Abby's MUS 116 Blog

In these Covid times, there are many different obstacles musicians and all artists are facing.  It is really wonderful that art is becoming more accessible but with this accessibility comes a  feeling of entitlement to that art for free. With so many online listening and viewing options, general audiences find music as an art form to be less valuable. Because of that, many people don’t want to pay to watch concerts online, because to many it seems like an almost identical experience to watching someone play a piece on YouTube. Without the in-person experience of hearing live music, it is very difficult to keep paying audiences engaged and connected to performances.

Additionally, a lot of musicians are keeping their income up by designing and selling merchandise. In some ways, this is a good alternative, but it is also a bit of a problematic solution. This is because this current environment is forcing musicians to do something else besides create music and labelling it as a sort of equal replacement, devaluing the music itself. This is not to say that these musicians should not be doing this, because it is a smart way to be making money in this time when most people are not making money from live performances. But I do not think it should be viewed as the sort of “ideal solution” we should be striving for. I think that the best thing we can do is to find ways to succeed by creating music.

I think that no matter how much innovation and accessibility comes out of this situation, there is no way to find something that replaces the magic of live performance, and I think that because of this there will be no exact “ideal situation” where musicians are all working as often as they used to and making as much money as they used to. But I think that livestream performance methods are the best options right now. Something about a performance only existing for a brief moment before disappearing forever makes live performances really special and I think it makes audiences feel more connected, and more likely to attend. I think this also creates a situation where people are more likely to pay for a ticket, rather than something that is recorded and posted on a website. I don’t think there’s any true answer to this problem, because I am someone who finds live in-person performances to be a really special thing for both the performers and the audience, and I don’t think there’s any way to truly recreate that virtually, but I think that musicians can continue to build a social media presence, and create as much music as possible for livestreams and other projects before we are eventually all able to gather again.

The label “Latin American Music” is problematic because “Latin American Music” as a whole is so broad and the term implies that it is a single style of music.  It compares to saying that the music of Beethoven is the same as the music of ABBA because they are both “European Music”. Latin America is made up of many different countries and regions, and the music and culture has evolved over many years. Broadly referring to all music that has come from Latin America as one single genre of music takes away from the individuality of the many different Latin American musical genres and styles.

Latin American Music and Latin Music differ in their place of origin.  Latin American Music is music originating from Latin America while Latin Music is music that comes from people of Latin American descent living elsewhere in the world. The difference in the musical styles are the surrounding influences of the music. Latin Music will of course have more musical influences from wherever in the world the particular piece or genre comes.

Ostinato often is understood to simply mean something that is repeated over and over throughout a piece of music. They are often used in Caribbean and Latin American Music to move the music and give it a specific flow. They are often layered on top of each other, and played with various different instruments. A common ostinato used is the “Habanera Pattern”, which can be identified in numerous musical expressions all across not only Latin America but also elsewhere in the world.

The discrepancies I noticed in “Polacca” were in the rhythm. The voices and the drums are technically moving at the same tempo, but it feels as though the drums are moving at a quicker pace, as they are sounding a fraction of a moment before it feels like they should. That quick fraction of a moment serves as that empty space for the individuality to live.

The discrepancy I noticed in “Spaced Cowboy” was between two different sections of the piece. At about the 1:25 mark, the pulse and overall feel of the music seem to completely shift, feeling almost like two separate songs which have come together. The moment of discrepancy last for a bit longer than just that specific moment, as the voice seems to fit better with the second section, even during the first section, so that discrepancy lasts for that whole moment of overlap.

Lastly, “Agua Que Va A Caer” seems to have some discrepancy in the intonation and the rhythm with the entrance of the supporting voices. It sounds to be closer to multiple people singing the same piece at the same time, rather than a group of people putting most of their focus on vocal blending as is often a focus in ensemble music.

I think that music that is taught in university should consist just as much of 18th century western music as music from other cultures. Music has changed and evolved so much since that period, that it is not accurate to say that the theory of 18th century western music directly relates to music of North American music today any more than that of other cultures. The only reason that someone may claim that is does, is because that is what is taught in schools as objective fact, which leads to the quote from the website. Something that is really important to remember is that music is art. There is no objective “right answer” to any question, which is something that I think gets forgotten in music education. This of course makes sense, because in education and learning environments, there has to be a sort of right or wrong answer in some capacity, but I think that it does end up contributing to the white racial frame of music theory. I think what we currently learn as “music theory” should be taught not as “the way music is”, but as one viewpoint that musicians had. For example, I have studied a decent amount of theatre and acting, and in my experience acting technique is taught by learning about many different methods and schools of thought, none of which are presented as being more correct than another, and then applying what works individually. I think that this could work the same way for music theory and music history. Students would spend equal amounts of time learning about different thoughts about music theory, from different cultures and different eras. I think this would work towards dismantling white supremacy in music, as well as strengthening students as musicians and artists, because I think it would allow for more actual thought and creativity.

