I just got this CD today, and have listened to it a numerous amount of times already. It's a great album, but as evident, the interpretation of it all seems out of touch and vague. However, upon looking at this page, reading the translation of the title and researching the composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, the point becomes evident; this album is artwork, a painting. The interpretation is individual on a sense that Stockhausen developed (or in the very least tapped into). As also described in the last song "There Can Be No Dispute That Monsters Live Among Us," the view of music is (to quote directly) "far too narrow." People see music as a solfege or lines and spaces or whole notes with the intention of the syllable sung with said note being a vowel. This, however, is not the true intent of music portrayed in nature's broad spectrum; the sounds we hear everyday, the patterns of someone's footsteps, the patter of rain on a metallic surface, the sound of wind rustling through leaves all posess a mustical tone. Stockhausen understood this, as evident in his various operatic pieces. (Taken from Wikipedia)-"In [Stockhausen's opera] Zyklus for example, the score is written so that the performance can start on any page, and it may be read upside down, or from right to left, or not, as the performer chooses." "Lover, the Lord Has Left Us" is exactly like a Stockenhausen piece. What one person with a somewhat limited or less open concept of music hears as mere clicks and whistles is exactly what another person hears as a masterpiece. Thusly, the artists interpret their selections differently. The listener in turn interprets it differently. I've read and heard various reviews shunning this album on the mere fact that it sounds nothing like the former album. Appreciate it for what it is rather than compare it to another disc. A van Gogh work is rarely held up to a Picasso work and criticized for being nothing alike. Both are forms of art; so are both TSOAF albums. Why should they be treated differently than say, a painting?
Too much emphasis is put on strict convention when it comes to musical works. Much like Stockenhausen, The Sound of Animals Fighting are attempting to break away from this convention. Much like Stockenhausen, it is a bold and controversial move. However both embody the wish to destroy convention and establish music for what it truly is; art, free to interpretation to all. You may interpret this album as garbage; an unbiased listen is deserved before this final conclusion is made. Hold no standards of convention, and you might see this album as the beautiful work of art that I do.
I just got this CD today, and have listened to it a numerous amount of times already. It's a great album, but as evident, the interpretation of it all seems out of touch and vague. However, upon looking at this page, reading the translation of the title and researching the composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, the point becomes evident; this album is artwork, a painting. The interpretation is individual on a sense that Stockhausen developed (or in the very least tapped into). As also described in the last song "There Can Be No Dispute That Monsters Live Among Us," the view of music is (to quote directly) "far too narrow." People see music as a solfege or lines and spaces or whole notes with the intention of the syllable sung with said note being a vowel. This, however, is not the true intent of music portrayed in nature's broad spectrum; the sounds we hear everyday, the patterns of someone's footsteps, the patter of rain on a metallic surface, the sound of wind rustling through leaves all posess a mustical tone. Stockhausen understood this, as evident in his various operatic pieces. (Taken from Wikipedia)-"In [Stockhausen's opera] Zyklus for example, the score is written so that the performance can start on any page, and it may be read upside down, or from right to left, or not, as the performer chooses." "Lover, the Lord Has Left Us" is exactly like a Stockenhausen piece. What one person with a somewhat limited or less open concept of music hears as mere clicks and whistles is exactly what another person hears as a masterpiece. Thusly, the artists interpret their selections differently. The listener in turn interprets it differently. I've read and heard various reviews shunning this album on the mere fact that it sounds nothing like the former album. Appreciate it for what it is rather than compare it to another disc. A van Gogh work is rarely held up to a Picasso work and criticized for being nothing alike. Both are forms of art; so are both TSOAF albums. Why should they be treated differently than say, a painting?
Too much emphasis is put on strict convention when it comes to musical works. Much like Stockenhausen, The Sound of Animals Fighting are attempting to break away from this convention. Much like Stockenhausen, it is a bold and controversial move. However both embody the wish to destroy convention and establish music for what it truly is; art, free to interpretation to all. You may interpret this album as garbage; an unbiased listen is deserved before this final conclusion is made. Hold no standards of convention, and you might see this album as the beautiful work of art that I do.
Exactly :]
Exactly :]