Ian Pace on Sorabji

[ahinton]

I find it amazing how irrational some people can be. For instance, Wikipedia states the following:

In 1969 she was put to a test by the British Broadcasting Corporation, who set her at a piano where she waited for the spirit of Liszt to appear to her. In due course she produced a piece, supposedly dictated by Liszt. Brown claimed the piece was too hard for her to play so another pianist was engaged to play it.

My question is as follows: How did they know she didn't compose the piece prior to that test?

Well, they didn't I suppose - although I gather that something was going on with her that could not be accounted for by means of her own limited abilities; interesting as that obviously was, the fact (for me, at least) remains that either whatever was going on was not some kind of communication with Liszt and others or composers such as Liszt must go pretty much ga-ga after death...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

If one could communicate with the deceased, we could have a "Sorabji on Ian Pace" thread.

I will go and see my ex as she was a medium.

Thal

[ahinton]

If one could communicate with the deceased, we could have a "Sorabji on Ian Pace" thread.

Possibly so - but that fact that we "could" do so (in theory, at least) would not of itself make one compulsory, fortunately.

best,

Alistair

[john11inc]

o_O


Why were a bunch of posts in this thread deleted?

[thalbergmad]

Too intellectual?

[john11inc]

Too intellectual?

From what I saw: hardly. . .

[thalbergmad]

For me 

[retrouvailles]

I really think the mods should say what and why posts were deleted. It can really create some confusion and/or put things out of context.

[john11inc]

Oddly, they weren't even mine, this time 

[djealnla]

What posts?

[djealnla]

Has Pace answered your subsequent questions, John?

[john11inc]

Naw; he's very busy atm.

[john11inc]

Oh btw, of possible interest is the Ian Pace quasi-fanclub I made.  It's more of a joke, though:

https://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=120265324650569

[ahinton]

Oh btw, of possible interest is the Ian Pace quasi-fanclub I made.  It's more of a joke, though:

https://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=120265324650569

Yes, very amusing, I'm sure, although I cannot help but wonder what might have resulted had you devoted the time it took you to some piano practice instead (not that it's actually any of my business, of course); I wouldn't mind reference to a certain Scottish composer being removed from it, however, even if only because the degree of smartness of that composer has not been scientifically proven and is therefore not necessarily something to which anyone need attempt to aspire...

Considering the length of time that this "facebook" ("eyesbook"?) "quasi-fanclub" has been in existence, the paucity of fans - inversely proportionate as it is to the sheer prolixity of the advertised repertoire on the subject's now well outdated website (yes, of course you knew that I meant him in the other thread!) - might seem somewhat surprising to some, might it not?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I wouldn't mind reference to a certain Scottish composer being removed from it

This would be a good idea, considering you already have your own fan club on facebook.

Thal

[ahinton]

This would be a good idea, considering you already have your own fan club on facebook.

If indeed I do so, I can confirm that it would have been created not by me but by someone else without my agreement or knowledge and, since I have already clarified on this forum's "do you facebook?" thread that I do not do so, my level of interest therein should not be unduly difficult to gauge.

Perhaps it's time to return to the thread topic.

Best,

Alistair

[john11inc]

Yes, very amusing, I'm sure, although I cannot help but wonder what might have resulted had you devoted the time it took you to some piano practice instead

The whole five minutes?

[ahinton]

The whole five minutes?

If that's what it took, yes! Still, that's up to you, of course.

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Naw; he's very busy atm.

I wondered when something like that would appear. Let me guess: "I am currently too busy to write more, but I will write more in depth about it as soon as time permits". How close do I get?

gep

[ahinton]

I wondered when something like that would appear. Let me guess: "I am currently too busy to write more, but I will write more in depth about it as soon as time permits". How close do I get?

Spot on, I'd say; after all, there is an historical precedent from that quarter...

Best,

Alistair

[john11inc]

No.  It was more like I told him that he shouldn't respond if he didn't want to, and I guess he didn't want to.

[ahinton]

No.  It was more like I told him that he shouldn't respond if he didn't want to, and I guess he didn't want to.

But then whether or not he wants to respond and whether or not he does respond surely makes little difference to what is available to consider in the absence of such response until and unless one and/or the other might change, as we have already noted here.

Best,

Alistair

[ryguillian]

Here are some of the things Ian Pace has stated about K. S. Sorabji, his music and his fans in the past (not quoted verbatim):

"Sorabji's music expresses extremely misogynistic sentiments."

"Sorabji's music is obsessed with itself."

"Sorabji's compositional techniques are rudimentary and require no talent."

"Sorabji sympathized with the racial theories of the Nazis."

"There's always a right wing clique around that guy [Sorabji]."

Discuss.  