The listening example I chose is “Un di felice” from Giuseppe Verdi’s La Traviata. Upon first listen, my ear was mainly listening to the sort of “roadmap” of the piece. We first hear the tenor voice in a sort of lament, then suddenly a soprano comes in with a much lighter and bouncier sound, changing the direction of the piece. The first few times I heard it, I found the soprano entrance to be a bit jarring, but as I continued to listen to it, I of course started to anticipate it, and so her entrance began to sound much more natural to me. I began to hear what Verdi may have been intending with her sort of quickly taking over the sound of the aria. The main change I noticed however was my interpretation of the characters within the duet. As I listened to it, I noticed more and more emotional nuances in the voices and the accompaniment, and I began to pick out some recognizable Italian words to help me to better understand the context. For example, the first time through I didn’t understand the text at all, but as I continued to listen I started to notice words and phrases like “amor” (love) and “delizia al cor” (delight to the heart) from the tenor, while the soprano seems to be singing phrases like “solo amistade” (friendship only) and “dimenticarmi” (forget me). This on top of my understanding the contrast between their sections helped me to better understand the meaning of the piece over many repetitions.

To be completely honest, the implications of only playing music of the past is not really something I’ve ever put a lot of thought into, and this thought experiment brought up a lot of points for me that I had never really considered. As much as I absolutely love Western classical music, the majority of it is written by dead white men, most of whom were quite racist. This obviously creates a lot of issues in regards to it being performed today. I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with performing or listening to this music, but it is incredibly important to by mindful of this, which is something I have always tried to do. But something that I had not thought about very much before is what it means to only perform music by these composers. Personally, I love listening to music of today, but I very rarely perform it, which I am realizing is a little bit problematic. As performers, we are given an opportunity to share music with others, and we have the ability to use this opportunity to share the message and art of female, non-binary, and/or BIPOC artists. If we use this opportunity only to share the message of dead white men, we are doing a disservice to those around us. On the other hand, while I think it should be with a sort of mental annotation, I still think it so important to continue to perform these works, for so many different reasons. When I first imagined all traces of past music being erased, it was a truly terrifying thought to me. Personally I am a singer, and while I think it is fun to sing contemporary music of today, I cannot compare it to the feeling I get singing music of the past. If I could no longer perform these works, I would have to completely change who I am as an artist, which again is not something I’d thought about before, and it’s making me realize that even though I’m sure I will always sing classical music, there is also so much contemporary music of today that I could also be sharing with people. In regards to the Nietzsche quote, I fully agree. I think that it is important to continue to perform music of the past, but to look at it in a contemporary light, and understand the context in which it was written versus the current climate of today.

The section of Bach’s Goldberg Variations that I chose to compare is the Aria da capo. Rather than a variation, this is entirely a return to original aria. When listening to the two different recordings of it, the first thing I notice is the tempo. The 1955 recording is much quicker than the 1981 recording, so much so that the 1955 track on Spotify is close to half the length of the track of the 1981 recording. This creates a straighter and more even sound in the 1955 recording, whereas the 1981 recording is more dynamic and delicate. I think that this really reflects Gould’s life and musical journey, as the 1955 recording sounds and like a young virtuosic artist introducing himself to the world. It sounds bright, complicated, and impressive. The 1981 recording shows us a version of Gould who doesn’t need to be showy. The melody is thoughtful and simple, and the bass line is steady, moving one note at a time. To me, it sounds like the biggest difference is that the 1955 recording focuses more on the notes, and the 1981 recording focuses more on the music. By this I mean that the 1955 recording sounds more technically difficult and impressive, while the 1981 recording feels more like it’s telling a story. Listening to the 1955 recording, I feel inspired and amazed, and listening to the 1981 recording, I feel like like I am being drawn in, and that every single note is incredibly important to hear in its entirety.

