Complexity

[mcgillcomposer]

Hi everyone,

This is a topic relevant to many fields, including music, and I am curious to know what your thoughts are on the matter.

It seems that complexity is often interpreted as an indication of quality. Personally, I think this type of thinking is primitive and, to put it quite bluntly, idiotic. Of course, there are situations when the complexity of something does contribute to its quality, but equally so, there are instances when it either makes no difference or, in fact, makes something worse.

What do you think?

[pianistimo]

i happen to love ives - but hardly anyone after him.  'modern' complexity only in limited amounts.  of course, that's usually all they give you.  wasn't most of milton babbit's works 7-8 minutes - and big works 11 or so? 

[mcgillcomposer]

i happen to love ives - but hardly anyone after him.  'modern' complexity only in limited amounts.  of course, that's usually all they give you.  wasn't most of milton babbit's works 7-8 minutes - and big works 11 or so? 

Do you think a lot of what is called 'complex' is actually artificially so?

[pianistimo]

no.  i think it represents the times that we live in.  fast paced.  computer and remote controlled.  it just represents - as art does - the world around us.  which is, when you think about it, very artificial.

[rc]

I think the appeal of complexity is intellectual.  Some tend to disregard things they can easily understand...  Or if they like something, feel the need to rationalize it this way by complicating it.

It's tough talking in such abstractions, in music my favorite is when I like something I hear and when I get to learning it am surprised by the complexity - "wow, there's a lot to this!".

I'm not a fan of puzzles for their own sake.

[Bob]

Kind of a balance.  You can have something simple, that's great.  You can have something great that needs or happens to be complex.  And then just a level of complexity that creates something, not necessarily great, but some type of patterns, complexity -- like a shape. 

[ahinton]

The vital difference is between the complex and the complicated; what is complex is so by its very nature - i.e. inherently - whereas what is complicated has had complexity added to it. I see little purpose in music being complicated for the sake of so doing, but if the thoughts are complex then the appropriate manner of their expression is likely also to be complex.

Best,

Alistair

[ted]

We have that in common, Susan. Ives's music has for me an endearingly simple quality. He just seemed to ignore all debates and theories and created the sounds he enjoyed. Like naive painting - you know, those ones done by untutored artists, with lots of people doing things in busy parallel perspective landscapes - it captures one's attention at a very primitive, charmingly hypnotic level. Of course the music itself is not simple to read or execute, and Ives himself, when he wrote about music, did so with a marked intellectual and mystical overtone; very stimulating to read though. Nonetheless I think that the underlying spirit of Ives is neither complex nor complicated.

I suppose the argument about whether art of necessity reflects life could go on forever. I think some definitely does - as you say, hectic movement and automated rhythms -  but some still comes from deep within the mind of its creator. If the creator is not a worldly person, and tends to dwell in fantasy, then we would expect his or her musical creations to reflect the landscapes of the mind rather than external vistas. 

No, I do not like creating music after the manner of solving a puzzle either, but a great many musicians do enjoy it and good luck to them if it makes them happy..