I'd love (not really, actually, I wouldn't) to comment on the sundry discussions here, but I'm going to keep it to a few general comments. First of all, what the hell is the point of this thread? There are, I think, two points to make: 1. I don't know who you are, but I know you're not Ian Pace, so don't speak for Ian Pace. At the outset you mark your quoted questions exactly not verbatim and even if they were you have no right really to quote Mr. Pace out of context. Mr. Pace is a true musician and thinker and this treatment doesn't do him—or anyone—justice, even if it's a topic on which I disagree with him. So basically, shut up. 2. I think it's pretty clear that the purpose of this thread was to entice. The cadence of the responses only confirms this, really. This all is 10,000 miles removed from sober discourse. Can't we stop doing this, please? Display some damn intellectual integrity for heaven's sake. Or, at the very least, for Alistair's sake.

Now, I'd like to gloss over a few general themes. First, "race and music" is an extremely complicated matter. And I think it's pretty clear that Sorabji had some pretty pathetic and, let's say, "timely" views on the issue. Views, as a matter of fact, not entirely different from those of Nietzsche in his more sad "biologistic" moments. The 19th century had devils like Ernst Haeckel—think of a more seething, awful, ratty incarnation of Richard Dawkins—who espoused all sorts of crackpot theories of "vitality." The rhetoric of race and its various "vital" components was heavy in the late 19th century (there are tons of examples in Nietzsche's output) and coupled with the surging popularity of Darwin it's not surprising that Sorabji (who seemed to systematically half-learn almost everything that interested him) adopted a bastardized notion of race. Barring unbelievable claims that his obsession with race was a product of "racial otherness" to protect him from xenophobic Englishmen (a view espoused in the album booklet of Powell's recording of "Fantasia Ispanica"), that's that.

Now, how does this come out in his music? Not at all, really. As it stands and funny enough, one of his "racial" pieces was based on a false notion about his past; he thought he had Spanish in him—e.g., "Fantasia Ispanica". So yeah, I think that shows how "credible" Sorabji's racial philosophy was. If you can even call it his. The world-historical ass that Sorabji was starts to reveal itself...

One should also think about whether or not Mr. Pace's opinion of Sorabji really matters that much. I don't, for example, care what Marc-André Hamelin thinks about Ligeti's music. He hasn't played it. And Alistair pointed out, Pace hasn't played Sorabji's music. Not that you need to play Sorabji's music to have an opinion of it, but I think there are other opinions to consider.

To be sure, as a person Sorabji seems pretty detestable to me: verbose, bourgeoise to a disgusting degree, solitary to the point of recklessness, intellectually dishonest. But Sorabji and Sorabji's music are two things (even if such tidy compartmentalization of people and their work seems a little sick to me). And I don't think there's any question that he had immense creative energy and contributes something interesting to piano music (even if we're still trying to figure out quite what that is). I do wish Sorabji would have been a little more careful in his music. I mean this sincerely when I say it—had Sorabji been more careful about developing a solid compositional technique I think he'd easily be one of the greatest composers of the early 20th century. His style is inimitable. He had surging creative power, but yes in matters of technique he was haphazard for the most part. That's why—with Richard Barrett—I find myself attracted to moment's of Sorabji's music where (sometimes I wonder if not through luck) everything "just works." But the specious fugues, the "miscellaneous" harmony... it really is pretty ingratiating if you're trying to take the man even remotely seriously. And all this confounded with his insane, pompous estimation of himself (comparing the through-composed "Opus clavicembalisticum" to Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata and Bach's "Well-Tempered Clavier") makes the stakes particularly high for him...

I think it would really be worth it for people around here to stop acting so stupid and use a little intellectual conscience when writing questions. Please, so I can using my idle time meticulously searching Google Maps for a nice coal mine to stick you people in.

[djealnla]

I don't know who you are, but I know you're not Ian Pace, so don't speak for Ian Pace. At the outset you mark your quoted questions exactly not verbatim and even if they were you have no right really to quote Mr. Pace out of context.

According to which statute? Have you ever heard the name Jane Akre?

Mr. Pace is a true musician and thinker and this treatment doesn't do him—or anyone—justice, even if it's a topic on which I disagree with him.

What treatment?

So basically, shut up.

What is this supposed to mean?

I think it's pretty clear that the purpose of this thread was to entice. The cadence of the responses only confirms this, really. This all is 10,000 miles removed from sober discourse. Can't we stop doing this, please? Display some damn intellectual integrity for heaven's sake. Or, at the very least, for Alistair's sake.

Not unlike that of the following two posts by you, that's for sure:

Everyone knows. No one cares. Chris Rice is a cartoon pornographer and nobody wants to support his enterprises. I encourage Tellef to release on a label other than Altarus.

