New Art Movement

Is there anyone else here that feels like everything after ~1918 in music has been a huge mistake? Everything in the West started to go in an abstract, academic, direction just when (imo) the greatest music of all time started. Mind you I'm talking about music that has a score, not Jazz, Rock etc. At the end of the Romantic Era, Rachmaninoff, Mahler, Puccini and Strauss took Western music to its zenith. For some reason Stravinsky, the Absurdists, the Second Viennese School and other experimenters broke through 'the roof ' which was great and all, but the resultant domino effect has taken us to where we are today:

>at bar 420 the first and second violins begin hitting their foreheads with their instruments to symbolize the oppression of womyn of color in feudal Japan.

When I was in music school, I used tolerate and perhaps pretend to like atonal/modern music because that was the 'cool' thing to do. Now I believe it lacks all of the best qualities of music, Emotion, proportion, harmony, form, balance and most importantly, meaning are absent from all modern music I've been able to find. If someone thinks this is untrue please show me, I'd love to see what is being made currently that embodies these qualities.

I'm an amateur composer but I have begun to take it very seriously as an art form. I'm looking to collaborate with other composers who feel the same way I do about the state of music today. I want a group of composers, whether I am with them or not, to react against the conservatory/university musical paradigms the way the Mighty Handful reacted against Tchaikovsky and the Western conservatory composers in Russia.

Now I know an art movement is traditionally named by the artists that come after but the world could be ending soon for all we know. I propose Conservative Reactionism, a reactionary movement in music which picks up where the late Romantic era left off.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8HON4AswPVk
youtube.com/watch?v=6Stu7h7Qup8
youtube.com/watch?v=CVG5R6sIobo
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

cont.

The intention is not to have it stagnate in that time forever, but to evolve to new heights. Hopefully it will delay the relapse of music into chaos for a century.

Inb4 that's very Euro-centric of you/ SJW shit

It already exists and has been around for a century, it's named Neo-Romanticism.

>shitty firetruckcore as the "zenith" of Western music
>writing off minimalism entirely
>Emotion [...] and most importantly, meaning
Kill yourself.

Fuck off and listen to U2

What style of classical is the Diablo 2 Soundtrack? Is that Wagner

>i don't like [insert artform]
okay so do something new
>i propose going back and doing something that's already been done
no that's wrong

>tape music
>musique concrete
>electroacoustic
>minimalism
>microtonal
>new complexity
>spectralism

All elaborate memes. Most 20th century music was a waste of time. Stick to Mozart and Bach pls

learn2 contemporary art

>If someone thinks this is untrue please show me, I'd love to see what is being made currently that embodies these qualities.
youtube.com/watch?v=8HON4AswPVk
youtube.com/watch?v=6Stu7h7Qup8
youtube.com/watch?v=CVG5R6sIobo

>contemporary """"""""""""""""""""""""""art""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Is right OP. Try thinking about the spirit of the music rather than the music itself

>100 years old
>contemporary

i sort of like this one desu, but more so the idea behind it

here's one that's truly terrible however

>at bar 420 the first and second violins begin hitting their foreheads with their instruments to symbolize the oppression of womyn of color in feudal Japan.
What work is this?
You...you're not making shit up are you to try and prove your point?

As you say the people who come after usually name an era, you might call it 'Conservative Reactionism' maybe they will call you 'Frustrated SJWs'.

IMO he urinal was just a joke that other artists (and guess Duchamp himself) took too far and ran into the ground

neoclassical music is shit

I have listened to some "Neo-Romantic" composers and I think the tonality isn't traditional enough for anyone but an academic to relate to.

Its called Brass you stupid goy.

Kek

I've never heard it. My point is this type of music is only coming through in film scores and things like that.

Re-read. you didnt understand.

I agree. We now have a bunch of people doing no work at all to make statements.

that is not contemporary art, and you legitimately do not understand modern (or contemporary) art

Thanks. I'm a fan of Part's work. But the other two are new to me.

what do you mean by pick up where romantic left off then because it sounds like you just want some more sick mozart trax

also see

If you're OP and haven't heard Glass, I don't really know what to say.

What? Stravinsky single-handedly saved the Western tonality in the 20th century, I suggest you study more the history of classical music. Whereas Puccini and Rachmaninoff never achieved his or Schoenberg's level of insight and significance in Western music, and they clearly realised (well, at least intuitively) the limitation and impasse of their styles. Mahler tried to somehow preserve romantic subjectivism within the confines of tonality but ultimately failed, and Schoenberg and all the "horrible" "wrong" music, rejection of tonality was in fact the direct consequence of the romantics: Wagner, Puccini, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin etc., not their objectivist/surrealist opponents, viz. Satie and Stravinsky who had a much subtler approach.

Why do you want to make such anachronic music, OP?

