outliers that have little in common with one another. They really don't represent anything but exceptions to the rule of what is commonly defined as contemporary classical music. Pointing out exceptions doesn't invalidate a point and it's a lazy way of arguing

It is so easy to write a dissonant melody than to write a melody that one will remember for eternity.

I made it. I think I explained how to make it into another video. Or you can get in touch with me through patreon

Thanks for this insightful response. I don't agree that the reason for promoting modernist aesthetic was just to piss off the Soviets, it could be a part of the reason, but a minor one. The real reason is more complicated and has to do with doing away with the European traditions, which were intimidating in many ways to the progressives, and were ultimately stained with what they deemed to be the evil of nationalism. In general, my point of view is that music as the sublime art form of the baroque, classical and romantic eras is dead and gone and trying to inject an artificial new life in it with a concocted pseudo rational ideology is ridiculous. Postmodernism makes more sense if it's done lightly and with skill