Best,

Ry

Alistair, let's get one thing straight. I contribute to the music community by providing Web space for many users on this forum and also by distributing recordings and videos and sheet music. You contribute nothing; you're an anti-social hyper-verbose profiteering dickhead. You don't give free PDFs of Sorabji's scores or distribute music or anything like that. You don't even start threads on this forum. You just submit edgewise misc. circumloquacious trash that's the textual equivalent of an optical "floater" or cataract.

*** yourself,

Ryan

[djealnla]

He [Marc-André Hamelin] hasn't played it [Ligeti's music].

I seem to remember he played it at least once in public.

[john11inc]

But then whether or not he wants to respond and whether or not he does respond surely makes little difference to what is available to consider in the absence of such response until and unless one and/or thje other might change, as we have already noted here.

Best,

Alistair

In absolutely no way does such a tautological and obvious statement conform to what was originally insinuated in response to my relaying of Ian Pace's failure (not that it's a failure, and I would consider it a failure on his part if he did bother to respond, considering the vacuity permeating this thread).  Because I was in a position to be moderately helpful, given my friendship with Pace, I offered to join the thread in such a capacity and only in such a capacity; as you can see, I have almost entirely abstained from giving my own opinion on the insurmountable number of topics that have been brushed upon in this thread, most all of them in a hilariously superficial manner.

As well, given your admittance of such, it seems odd that such a large amount of conversation has nevertheless managed to go on.  Frankly, my view of this thread is similar to Ryan's in that it serves no legitimate purpose, and pending Ian joining this forum and posting himself (which I can nearly guarantee he will not do) it continues to serve no purpose.  However, I will go one step further in that I feel it's obvious that the original poster's motives are egocentric: the way in which this thread was proposed seems to have little reason other than to publicly state that the original poster is aware that such things have been said, and for some reason we should be vaguely impressed by this fact, as well as the fact that the person thinks about such things.  Given how the pseudo-quotes were presented (in a totally biased and purposefully unflattering light), I also assume such forms a fallacious base by which to later attack them, which again serves no actual purpose.

It is a fact that Sorabji had misogynistic views; whether they were as strong as one might infer from only being familiar with the documents that specifically deal with it doesn't detract from the fact that he was a misogynist.  Qualifying that his music somehow has a misogynistic aspect to it is incredibly difficult to do, but I think it is intuitively obvious that there is a strong possibility of such, given that there are many things that one could point to in order to quasi-substantiate such a view.  Can you empirically validate the statement?  No, absolutely not.  But if you look at it from a differantial (not a typo: talking about Derrida) point of view, an even stronger argument can be made for this belief.  Because it's going to be impossible to "prove" it was or wasn't the case, discussing it in such a manner is stupid.

Sorabji's music is extremely self-reverential, in my opinion.  I don't think very many people would disagree with this.  It seems to live on in honor of itself, or its composer, as opposed to being pure art.  This is not necessarily a bad thing and doesn't speak to Sorabji's skill as a composer, and can only qualify as a personal interpretation of Sorabji's output.  Again, this is so abstract that talking about it in black and white terms is pointless.

Sorabji's compositional techniques are not "rudimentary", and they certainly didn't require "no talent".  That statement is idiotic when standing alone.  While I don't agree with Pace regarding its pervasiveness, I do also get the feeling that many sections of his works were written conveniently, in that form often came to dominate the music, regardless of how (in)commensurable they were.  It often feels as though the music was already there, and then a superfluous haze of artificially infused chromaticism was violently shoved into the music against its will, often doing a disservice to the music itself.  The Opus Clavicembalisticum is actually the first piece I would point to as an example of this, and I think it's highly unfortunate that the OC was burdened with more historical significance and notoriety than some of his other, larger works, which I think are much better.  Again, I am not an end-all expert on Sorabji, but I am quite familiar with the majority of his typeset works (and even some that aren't), and I consider the OC to be the worst of the lot.  

The statement regarding Sorabji sympathizing with Nazis looks ludicrous without the context that was later provided, but is accurate.  Whether or not using the very instigatory word "Nazi" does a service to the point is at least questionable, but the argument is valid.  He did place a heavy emphasis on racial origin, which was a view also shared by the Nazis.  Using the word "Nazi" to describe Sorabji is inappropriate and appellate, but the argument stands.  Just inflammatory wording that harkens to that which isn't appropriate.

Frankly, I don't know anything about the political or economic views of people who listen to Sorabji, but it is true that Sorabji himself had, how to put it lightly. . . tastes that are considered more coalescent with right wing ideology than left wing ideology.  I find the topic impossible to address in a way that would adequately draw us to an answer regarding the voracity of the statement and I find it irrelevant to Sorabji's music.  If I was under the impression that it permeated his music I would believe it to be apropos, but because I do not get the feeling his political views (unless you want to consider sexuality a "political view", which I don't) were expressed in his music, I find the topic pointless.