Before tonality began to disintegrate, what if another school of thought, branched off in a direction that preserved the elements of Romanticism. Well it didn't. So what i'm saying is I want to write in that style and I wonder if anyone else feels the same way.

because I hate the world.

Im OP yes I've heard Glass. Now you don't have to think of what to say.

If he saved it, why isn't it around today? "Surrealist" and Atonal composers might be more significant in terms of how music has changed throughout its history, but there music is seriously lacking in the way people can relate to it. Why do orchestras play Beethoven 10 times a year and never Schoenberg 1 or 0 times?
And I never said they weren't good composers, I just think they opened the floodgates into an anything-goes free-for-all where novelty is held above proportion and form.

write whatever you like, it will be irrelevant nonetheless, so don't worry too much

i very seriously doubt that would take hold today but nobody's stopping you

really?? You mean it? O thank god. I wasn't gonna write until you gave me permission, thanks Sup Forums user.

Theres nowhere else to go dude. Wagners music was tonal tradition taken to its logical conclusion, from there all you have is atonal or going backwards (minimalism and shit)

I like the concept but i dont think you realize how far they went by 1900

Thanks for not talking to me like I'm shit. Your sentiment has crossed my mind before. Have you ever heard Mahler's 10th symphony completed by Derryck Cooke? By the end of it, I can feel the edge of an entire dimension of unwritten music. It was like a corridor that later composers looked down and then passed by without going down it. I don't believe everything's been written yet. I don't think the tonal tradition has concluded either.

btw that Ades concerto sounded like shit to me.

1910: Music started
1918: Are you kidding me this isnt music
2017: Rip music goodbye ..

>And I never said they weren't good composers, I just think they opened the floodgates into an anything-goes free-for-all where novelty is held above proportion and form.
Do you know how consciousness operates, you massive faggot? They didn't "open" anything, they just spearheaded general course in human culture which came into being independently of any particular individual will.
>but there music is seriously lacking in the way people can relate to it
It's merely a precise reflection of a society you live in, that's exactly what artists do and art music is supposed to disclose, stop blaming artists and art.

>Rachmaninoff, Mahler, Puccini and Strauss
wow you have a taste of a 70 year old lady

do you have a twitter or some shit like that so you wouldn't just disappear after this thread ends

Do you know what a metaphor is, you even more "massive faggot"?
Their music is irrelevant to the human experience in the ideal and perfect for 20th century totalitarianism and misery. The relationship between art and society is reciprocal. Do you write anything or do you just act scholarly on Sup Forums? Art is not a mirror it is a hammer.

elaborate

Western tonality is still thriving today in a large proportion of current pop music. If you want orchestral tonality then just listen to film scores. But no it seems you want art music only that is confined to not even the previous century but older, you want art to be limited and imprisoned to your tastes. Well as people have said, there is nothing stopping you and maybe others will rally round you but most will not. The people who want forward looking art will ignore you, the people who think Beethoven and Brahms are the apex of music will most likely ignore you too.

>Why do orchestras play Beethoven 10 times a year and never Schoenberg 1 or 0 times?
For the same reason that people like neoclassical architecture. That doesnt mean architects should go back to that style.

>Why do orchestras play Beethoven 10 times a year and never Schoenberg 1 or 0 times?

was beethoven popular in his time? i know that no one cared about bach while he was alive. maybe in 200 years everyone will flock to listen to stockhausen

>the year is 2217
>stockhausen is played in department stores
>target is selling yohji yamamoto runway pieces on clearance
>mark rothko paintings are hung above toilets in mcdonalds bathrooms
>children are commenting about how they only listen to real music on 4'33" youtube videos

He was reasonably popular but he didn't hold the same kind of position as the greatest like he does now, just one of many contemporary composers. But why would Stockhausen be elevated in 200 years time when The Beatles are already in that position. Classical now is a niche, and no not because it is awful but because music that better stimulates people and conveys their emotions is made in the pop genre.

Classical has shifted position because composers know a string quartet or symphony isn't really the soundtrack of people's lives these days. Classical now tends to be more academic, intellectual, difficult, complex etc because that is a niche they can fulfill. There isn't the market for Mahleresque symphonies, they can be made but they won't sell much.

yeah i guess this prolly wont happen lol. perhaps 20th century initiated music into an actual art form and now shit got really serious/intellectual.

read Adorno.

I remember when I was 18 too. You'll grow out it when you realize that pre impressionist music is extraordinarily boring and not challenging at all, especially after you've heard the same tired chord progressions and ideas over and over again.

> Emotion, proportion, harmony, form, balance and most importantly, meaning are absent from all modern music I've been able to find
All modern music has this, you're just used to music explicitly telling you what you're supposed to feel, rather than experiencing much more nuanced and abstract emotions. Mahler, Strauss, and Rachmaninoff will bore you after you've heard their ideas for years and years.