Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

1/7

On Music and PoliticsAuthor(s): Gyrgy LigetiSource: Perspectives of New Music, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Spring - Summer, 1978), pp. 19-24Published by: Perspectives of New MusicStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/832674.

Accessed: 21/09/2014 17:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Perspectives of New Musicis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Perspectives

of New Music.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

2/7

ON MUSIC

AND

POLITICS

GYORGY LIGETI

Might

I

say

something

s a memberof

this

o-called

"elite"

closed

circle

of

the

avant-garde

which was

just

addressed

here?

*

I think

hat

if

young

composers

were

to

come

along

and do

something

ompletely

new-not

simply

n imitation

f

things

done

by

Stockhausen,

Boulez,

Cage, Riley,

Kagel,

Ligeti,

etc.-the

composers ust

named

would

be

very

happy

about

it

and

that

every

possibility

or

performance

would

be offered hem

with

open

arms.

Speaking

for

myself,

'm

actually

always on the watch for new composers, oryoung people who are

doing something ompletely

ifferentnd

who

will

say-just

as

Boulez

said

fifteen r

twenty ears

go:

"Away

with

Schoenberg,

we're

going

to

do

something

ifferent"- "And

now

away

withBoulez and

Stock-

hausen and

Ligeti

and

Cage

and all

those fellows: we're

going

to

do

something ompletely

ifferent."'ve seen

and heard an

insane

num-

ber of

scores

n

the

last

few

years

and

my

heart

bleeds,

for

up

to now

I've

found

nothing

otally

new

and

nothing

ssentially

ifferent.

hus

I feel that the idea-a typeof persecution omplex-that thereare

many

composers

who

are not heard

because

they

are

shut out

of an

elite which

exercises

domination

s an

illusory

dea. It does

not

cor-

respond

to

reality.

The

essence

of

the matter

s

that

the

composers

who

are

doing something

ew and essentialhave

to demonstrate

ual-

ity

in their

work,

ust

as

Boulez has

done.

Twenty years

ago,

when

Boulez

brought omething

otally

ew and

shocking

n

his

Polyphonie

X

*

Ligeti's

remarks

were made

spontaneously

n

Darmstadt

in

1972

during

the

discussion which followedpapers givenby Carl Dahlhaus and Reinhold Brinkmann

on

aesthetic

and

political

criteria

in

compositional

criticism.

Subsequently,

the

re-

marks were

published

in

German

in

the

Darmsti~dter

Beitriige

zur Neuen Musik

XIII,

ed.

Ernst

Thomas

(Mainz,

1973),

pp.

42-46.

This

translation

is offered

with the

gracious permission

of B. Schott's

S6hne,

to whom

gratitude

for their

kindness s

herewith

xpressed.

-Wes Blomster

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

3/7

20

PERSPECTIVES OF

NEW

MUSIC

or Le Marteau sans

maitre,

heseworkswere

convincing

hrough

heir

quality.

And

this

quality

is,

I

think,

omething

which

the

members

of theelite

xpect.But

actually

I

wanted

to talk

about

something

uite

different.

s

far as music

and

politics

re

concerned,

think

massive

confusion

re-

vails in

terminology.

Music" is

a

word

and thisword embraces

many

differentontents.

When,

for

example,

one talks

about

march

music-

one

possibility

f

functionalmusic-and

about

a

Webern

string uar-

tet,

then

I

think

he

only

thing

that

brings

march

together

with

a

Webern

string

uartet

within

one

common

concept

s the

simple

fact

that

both

work

with

definite coustic

signals;

that

is,

both

consistof

relations f tones.Otherwise,discussions bout them ie upon totally

different

lanes.

Such discussions o

not

get

anywhere;

they

fail

be-

cause

actually

that which "music"

is is

a far

too

complex ubject.

I've

been

thinking

bout the

following

facts

for

some

time;

they

are

thoughts

which I

have

not

formulated

nd

which

now,

so to

speak,

emerge

omewhat

haotically.

When

I

listen

to

music,

perceive

a

very

definite

tructure,

con-

text

which s

communicated

hrough

coustic

signals.

But

at this

point

the question is immediately sked: Indeed-and the score itself s

only

an

optical

matter?Then

I

am

unable to

exclude the fact that

the

score-i.e.,

something xisting

nly

on

paper

and not manifested i-

rectly

n

any

acoustic

way-actually

is

a

part

of

music

too.