Frankly, Ian Pace is a terrifyingly smart person; I do not idolize him, as one might think, and disagree with him often (and let him know it in no more of a kind manner than I do anyone else on here), but he is without a doubt one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people in the world of music, based on my contact with him, so to harass him (and it is harassment, really) with these loaded questions on an issue he cares little about is just not something I'm very interested in; I was merely humoring the idiocy of this thread, and as opposed to how I normally deal with these sorts of situations, given just how much crap, and in how many directions it's being flung, I figured I would let other people just take a look at the intellectual rigor that went into this thread and let people make their own opinions.

Not that this is especially directed at you, Alistair, but you're just who I happen to be responding to.  In fact, I'd even go so far as to say you were a casualty in this stupidity, your presence unfortunately seeming necessary given the subject being Sorabji.  Although I'd have hoped, given the lack of context and explanation of these quotations, that you wouldn't have leaped at the opportunity to do a bit of slandering, not that you didn't express some reticence, but such reticence seemed in opposition to some things you did eventually decide to go ahead and state.

[djealnla]

I don't know who you are, but I know you're not Ian Pace, so don't speak for Ian Pace.

Hamelin recently has started citing the number of people at Powell's NYC performance of Opus clavicembalisticum when asked about Sorabji.

[djealnla]

However, I will go one step further in that I feel it's obvious that the original poster's motives are egocentric: the way in which this thread was proposed seems to have little reason other than to publicly state that the original poster is aware that such things have been said, and for some reason we should be vaguely impressed by this fact, as well as the fact that the person thinks about such things.  Given how the pseudo-quotes were presented (in a totally biased and purposefully unflattering light), I also assume such forms a fallacious base by which to later attack them, which again serves no actual purpose.

Not at all, I was merely hoping someone with some insights into the motivation behind Pace's statements would be able to say something more specific on the matter. Giving inaccurate quotes was the best I could do (unless I decided not to start this thread), since I don't have a photographic memory and couldn't find the web-page with the original statements which Pace made.

I apologize if I have offended anyone with this thread, but even if read fully in context, Pace's remarks are quite shocking, so if you (or anyone else) deem(s) their discussion problematic, perhaps this topic should be made a taboo out of altogether.

[prometheus]

Pretty sure john11inch is just trolling again and he doesn't even know who Pace is.

[ahinton]

One departs from the computer for a few hours and...

First of all, what the hell is the point of this thread?

That may vary from person to person; my only doubts about its point is the fact that Ian Pace's large and varied repertoire noticeably excludes any work by Sorabji.

I don't know who you are, but I know you're not Ian Pace, so don't speak for Ian Pace. At the outset you mark your quoted questions exactly not verbatim and even if they were you have no right really to quote Mr. Pace out of context. Mr. Pace is a true musician and thinker and this treatment doesn't do him—or anyone—justice, even if it's a topic on which I disagree with him. So basically, shut up.

If - as is the case - Mr Pace himself has not contributed anything to this thread but has said and written things about Sorabji elsewhere that others have heard and read, there is no particular reason not to comment on them, just as there is no obligation to do so.

I think it's pretty clear that the purpose of this thread was to entice. The cadence of the responses only confirms this, really. This all is 10,000 miles removed from sober discourse. Can't we stop doing this, please? Display some damn intellectual integrity for heaven's sake. Or, at the very least, for Alistair's sake.

As I suggested, as Mr Pace has contributed nothing here, there's no inherent reason why any comments on his observations about Sorabji should of necessity be "removed from sober discourse" or lack "intellectual integrity", although there is at the same time no guarantee of either, of course.

"race and music" is an extremely complicated matter. And I think it's pretty clear that Sorabji had some pretty pathetic and, let's say, "timely" views on the issue. Views, as a matter of fact, not entirely different from those of Nietzsche in his more sad "biologistic" moments. The 19th century had devils like Ernst Haeckel—think of a more seething, awful, ratty incarnation of Richard Dawkins—who espoused all sorts of crackpot theories of "vitality." The rhetoric of race and its various "vital" components was heavy in the late 19th century (there are tons of examples in Nietzsche's output) and coupled with the surging popularity of Darwin it's not surprising that Sorabji (who seemed to systematically half-learn almost everything that interested him) adopted a bastardized notion of race.

It is indeed a complex subject in general terms, but any proper consideration of where Sorabji might fit into it must at the very least take account of such views as he may have expressed both verbally and in writing over his entire life rather than the kind of selective cherry-picking of odd bits and pieces for no obvious purpose other than for the selective cherry-picker to make his or her own point. There has ben no allowance made here for the fact that, like most humans, Sorabji's thoughts on such matters (or indeed any others) were not fixed from the outset for life in ways that would not permit changes of mind; one has only to consider his various changes of heart about Fauré, Richard Strauss, Scriabin, Delius and Shostakovich for it to be obvious that Sorabji never took anything for granted as though it would and could never change.

