Morton Feldman in gesprek met Konrad Boehmer
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Festival Nieuwe Muziek Middelburg 2 juli 1987.
onrad Boehmer is geboren in Berlijn. Professor dr. Konrad Boehmer (1941-2014) studeerde muziek, muziekwetenschap, sociologie en filosofie in Keulen. Hjij was van 1968 tot 1963 muziek-redacteur van Vrij Nederland. Sinds 1972 is hij als docent muziekgeschiedenis en moderne muziektheorie verbonden aan het Kon. Conservatorium te Den Haag. Hij publiceerde verschillende boeken. Hij was een gelauwerde componist. Enkele jaren voor zijn overlijden richtte hij de Konrad Boehmer Stichting op die ten doel heeft, de beoefening en bevordering van stromingen binnen de moderne muziek waarvan het vernieuwende karakter nog geen maatschappelijk draagvlak heeft, te bevorderen.
For those terrified of the buzzing at the beginning, it comes and goes.
Great conversation, Feldman was profound and funny indeed, what he says about John Adams a.o. is more true than ever I think. Thank you for uploading.
Thank you so much for uploading this!
Kind regards from Berlin
It's fantastic to (finally) have these available.
Great to have Morton Feldman's verbal inflections, to complement the MusikTexte transcripts.
Thank you so much for releasing this publicly as well as the other interview with Iannis Xenakis. I'll treasure each one of these.
Rest in Peace dear Ad!
you were a great example for the World and for Art!
Interesting to think this was only months before his passing.
Fantastic!
certified Callahan & Witscher momento
The bit about idealism around 1:26:00
The electricty went out? Some people say there are no accidents.
Do you know if this interview is available in an MP3 format for purchase?
you may download this video in a sound format from many sites.
Oy, I hate mortality.
Bartok is third rate? I wonder why he thought that?
I think Feldman is an incredible conversationalist but he's not a good philosopher, let's say. The air of sophistication he exudes only goes so far. He hides what are essentially just opinions behind a dogmatic essentialism, e.g.: an American composer is x, a European composer is y etc., but he can't really articulate what that means beyond some vague notion of historical consciousness. It strikes me that his sense of things is simply what he would prefer to be true, rather than an attempt to get at let's say a real phenomenological view of music, composition, performance, listening etc. So when it comes to Bartók, who the hell knows? He's just saying he doesn't like Bartók that much but he won't say why because he'll have to admit that his criteria are founded more or less upon the same "style barriers" that he criticises others for not being able to overcome.