There

are

complex

structures-I'm

thinking

f

Bach,

for

example,

arid

several

chorale

preludes-in

which

a melodic

line-let's

say

a

chorale-is

worked out

in

canon and

simultaneously

second

canon

is

integrated

into

t.

It is

hardly

possible

o

follow

his tructure iththe

ear,

to

say

nothing fthe muchmorecomplicated tructuresn serial music. And

now

I

arrive

at

a

question

nherent n the

remarks

f

Dahlhaus and

Brinkmann.

think

ne

would

have

to

imagine

things

s

follows:

there

is a

nucleus

which

is musical

structuren

terms

f

something

olely

a

matter

of

sound.

One doesn't

really

"hear"

the

row. In a

piece

by

Schoenberg

or

Webern,

the

row

is,

to be

sure,

relevant

for the struc-

ture,

but on

the

immediate

coustic

plane

of

music

t

is

not there.So

there

s

then

a

second

plane

and this is

the

score

itself,

he

"paper

plane".

And

then

there s

a third

plane, e.g.,

the

text; and a fourth:

that which the

composer

reveals

n

the

program

notes or

that

which

he

keeps

to

himself.

'm

sketching

ver-broader

ircles.

And then there

is

still

one

more

plane:

part

of

music

and of

every

rtistic

enre

s

that

which

is

taking

place

in

society

t this

very

moment.The

source of

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

4/7

ON MUSIC AND POLITICS

21

confusion

ies for me in the

following:

there

can be a

very

definite

relation

betweenone

thing

nd

another.

For

example,

the

social

situa-

tion

or,

if

youwish,

the

conditions f

production,

he

economic

condi-

tions which

n

Marxism constitute he

substructure

r

base,

that

obvi-

ously

s

related-when we talk

about

music- with

hat

which s

musical

structure,

ut it is

not identical with

it

and

the

two

are

not

inter-

changeable.

Might

I offer

n

analogy?

Mathematics s

a

structure

f

thoughts.

t is

strange

oday,

when

t has

become

so

fashionable o

make

an absolute

demand

for

political

commitment rom

omposers

within

music,

but not

beyond

music,

that

the

same commitment

s not

ex-

pected

from

mathematician.

Actuallymathematics s not a science in thesame sense as physics

or

chemistry.

t

is a

type

of

language

and

belongs

to

a

realm

some-

wherebetween

he

natural

ciences nd art. For

many

mathematicians,

mathematics s

actually

n

art,

because,

for

example,

a

certainmathe-

matical

thought

rocess

s

only

of

value when t

s

of

a

certain

legance.

It

does

not have to

correspond

o

the real

world.

Only

a

very

small

portion

f

mathematics an

be

applied

to the

real

world-physics,

for

example,

s

one field

where this

takes

place.

But

now

let

me

get

back

to music. We have to make a veryclear distinction etween musical

works

as

thought

tructures

losed

in

themselves

r not

closed,

com-

municated

by

means

of

acoustic

signals,

and the

surrounding

world.

Musical works

are

related to the

surrounding

world. To be

sure,

a

Mozart

string

uartet

reflects he

social situation:

the decline

of the

aristocracy

nd

the ascent

of

rationalism-but the

quartet

tself ffers

only

traces

of

that which

has

happened

socially.

To call a

string

uar-

tet

by

Mozart or

Haydn

reactionary

s

infantile,

imply

ecause Mozart

and-to a stillgreaterdegree-Haydn were n theserviceof a prince

(I'm

thinking

articularly

f

Haydn

in the

service

of

Prince Ester-

hazy).

I

think

t would

be

equally

infantile o

make

an

absolute

de-

mand

upon

a

composer

r

painter

or

poet today

and to

try

o

pin

him

down:

"You

have to do

something

elevant

or

ociety,

or

ocial

jus-

tice

If

you

don't,

you're

a traitor " I

think

his

s

simply

demand

for

something

which

is

not

adequate.

One could

just

as well demand

from

mathematician:

"Lay

off

your

stupid

mathematics;

you

have

to

get

out and

fight

n South

America

or

God knows

where."