Barring unbelievable claims that his obsession with race was a product of "racial otherness" to protect him from xenophobic Englishmen (a view espoused in the album booklet of Powell's recording of "Fantasia Ispanica"), that's that.

Sorabji did indeed encounter what we would nowadays call racial abuse as a youth, but neither that nor anything else made him "obsessed" with racial matters; in all my many conversations with him over more than a decade and a half, he hardly ever mentioned the subject, actually.

Now, how does this come out in his music? Not at all, really.

Precisely - any more than his alleged "misogyny" does. Not only does it not, it also cannot.

As it stands and funny enough, one of his "racial" pieces was based on a false notion about his past; he thought he had Spanish in him—e.g., "Fantasia Ispanica".

On what grounds do you conclude that Sorabji made a false assumption as to his racial origins? Do you know what he knew?

So yeah, I think that shows how "credible" Sorabji's racial philosophy was. If you can even call it his. The world-historical ass that Sorabji was starts to reveal itself...

By such a statement you are telling us all about yourself and nothing about Sorabji.

One should also think about whether or not Mr. Pace's opinion of Sorabji really matters that much. I don't, for example, care what Marc-André Hamelin thinks about Ligeti's music. He hasn't played it. And Alistair pointed out, Pace hasn't played Sorabji's music. Not that you need to play Sorabji's music to have an opinion of it, but I think there are other opinions to consider.

Fair comment.

To be sure, as a person Sorabji seems pretty detestable to me: verbose, bourgeoise to a disgusting degree, solitary to the point of recklessness, intellectually dishonest.

"Seems" is what might redeem your statement here if it were actually redeemable. You didn;t know him any more than Mr Pace did. I don't know what you think to mean by your use of the term "bourgeoise" but, if you must nevertheless dig yourself in still deeper by using it, then the final "e" needs to be dropped.

but But Sorabji and Sorabji's music are two things (even if such tidy compartmentalization of people and their work seems a little sick to me). And I don't think there's any question that he had immense creative energy and contributes something interesting to piano music (even if we're still trying to figure out quite what that is).

You're absolutely correct here.

I do wish Sorabji would have been a little more careful in his music. I mean this sincerely when I say it—had Sorabji been more careful about developing a solid compositional technique I think he'd easily be one of the greatest composers of the early 20th century. His style is inimitable. He had surging creative power, but yes in matters of technique he was haphazard for the most part. That's why—with Richard Barrett—I find myself attracted to moment's of Sorabji's music where (sometimes I wonder if not through luck) everything "just works." But the specious fugues, the "miscellaneous" harmony... it really is pretty ingratiating if you're trying to take the man even remotely seriously.

But those who do take him seriously (not least the performers and scholars) seem to have had nothing to say about what you feel to be a lack of sufficient "solid compositional technique". I apprecaite your other comments here, but they might make more sense if you elaborated on what you find to be lacking in his "technique" and why. I daresay, for example, that Honegger and others who declined to teach Xenakis must have felt the same about him, yet Messiaen had the vision to realise that Xenakis was going to develop his own solid compositional techniques to suit his own unique vision, which is what he did. The case is, of course, far removed frrom Sorabji in terms of the nature of the respective composer's music, especially in that Sorabji espoused and expanded the tried and tested as part of what he did, but the cap still fits.

And all this confounded with his insane, pompous estimation of himself (comparing the through-composed "Opus clavicembalisticum" to Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata and Bach's "Well-Tempered Clavier") makes the stakes particularly high for him...

So you can't take - or even recognise - a joke, then? Clearly not! Ah, well...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

In absolutely no way does such a tautological and obvious statement conform to what was originally insinuated in response to my relaying of Ian Pace's failure (not that it's a failure, and I would consider it a failure on his part if he did bother to respond, considering the vacuity permeating this thread).  Because I was in a position to be moderately helpful, given my friendship with Pace, I offered to join the thread in such a capacity and only in such a capacity; as you can see, I have almost entirely abstained from giving my own opinion on the insurmountable number of topics that have been brushed upon in this thread, most all of them in a hilariously superficial manner.

I didn't use the word "failure"; you did. I did not intend my statement to be other than obvious. I have no objection to your relaying anything that Ian Pace may have said or written to you and I have not sought to suggest otherwise. I also recognise and agree that you have not sought to present your own opinions in this thread so far.

As well, given your admittance of such, it seems odd that such a large amount of conversation has nevertheless managed to go on.  Frankly, my view of this thread is similar to Ryan's in that it serves no legitimate purpose, and pending Ian joining this forum and posting himself (which I can nearly guarantee he will not do) it continues to serve no purpose.

