An Earnest Inquiry (of John Williams fans)

[eyeresist]

Give it up, man. There's no reasoning with him on this.

[Sergeant Rock]

Give it up, man. There's no reasoning with him on this.

In this forum discussing film music and its composers is like sex, politics and religion at the dinner table. It only leads to frustration, anger and indigestion    I long ago gave up participating in threads on this topic. By the way, I'm a John Williams fan (especially love Star Wars, Superman, The Cowboys, The Reivers) but I won't try to justify my enthusiasm here or vote in the poll.

Sarge

[mc ukrneal]

Give it up, man. There's no reasoning with him on this.

In this forum discussing film music and its composers is like sex, politics and religion at the dinner table.

Sarge

I am only starting to understand this - what can I say, I'm slow!

[Karl Henning]

Give it up, man. There's no reasoning with him on this.

In this forum discussing film music and its composers is like sex, politics and religion at the dinner table. It only leads to frustration, anger and indigestion    I long ago gave up participating in threads on this topic. By the way, I'm a John Williams fan (especially love Star Wars, Superman, The Cowboys, The Reivers) but I won't try to justify my enthusiasm here or vote in the poll.

Sarge

The irrational rant which has recently dominated notwithstanding – since I started the thread, I want to make a few things clear.

My core interest here is compositional and musical, and I created the poll out of curiosity whether the fans of Jn Williams would entertain a compositional/musical question about his process.  The poll's results have been perfectly satisfactory in this regard.

As to some of the ancillary notions which have cropped up:

1.   Call this obvious, but the fact that Williams was paid (and paid well) for his work (nor the fact that his work garnered awards), is not of itself any indication of the quality of the work.  That is, taking those facts as proof either that his work is worthless, or that it is great, is about equally pointless.
2.   Williams is undeniably talented. Personally, I am not sure that I consider him the "greatest" among those who have written for film, but (a) the case can be made, and (b) he is certainly many cuts above the 'worst."
3.   No one who finds enjoyment in Williams's work need "justify" that to anyone else.

[Karl Henning]

I question to what degree; because you are very obviously confusing light showbiz commercial entertainment with the real stuff.

You obviously imagine that there is some hermetic divide between light music and "the real stuff," an imaginary divide which you've never satisfactorily defined, of course.

[Karl Henning]

Let's use my exact wording, I said 'light showbiz commercial entertainment' ..

So you did.  Your exact wording does not define the matter, though;  and I did not so much "misquote" you, as prune your remarks of irrelevant pejoritaves.  In reverse order:

1. The relation between Art and Entertainment is an interesting one, but (a) not anywhere near so clear as you are fond to imagine, nor (b) is the relation one of mutual exclusion.

2. As Neal trenchantly observed above: except for the rare instances when an artist is independently wealthy, there is always a question of how the artist earns tradeable goods or currency; and so the vast majority of artwork is "commercial."

So neither of those adjectives is cut-&-dried;  and therefore of no service to the present discussion.

3. As for "showbiz," this has been part of the Western musical world since the Florentine camarate invented opera at the turn of the 17^th century.

You come closer to the truth in your last clause: the matter before us is one of spectra, not of hermetic divisions.

[Leo K.]

What's wrong with writing for cash? I am all about self-promotion and getting paid when I can. I have to feed my family, I don't live in an ivory tower like others can afford and enjoy so I don't care if John Williams does.

I like what Sarge said, and guess I'll leave it at that

[Leo K.]

... there is a huge difference there between a commercial product and the real concrete artistic music making

How? John Adams gets paid too. Igor Stravinsky made as much as John Williams, if not more!

[Leon]

What's wrong with writing for cash? I am all about self-promotion and getting paid when I can. I have to feed my family, I don't live in an ivory tower like others can afford and enjoy so I don't care if John Williams does.

I like what Sarge said, and guess I'll leave it at that

Agreed.  Willie Nelson is reported to have said "I do it for the love but I'm not above the money". 

There is an irony, in that, "professional" musicians/composers, i.e. those who are successful enough to make a living from their art, are generally respected more than "mere" amateurs.  However, then there is the criticism that they are sell-outs if their music is not thought of as "artsy" enough.

There was hardly a more ambitious self-marketer than Karlheinz Stockhausen. 

Just because a composer such as John Williams has made a lucrative living from his composing for films does not necessarily mean that his concern for the quality of his craft is less than composers like John Adams, Philip Glass or Charles Wuorinen.

That said, it is worthwhile to note that John Williams chose to write music for films  (not an easy profession to break into and become highly successful) and not dedicate himself trying to obtain commissions for symphonic works or operas, where the artisitic goals and opportunities are arguably of higher level than with music for film.