I

believe

that the

mathematician

r

the

composer

s

actually

doing

something

more

worthwhile

y

concentrating

pon

his

field.This

does not

mean

that

he

closes

his

eyes

and

stops

his

ears

in

the

face of the

injustice

which

goes

on in

the

world-this

not at

all. But I'm

against

his

totally

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

5/7

22

PERSPECTIVES

OF NEW

MUSIC

naive confusion

of various fields

and

against

this

type

of

pressure:

"Take

a

stand

on

political

progress-and

do it

through

your

work

as

well.

If

you

don't,

f

you

stand

aside,

then

you're

n

line

with reaction

and with

oppression

" I think rroneous

ogic

s involvedhere. f some-

one

says:

"If

you're

not for

us,

then

you

are

our

enemy"-that

is

demagogy

nd

totalitarianism.

Let

me come

back

to

mathematics

nd

give

an

example

of the

way

in which

certain

conditions f social

oppression

an

give

rise to

some-

thing

quite

progressive

hrough

ransformation

nto

an

independent

structure.

t

is well-known

hat

cybernetics,

n

essential

art

of

present-

day

science,

ctually

plays

a

practical

role n

the

progress

f

society,

or

through heuse ofcomputers nd thecyberneticossibilitiesforgani-

zation,

a better

ife

can

be

achieved formore

people.

When

cybernetics

began,

it

was

actually

bad

affair. t served he

destruction

f

people.

In

America,

John

von

Neumann was

assigned

problems

f

anti-aircraft

defense, .e.,

the

design

of

automatic

weapons

which

could shoot down

enemy

aircraft

with

greater certainty.

And what did Neumann

do?

One knew

that

one

had to

have immediate

ignals

on

the

approach

of

planes

and

also

had to

know

exactly

where

the

plane

would be

at

the

momentwhen theprojectile eached t.Consequently:one doesn't im

at

the

plane,

but

somewhere

lse.

To do

this,

large

numberof data

had to be

brought

nto

a

single

context,

ncluding

he

purely

human

data,

e.g.,

the

probable

conduct

of

the

pilot.

A

mathematical

xtrapola-

tion

was

involved.

And

now

just

imagine-I'm

being blasphemous-

that it

was

not

John

von

Neumann

in

America

doing

this

o

that

the

English

and

American

armiescould

fight

gainst

the

Nazis,

but

rather

someone

n

Nazi-Germany.

Would

cybernetics,

n this

case,

be

looked

upon as something vil in terms f a thought tructure ecause itwas

concerned

with

these

calculations n

Nazi-Germany?

No

Now I'm

speaking

with

ntentionally

xaggerated

blasphemy,

or

am

of

course

an

opponent

of

the

Nazis,

simply

n

terms f

my

background.

What

I

mean

is,

however,

hat the

same

science,

conceived

and

developed

in

Nazi-Germany

would

"as

science"

have

been of

equal

value.

That

is

to

say,

under

certain

conditions

reactionary

ituationof

oppression

can

give

rise to

a

structure

f

thought

which

has a lifeof

its

own.

For

that

reason-and now

I'm

getting

back to New

Music-I think t's

completely

rrelevant o

speak

about the

political

progressivity

r re-

actionary

position

of New

Music.

It is

not

progressive

n

a

political

sense nor

is

it

regressive,

ust

as

mathematics

s

neither

rogressive

or

regressive.

t is of a

region

which ies

elsewhere.

here is

no

doubt

but

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

6/7

ON MUSIC AND POLITICS

23

what it

is

related o life nd

to

the social

condition n

many

ways.

That

the

so-called "broad masses"-who

do not

exist,

but are also

only

a

word-do not

need thismusic

or

this

book or

these

pictures,

s

nothing

more than a demagogic argument imed at putting histypeof art

of a

smaller

circle

on

the

list of

things

o

be

eliminated.

think

hat

it

is

a

fascist,

otalitarian ttitude

o call

something

eactionary

which

belongs

to but a few

people

simply

because

it

belongs

to

only

a

few

people.

In

America-and

again

I'm

making

a

point

of

saying

some-

thing

blasphemous,

ecause I

really

m

on the

side

of

the

black

popu-

lation of

America-the

blacks

account

for

15%

of the

entire

popula-

tion. Now

somebodymight

come and

say:

"We

are

85%

white and

the blacks should get out " Consequently: "We here are a mass of

workers

nd

this

elite New Music has

to be

gotten

rid

of,

for t is an

affair f

0.1

%

of the

population."

