This is based on a conversation I thought that I had with Aaron Copland.
“What is it to be musical?” I asked,
“Musicality is how one lives. It is in the rhythmic knocking of the woodpecker’s beak upon a mighty redwood and the whistling of the songbird who sits in its cage in my office. It is the metered panting of a dog who is catching his breath after chasing some quick culprit and it is the calm blowing of the winds over a wide open plane in Montana or perhaps, Wyoming” He answered. I stared at him. My pupils dilate as if this answer was too great for my ears and had to be absorbed through my eyeballs.
My hand shakes as I write down the rest of his answer. I look up at him. “Who can be musical?” I ask.
His eyes slowly turned downward and finally stopped, fixed it seems on one of my untied shoelaces. After a few seconds of staring, he opened his mouth and spoke of a holy edict that said “He who is music, is god. Let all who know this be saved”. I wondered from where this law had first been written. Had it been issued by a great empire whose enormous pyramids to the gods had been bathed in the blood of the sacrifice or had it perhaps it had been said offhandedly by Bach or Schumann or Pachelbel to a street urchin who had asked for help. By now my hair had turned white with fear and it felt as if there was a thunderstorm in my chest as my heart beat louder and louder.
“I…” I am choked with terror. “I…uhm. I have one final question”
“Yes. Go on” He seems unfazed by my overt horror.
“Can I be musical as you are?”
“Levels of musicality are not subject to quantification, at least not to a certain degree. There are of course obvious difference between a novice and an expert, but how do we measure two musicians who have both obtained the level of expert. Is it speed and technique? Knowledge of theory and harmony? Is it length of time at expert level? Suppose there are two musicians both considered to be of expert level but one has furious speed and technique but lacks proper knowledge and the other has a library of knowledge but lacks speed and technique. Who is the better player? When it comes to matters of this sort, the answer becomes a subjective one. It becomes a matter of personal preference. So in the case of both you and me, I would say that subjectivity would be a great factor in measuring our artistic qualifications. Does this answer your question?”
With that, my eyes began to bleed and I succumbed to the pressure in my chest.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
It seems that you feel great admiration to this person, so great that you couldn't bear the burden of the great awe and deep of his answer and passed out(?). It is worth to say, though, that in the context of the story it's not very clear why you're so worried about this interview as the answers seem--yes, complex--but not patronizing.
Well i didnt passout, my heart explodes in my chest. The main idea of this story is that i aspire to be as great of a composer as Aaron Copland (The Namesake of the music school in Queens Collehe)that i am actually scared when i have the chance to meet him because i view his genius to be on a level i couldnt imagine. The answers are not meant to be patronizing the are supposed to be complex, and the complexity of the content within those answers is what ultimately kills me. I was inspired by the ancient jewish notion that if you were to both see and hear god it would kill you.
Just a note, I know my grammer and spelling where shitty on the last post. I was in a rush. My apologies.
Interesting piece, Jacob. In particular, it's interesting that you decided to actually present Copland's answers, written by you I assume. Doing this makes it very hard to maintain the level of mystical awe that I think you are after. Did you consider using actually quotes from Copland? Or perhaps not revealing his answers at all, only describing the effect they have on you?
It is a very subjective type of story. So yes my the answers i put hold more importance to me as a musician. It is only the kind of answers that i imagine that Copland would give
As i read this piece my interest drifted. I understand that there is a level of complexity to the answers given by the person being interviewed. But similarly to the interviewee i myself was perplex by the responses. Maybe it would be helpful if after the answers were given the Copland elaborated on his answers Or you explained the answers yourself making them seem more clear and meaningful.
Post a Comment