Alex Ross, The Rest is Noise

[7/4]

The chapter on US music (and the experiences of emigre composers there) in the Ross was particularly interesting. It only seems to merit a page or two in most general musical histories. Intrigued to read the context out of which some of the music I've been listening to recently arose.

I think the book on American music to get is Kyle Ganns American Music in the 20^th Century. Expensive, but worth it. I found it used and I'm just picking my way through it.

[7/4]

I snagged a copy from Amazon for 8 buck yesterday, it should be here by the end of the week.

Let's see what all the fuss is about.

x

[A Lark Ascending]

I snagged a copy from Amazon for 8 buck yesterday, it should be here by the end of the week.

Let's see what all the fuss is about.

x

Should be no need for any fuss if its read as I think Ross intended it. A general account of a complex topic for a general readership.

It reminds me of Alyn Shipton's 'A New History of Jazz'. Both attempt to tell a broad tale and impose order on a highly complex topic via their own outlook. I seem to recall Shipton being less impressive in the latter third of the book as he tried to race through as many strands of recent jazz history as possible without having the historical distance to really draw it together. I'll be intrigue to see if Ross has the same problem.

[7/4]

I won't find out unless I actually read it!

.

[A Lark Ascending]

I won't find out unless I actually read it! .

That would be a bit radical.

[7/4]

I won't find out unless I actually read it! .

That would be a bit radical.

Of course, it may get here this week, but that doesn't mean I'll have a chance to read it right away.

[A Lark Ascending]

Have now finished this and I fall very much on the positive side of the fence. I'd imagine anyone not intimately involved with 20thC music already will find this an engaging read. I polished it off in less than a week - unusual in even a work of fiction during term time.

He very clearly favours those composers who want to connect with an audience over those with their eyes fixed on permanent revolution regardless of that audience. Yet even though he mocks the pomposity of the attitudes and utterances of the latter, he can still acknowledge the significance of their music.

It isn't perfect - just like Shipton's jazz book it becomes overwhelmed by the sheer volume of music in recent times and can only flit between things. I recall reading somewhere a criticism that it seems more like a set of magazine articles put together - there's some substance in that but I think that again it results from trying to cover such a vast area (there's an interesting bit at the end where he mentions the number of working composers in various countries and you get a real sense of how impossible it is go get a head round everything). His approach reminds me of the way we teach history - you cannot even begin to cover a topic like 'The First World War' in continuous depth, so you give an overview and then zero in on one or two case studies to provide some depth. At times this gets a bit strange - a great chunk of the Britten chapter is given over to a lengthy description of Peter Grimes.

There's a definite geographical bias - I'd argue it over-represents America in the picture. In fact that suited me as it discussed the context of music I know but had read little about. But it leads to a distortion of interpretation. Not surprising, though, given that its prime audience, I suspect, was intended to be American.

I've also read some criticism of his use of ornate, flowery analogies to explain the music. I think such critics are missing a vital point. Most people reading the book (like me) will be unlikely to have much if any understanding of musical notation. Such analogies - however woolly - do convey some idea of the music in a way that precise musicological terms cannot.

Overall a good read and a book that will sit on my shelves for reference in the future.