As I implied above, I have my own doubts as to the validity of the thread in terms of what useful ideas it might generate that are directly germane to the topic as such, particularly in the absence of Mr Pace as a contributor to it (and, for the avoidance of doubt, that is not meant as any kind of accusation).

However, I will go one step further in that I feel it's obvious that the original poster's motives are egocentric: the way in which this thread was proposed seems to have little reason other than to publicly state that the original poster is aware that such things have been said, and for some reason we should be vaguely impressed by this fact, as well as the fact that the person thinks about such things.  Given how the pseudo-quotes were presented (in a totally biased and purposefully unflattering light), I also assume such forms a fallacious base by which to later attack them, which again serves no actual purpose.

I won't go so far as to comment on the motives of the initiator of this thread; suffice it to say that I have already expressed my reservations.

It is a fact that Sorabji had misogynistic views; whether they were as strong as one might infer from only being familiar with the documents that specifically deal with it doesn't detract from the fact that he was a misogynist.  Qualifying that his music somehow has a misogynistic aspect to it is incredibly difficult to do, but I think it is intuitively obvious that there is a strong possibility of such, given that there are many things that one could point to in order to quasi-substantiate such a view.  Can you empirically validate the statement?  No, absolutely not.  But if you look at it from a differantial (not a typo: talking about Derrida) point of view, an even stronger argument can be made for this belief.  Because it's going to be impossible to "prove" it was or wasn't the case, discussing it in such a manner is stupid.

As I stated earlier, a proper consideration of Sorabji's views upon women or indeed anything else really presumes a far deeper knowledge and understanding of those views and his manner of expressing them from across the entirety of his long life, with due attention accorded to the extent to which they were flexible, than has been provided here by those who never met or corresponded with the composer. As to his views on women or anything else manifesting themselves in his music, there's no useful mileage to be travelled by leaning on Derrida or anyone else. You are correct that such statements cannot be empirically validated but, so far, there has not even been any specific evidence provided as to the particular ways in which Sorabji set about composing that could even give some people a hunch that there is such a  connection either. What conceivable connection have fugues, passacaglias, tropical nocturnes, variations and the like - and the way in which their composer goes about writing them - or even the predilaction for keyboard expression - with views on matters of race, sex, politics and the rest?

Sorabji's music is extremely self-reverential, in my opinion.  I don't think very many people would disagree with this.  It seems to live on in honor of itself, or its composer, as opposed to being pure art.  This is not necessarily a bad thing and doesn't speak to Sorabji's skill as a composer, and can only qualify as a personal interpretation of Sorabji's output.  Again, this is so abstract that talking about it in black and white terms is pointless.

Agreed, except that one nees to consider precisely what is meant by "pure art" and there's no obvious reason why such art cannot live on in honour of itelf t=for the benefit of later generations of listeners and performers in any case. Furthermore, much the same could as easily be said of many other composers.

Sorabji's compositional techniques are not "rudimentary", and they certainly didn't require "no talent".  That statement is idiotic when standing alone.  While I don't agree with Pace regarding its pervasiveness, I do also get the feeling that many sections of his works were written conveniently, in that form often came to dominate the music, regardless of how (in)commensurable they were.  It often feels as though the music was already there, and then a superfluous haze of artificially infused chromaticism was violently shoved into the music against its will, often doing a disservice to the music itself.  The Opus Clavicembalisticum is actually the first piece I would point to as an example of this, and I think it's highly unfortunate that the OC was burdened with more historical significance and notoriety than some of his other, larger works, which I think are much better.  Again, I am not an end-all expert on Sorabji, but I am quite familiar with the majority of his typeset works (and even some that aren't), and I consider the OC to be the worst of the lot.

Interesting and well-considered thoughts (indeed a good deal more considered than some other in this thread!), although I do not agree that anything was ever forced into Sorabji's music from some kind of external independent source as you suggest; the very speed at which he wrote might alone point to this notion holding no water. I also don't share your view of OC, although there's no doubt that quite a few of his other large-scale pieces are superior to it - the composer himself would have agreed with that.

The statement regarding Sorabji sympathizing with Nazis looks ludicrous without the context that was later provided, but is accurate.  Whether or not using the very instigatory word "Nazi" does a service to the point is at least questionable, but the argument is valid.  He did place a heavy emphasis on racial origin, which was a view also shared by the Nazis.  Using the word "Nazi" to describe Sorabji is inappropriate and appellate, but the argument stands.  Just inflammatory wording that harkens to that which isn't appropriate.