[Sammy]

You don't like the opening to Star Wars (main theme) or the Empire Strikes Back march? How about the opening to Saving Private Ryan or the E.T. theme?

I have to be honest here.  I've seen each of the above movies and remember nothing about the music (bad or good).

[71 dB]

I'll take Shostakovich's light music over John Williams bile any day of the week.

Maybe but how would Shostakovich's light music work in Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Memoirs of a Geisha or Jurassic Park? Comparing Shostakovich's light music and John Williams' movie music is comparing apples and oranges. Doesn't make much sense because Shostakovich didn't compose music for Minority Report. John Williams did.

[71 dB]

John Williams makes big money because he is one of the best movie composers out there. His scores make the movies better. It's the same with star actors. They earn even 10 times more than John Williams per movie. Are they acting just for the money? Maybe they are but so what? They are stars and people want to see them on silver screen.

[Mirror Image]

You don't like the opening to Star Wars (main theme) or the Empire Strikes Back march? How about the opening to Saving Private Ryan or the E.T. theme?

I'm in a better mood today, so let me say that it is in my opinion that film music isn't something that I find substantially rewarding. As I have mentioned before, there were many composers who wrote film music because they had no choice financially (i. e. Shostakovich being the greatest example). I do enjoy some of his film music but it's not something I return to often. The same goes for RVW or Honegger who both wrote some very good music in this medium. John Williams is cut from a different kind of cloth altogether as are Morricone and Goldsmith. They are film composers. As innovative or creative as their scores may be, and I certainly do like many of these guys' scores, I don't take them that seriously because I don't view film music as a serious art. Again, this is just my opinion, but as for light music composers, well, again, they're cut from a very different cloth than many serious classical composers. It's all about perception and really about what sounds good to you. Like Karl said, nobody here needs to justify why they enjoy John Williams' music. If you like it, then that's great, but there are people who will not like it, and I'm one of them.

I've seen the original Star Wars trilogy probably a thousand times, but it's not the music I remember, it's the characters, the story, and the special effects. The same goes with any movie I watched. I don't watch a movie for the music. It does help enhance the movie experience by having music, but, again, I'm not watching the movie to rock out to the music.

[Mirror Image]

John Williams makes big money because he is one of the best movie composers out there. His scores make the movies better. It's the same with star actors. They earn even 10 times more than John Williams per movie. Are they acting just for the money? Maybe they are but so what? They are stars and people want to see them on silver screen.

Just breathe in and out, everything will be okay. Not everybody likes John Williams and you shouldn't let it bother you. You really don't need to defend him, do you? People can say whatever they want to about a composer I like, it makes no difference to me anymore. My opinion of Williams has come from listening to many of his scores like Jaws, Jurassic Park, all of the Star Wars original trilogy, and Schindler's List. I'm not completely oblivious to the man's work. He just works in a medium that I think has been better served by other composers.

[71 dB]

I've seen the original Star Wars trilogy probably a thousand times, but it's not the music I remember, it's the characters, the story, and the special effects. The same goes with any movie I watched. I don't watch a movie for the music. It does help enhance the movie experience by having music, but, again, I'm not watching the movie to rock out to the music.

You'd be surprised if you saw Star Wars without music. Then you would understand what good movie music means and you wouldn't take it's effect for granted.

[Karl Henning]

. . . I do enjoy some of his [Shostakovich's] film music but it's not something I return to often.

But, John: Have you seen the Kozintsev Shakespeare films?

(FWIW, I think more highly of Williams's scores than of Morricone's.)

[Mirror Image]

You'd be surprised if you saw Star Wars without music. Then you would understand what good movie music means and you wouldn't take it's effect for granted.

Again, you're just defending Williams because you think you have to. Trust me, you're going to feel the same way about him regardless of what I or anyone else has said negatively about him anyway, so do us both a favor and just stop debating with me, because you're not going to change my mind about him.

[71 dB]

You really don't need to defend him, do you?

Of course I don't. Why do you need to put him down?

[Mirror Image]

But, John: Have you seen the Kozintsev Shakespeare films?

(FWIW, I think more highly of Williams's scores than of Morricone's.)

Can't say that I have, Karl. I'm really not a big movie buff anyway. I'm not sure if I told you this, but the last movie I saw in the theater was The Lord of the Rings: Two Towers.

[Mirror Image]

Of course I don't. Why do you need to put him down?

It's not that I feel the need to put him down, it's just that I think it's funny that so many people just put the guy up on a pedestal like he's some kind of god.