twiss@stolaf.UUCP (Thomas S. Twiss) (05/06/84)
The purpose of this article is not to flame either Cage lovers or
haters. But let's look at some of these definitions of art.
Some of you seem to think that art must entail an aesthetic
interest (i.e. a specific intent ot impetus). I would agree with you.
But then you say that Cage does not do this becuase he is only interested
in pure sound and sonorous qualities discarding any human thought or
action. Well, I assert that this is incorrect. Even if Cage sits at his
piano and makes you listen to nothing for three minutes,
this still implies an intent. Even though Cage does not create the sound
or even have any control over it, it is nonetheless presented within the
context of an intent by the performer. He is on stage, you are in the
audience, and a performance is taking place. He is directing our
attention to certain elements of sound around us that we might not have
noticed before. No matter what, every performance of Silence will be
different given the nature of the hall and the unique audience.
You may argue (successfully) that Cage's work is bereft of control,
but I must insist that there is without a doubt an aesthetic interest
present, one in which creativity, albeit a very different kind, is also
present.
Tom Twiss
...{decvax|ihnp4}!stolaf!twiss