I don't fully understand your point here about the alleged "accuracy" of this statement. He told me, for example, that he thought Adolf Hitler to be a dangerous lunatic who had almost no idea of racial matters but who knew how to make a lot of unpleasant noise that convinced some people otherwise; had he publicly expressed such a view in Germany in the 1930s or early 1940s, I rather suspect that he'd have been pressed into (very short-lived) service as yet another of the Entartete Musik team. It is also apparently necessary for me to repeat that Sorabji was himself of mixed race, a factor that would hardly have endeared him to self-styled "racial purists" of the Nazi type.

Frankly, I don't know anything about the political or economic views of people who listen to Sorabji, but it is true that Sorabji himself had, how to put it lightly. . . tastes that are considered more coalescent with right wing ideology than left wing ideology.  I find the topic impossible to address in a way that would adequately draw us to an answer regarding the voracity of the statement and I find it irrelevant to Sorabji's music.  If I was under the impression that it permeated his music I would believe it to be apropos, but because I do not get the feeling his political views (unless you want to consider sexuality a "political view", which I don't) were expressed in his music, I find the topic pointless.

I agree wholeheartedly with all that you say here (although I think that, by "voracity", you mean "veracity", unless once again there's an American spelling of which I am ignorant). I am aware that Mr Pace and others seem to find it anathema for musicians to hold any views that are other than overtly left-wing, but that's their prerogative. Accordongly, you make good sense here whereas Mr Pace makes none.

Frankly, Ian Pace is a terrifyingly smart person; I do not idolize him, as one might think, and disagree with him often (and let him know it in no more of a kind manner than I do anyone else on here), but he is without a doubt one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people in the world of music, based on my contact with him, so to harass him (and it is harassment, really) with these loaded questions on an issue he cares little about is just not something I'm very interested in; I was merely humoring the idiocy of this thread, and as opposed to how I normally deal with these sorts of situations, given just how much crap, and in how many directions it's being flung, I figured I would let other people just take a look at the intellectual rigor that went into this thread and let people make their own opinions.

I cannot speak for anyone else here, but I have no interest in harassing Mr Pace, especially in the kind of indirect manner of writing in a thread such as this.

Not that this is especially directed at you, Alistair, but you're just who I happen to be responding to.  In fact, I'd even go so far as to say you were a casualty in this stupidity, your presence unfortunately seeming necessary given the subject being Sorabji.  Although I'd have hoped, given the lack of context and explanation of these quotations, that you wouldn't have leaped at the opportunity to do a bit of slandering, not that you didn't express some reticence, but such reticence seemed in opposition to some things you did eventually decide to go ahead and state.

I have not sought to slander anyone, Mr Pace included. In disagreeing diametrically with what he has written to me and to others about a composer for whom he clearly has more vicious contempt than for any other (both as a man and as a composer) and in pointing out here that Mr Pace's views have been formed without the benefit of his having ever performed any of Sorabji's music or corresponded with or met Sorabji, I am merely speaking the truth; no insults, let alone slander, is, was or need be intended and none should be read into my remarks.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Pretty sure john11inch is just trolling again and he doesn't even know who Pace is.

Of course he knows who he is! - and whatever doubts you may have of the authenticity of what he states that he is forwarding here, Mr Pace's vehemently negative views on Sorabji the man and Sorabji the composer are hardly unknown and john11inch has not been seeking to promote his own opinions here.

Best,

Alistair

[gep]

Can't we stop doing this, please? Display some damn intellectual integrity for heaven's sake.

After which comes the rest of your post, which is, how shall I put it, undisplaying?

he thought he had Spanish in him

Perhaps you'd care to read Sean Owen's thesis ("Oral Biography"). It might prevent you from making statements based on facts you

systematically half-learn

at best.

To be sure, as a person Sorabji seems pretty detestable to me: verbose, bourgeoise to a disgusting degree, solitary to the point of recklessness, intellectually dishonest.

I gather you are the complete opposite thereof, then?

Sorabji himself had, how to put it lightly. . . tastes that are considered more coalescent with right wing ideology than left wing ideology.  I find the topic impossible to address in a way that would adequately draw us to an answer regarding the voracity of the statement and I find it irrelevant to Sorabji's music.  If I was under the impression that it permeated his music I would believe it to be apropos, but because I do not get the feeling his political views (unless you want to consider sexuality a "political view", which I don't) were expressed in his music,

Exactly. Whatever one feels about Sorabji the person (and I must say that, based on the limited information I have, the "well-known" Sorabji may not be all that known well), that should have absolutely nothing to do with how one feels about the music. Let's face it, how many of the well known and loved composers were, as a person, all that pleasant? Beethoven? Wagner... Pace seems to dislike the music because of his dislike for the man. And that dislike seems to be pretty much based on things "half-learned", while not caring to "whole-learn" them. His choice, so be it. End of thread, as far as I am concerned...

all best,
gep

[minor9th]

I equate Mr. Pace's views of Sorabji's music with Justin Bieber's recent statements on abortion: WHO CARES?