When I still

ived

in

Hungary,

n

the

days

of

Stalin and

Zdhanov,

they

told us

composers:

"You

are

against

the

people,

because

you're

doing

something

lite,

something

esoteric.

Come

on,

write

ongs

and marches

or

he

people."

And

that's

the reasonfor

my

ast

remark.

As

a

child

I

lived

in

Rumania,

which then

was a

monarchy

nd

a

bad countrywithoppression f theworkers nd peasants.There was a

royalhymn

omposedby

some

Austrian

omposer.

King

Charles

had

commissioned t

in

the

previous

century

rom

Hellmesberger

r

some-

one

else.

In

the Rumanian

monarchy,

n

an

ultra-reactionary,

alf-

feudal

country,

his

royal hymn,

n

terms

f

its

use,

was

truly

com-

ponent

of the

oppression

racticed

here.

As

a

secondary

chool

pupil,

I

was

oppressed

because

I

had to

sing

this

hymn

twice a

day

along

with

my

fellow

pupils

at the

beginning

nd the end

of the

day

and

thus

I

became

a victimof

"oppression"-I really

did.

But

now, pay

close

attention:

soon

after World

War

II,

when Rumania became

a

so-called

socialist

tate-and

I'd be inclined

o underline so-called"

rather

than

"socialist"-this

hymn

was

banned,

along

with

the

exile

of

the

king,

which

was

a

truly

appy

event.

No one was

allowed

to

sing

it.

By

coincidence,

his

ame

melody

t some

earlier

point

n

time

had

gotten

to

Albania and

was

sung by

Albanian

partisans

who

fought

against

the

Italian

occupation

and

against

Mussolini;

with

a

different

text-an

Albanian

text-it was

sung

as

a

song

of

the

partisans.

After

Albania was freeand also became a so-called socialist and, this

parti-

san

song

became the

official

hymn

of

Albania. What

happens

then

when

an

Albanian

governmental

elegation

comes to Bucharest

and

one is

forced to

play

the Albanian

hymn-the melody

of

which is

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions

7/25/2019 Gyorgi Ligeti - On Music and Politics

7/7

24

PERSPECTIVES

OF

NEW

MUSIC

forbidden

n Rumania-at

the

airport? But

this

s

only

a small

in-

tervening

emark.)

My

goal

in

telling

he

story

s

this:

the

melody

s

such

is neither

royalist

nor

fascist;

t is

not

communistic or is

it on

the

side

of

the

partisans.

However,

t can

become

so

through

use

and

custom.

In

the Rumanian

kingdom,

corrupt

tate

with

oppression

and social

injustice,

this

melody

was

included

with

all other

means

used

toward hese nds.

And now

I

think

'm

coming

to the

essential

hing

which

wanted

to

say

about

the

political

relevanceof

music.

Music,

a

totally-defined

ordering

f

acoustic

event,

an

through

se

actually

become

something

repressive.

refer

o

the Rumanian

royal

hymn

r to

the Soviet

hymn,

which s likewise component frepression. ut tobecomethis,music

needs

the

addition

of

something

emantic

nd

conceptual,

forthe text

and

even

the

program

belong

to music

as

well. In

the

nterior f

music,

however,

t

is

only

a

very

definite

tructure

f tones which

is of con-

cern.

'm not

an

aesthetician;

do

not know

what the

aesthetic riteria

of

music

are,

but

I

want

to

come back

to this

point:

to

bringpolitics

into this

tructure

s

akin

to

bringing olitics

nto

mathematics.

Mathe-

matics

can-indirectly-be

a

political

tool.

For

example, through

er-

tain mathematicalmethodsan agencyof espionageor defensemight

build

an

apparatus

to

be

used

for

the

purpose

of

oppression.

But

mathematics

tself

oes not

oppress.

And

it is

equally

true

that music

in

itself

oes not

oppress;

neither s

it

democraticnor

anti-democratic.

To

be

sure,

certain

definite

njustices

re

subject

to

political

criticism

in

their

relation o

musical

society.

But

please

leave music

tself

ut

of

it

Don't

confuse

musical

structure

ith

ocial and

economic

concerns

which

re on

a different

lane

This content downloaded from 85.74.137.218 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 17:36:01 PM