The first piece I would choose to add in my own version of the Golden Record is the  Schindler’s List Theme by John Williams.

This piece is the opening theme to Steven Spielberg’s 1993 film, Schindler’s List. It is a haunting melody, played mainly by a solo violinist (Itzhak Perlman), and is accompanied by a string orchestra.

When looking through the list of what was included on the original Golden Record, I thought about how what sort of sounds influence our lives today that were not included in the original project. One of the first things to come to mind was film scores, as so much of culture today is influences by films and other visual digital media that we consume, and music is such a large part of that. John Williams’ Schindler’s List Theme is in my personal opinion one of the most moving pieces of film music, and I think that it is a piece that is beautiful both within the context of the film and fully separated from it.

The second piece I would add is Hideaway by Jacob Collier.

This is a contemporary pop song, which mixes digital contemporary sounds with the sounds of many different acoustic instruments. Collier uses elements of both polyphony and homophony to create harmonies.

I chose this song because I think that it would be important to include some modern music on a Golden Record being created in 2020, and I personally think that this is one of the greatest contemporary pieces of music I have come across. The smooth blend of instruments and the changes in colour and tone throughout the piece tell a full story.

The third sound I would add is the sound of a telephone ringing.

This video contains a repeated sound of a telephone ringing. It doesn’t quite sound like a modern cell phone, but closer to the digitalized sound of earlier landlines.

While telephones did of course exist at the time when the original Golden Record was created, they were not as large a part of society as they are today. This simple chirping sound conveys a bright and friendly greeting, that has come to mean something to us, but I believe that even without the prior knowledge of telephones, it is a sound that can be interpreted in that bright and friendly manner.

Over the past few months, art has of course been very different than it has been in the past, especially pertaining to performing artists. I think it has been so important to explore new ways to engage and create art. For me personally, I have been exploring ways to collaborate with other musicians with video recordings. In addition to music, I also really love acting, and have been working with other actors to perform via Zoom, as there is less dependency on timing for acting than there is for music. As far as engaging with art, I have found that I have been exposed to so many performances that I never could have seen otherwise, as things are being livestreamed and videotaped to be posted online. Having access to all this music, and all these wonderful performances has really inspired me as a musician.

Something that I consider to be powerful is the energy in area in the MacLaurin  Building where all the practice rooms are.  I find the sounds of everyone practicing as well as the general environment to be incredibly inspiring, and therefore powerful. I am in my first year at UVic, and I am sure that in past years, this sort of powerful energy has been even stronger, but even amidst social distancing protocols, I find that there is such power in students coming together in one place to learn and to simply make music. In fact, I think that the power is even stronger amidst COVID-19, as it is the power in perseverance.

While I haven’t been spending an incredibly large amount of time out in public settings recently, I have been noticing  dominant sounds that are consistently recurring, even in my own home. In this current climate where we are surrounded by technology in almost everything we do, I have noticed a tie between that and the sounds that are surrounding me. The two most dominant are the low buzzing hum of my refrigerator,  and the obnoxiously loud fan in my laptop. The sound of my laptop fan has a very fluttery sound, in which the sound is consistently flowing as long as my laptop is on, while my fridge produces a sort of low grumbly buzz which fluctuates in volume  and intensity. However, even though my laptop fan has a lighter sound, it is much louder than my fridge. While both of these sounds stem from electricity and have very technology-focused sounds,  they contrast in almost every way, and create a very interesting and almost harmonic blend of sounds.

I think that in a lot of ways, free time is something that we all take for granted. Especially recently, such as March and April a few months ago, it is something that so many people had, yet so many found it difficult to find productive ways to use it, myself included. I think that this is because when we simply have all this free time in front of us and nothing to do with it, it’s almost as if we have no free time at all, because it’s time that doesn’t mean anything. Sometimes we have to steal time in order to prioritize the things that are important, and for that free time to have meaning. Once our time has meaning, it will become productive.

Something that particularly stuck with me from the film was the concept of a “public living room”.  I think that so much of all art that we create relates to this concept, because as musicians, our job is to create music to be shared with public audiences. Creating art is one of the most personal things a person can do, as it is something that connects directly to our own ideas, even when we are performing works written by others. When we open ourselves up to be vulnerable and share music with a public audience, it is very similar to Laskey’s concept of his art gallery being a sort of public living room. For musicians, this living room could be a theatre, or a performance hall of sorts.