[djealnla]

Again, I am not an end-all expert on Sorabji, but I am quite familiar with the majority of his typeset works (and even some that aren't), and I consider the OC to be the worst of the lot.

Why? Sorabji's biggest fans hold it in very high esteem, particularly because of its form. Not that that necessarily means nor should mean anything to you, of course.

[djealnla]

I equate Mr. Pace's views of Sorabji's music with Justin Bieber's recent statements on abortion: WHO CARES?

The WHO cares? Not that surprising, frankly.

Jokes aside, it's probably the first thing he has done that I have esteem for. 

[djealnla]

Sorabji's music is extremely self-reverential, in my opinion.

Didn't you mean to say "self-referential"?

[minor9th]

The WHO cares? Not that surprising, frankly.

Jokes aside, it's probably the first thing he has done that I have esteem for. 

Who--Pace or Bieber?

[ahinton]

Didn't you mean to say "self-referential"?

Even if he did, it would be one of the more interesting typos, methinks (even if Derrida could not be invoked in its context on this occasion).

Anyway, do you really think that there's any more mileage to be gotten from this thread, given Mr Pace's (a) general experiential distance from Sorabji and his music and (b) practical distance from direct participation in this discussion?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Even if he did, it would be one of the more intersting typos, methinks

Well, more intersting than that one.

Thal

[ahinton]

Well, more intersting than that one.

Indeed so - but some of us might have to wait to find out whether or not his actually was one; in the meantime, might it be argued that the various pacing up and down here has gone around in ever-decreasing circles and gotten nowhere beyond a handful of worthwhile asides?

Best,

Alistair

[ryguillian]

I equate Mr. Pace's views of Sorabji's music with Justin Bieber's recent statements on abortion: WHO CARES?

Yeah, this is what I said. Albeit in a much less pithy way.

So you can't take - or even recognise - a joke, then? Clearly not! Ah, well...

I thought it as funny enough that "Sorabji" came after "Sor" in many music libraries. But now I guess librarians should be informed that Sorabji's music should be placed between P.D.Q. Bach's and Poulenc's (all due respect to Poulenc).

Everything else about the man is so darkly portentous—"the harmony bites like nitric acid"—but I guess we should know when the idiot was joking. Sure. Whatever.

Y'r obd't s'v't'.—
Ryan.—

[john11inc]

I agree wholeheartedly with all that you say here (although I think that, by "voracity", you mean "veracity", unless once again there's an American spelling of which I am ignorant).

This is not a typo.  I am American and I am hungry.

Didn't you mean to say "self-referential"?

No, you twat.  I meant to say exactly what I said.  What would "self-referential" have to do with what I wrote after the word?

Jokes aside, it's probably the first thing he has done that I have esteem for. 

Do keep me posted on all the Justin Bieber news.  I haven't had time to keep up with it myself.

[djealnla]

No, you twat.

Seems like somebody's views on abortion have been offended.

Do keep me posted on all the Justin Bieber news.  I haven't had time to keep up with it myself.

Honestly, I only know about his first statement (and only as a result of "minor9th"'s post in this thread) and have no interest in finding out how this affair develops.

[djealnla]

Anyway, do you really think that there's any more mileage to be gotten from this thread, given Mr Pace's (a) general experiential distance from Sorabji and his music and (b) practical distance from direct participation in this discussion?

Basically, no. Pace has no interest in telling us what he dislikes about Sorabji's music, just like John had no interest in the other thread in explaining what he dislikes about Mahler's music, so unless Pace writes something himself here, or he happens to answer John's subsequent questions and John publishes his reply here, I won't expect this thread to bring forth any fruit (and neither am I asking Nils to abort it).

[ahinton]

Y'r obd't s'v't'.—

Meaning "your obdurate savant", presumably?...

Best,

Alistair

[minor9th]

Hamelin recently has started citing the number of people at Powell's NYC performance of Opus clavicembalisticum when asked about Sorabji.

I was among the devotees that night--I flew from CA to NY just to attend it! (What was his estimation--50 or so?)

[djealnla]

What was his estimation--50 or so?

Hamelin estimated that the audience consisted of about 25 people, whereas Alistair stated that there were about 100 people present at the concert.

[thalbergmad]

More likely there were 100 at the beginning and 25 by the end. That would have been entirely understandable.

Many had died of old age, some of boredom and others had done the New York Marathon and decided to carry on running. One had bypass surgery during the concert and had time to recover and six had to leave because their Visa ran out during the last movement.

Thal

[mephisto]

More likely there were 100 at the beginning and 25 by the end. That would have been entirely understandable.

Many had died of old age, some of boredom and others had done the New York Marathon and decided to carry on running. One had bypass surgery during the concert and had time to recover and six had to leave because their Visa ran out during the last movement.

Thal

Legendary