In the risk of asking a slightly off topic question, my conductor asked what I would think if we played John Cage's 4:33'. I laughed thinking this was a joke, but he was serious (oops). My question, of those of you who are professional musicians or experienced concert performers, what do you think of orchestras that program this work? Is it too gimmicky or is it deeply profound to hear silence? I would love to hear other opinions before I respond to conductor. Thanks.
4'33" is a bit overplayed (in a manner of speaking)—suggest to the conductor one of Cage's other pieces in the same vein, such as 58, 74 or 108 (depending on the size of your orchestra of course). Assuming he doesn't mind standing around for a while while the musicians stare at stopwatches, of course. (108 may be pushing it a little duration-wise, since it's 45 minutes or so, but it's divided into movements at least.)
There's also probably some Feldman that could be substituted (Orchestra, etc) where he'd actually get to wave a stick around, and of course plenty of vague graphic scores from the 50s and 60s that could equally be interpreted in a very profound way.
If he's set on silence rather than Cage's sound-containers idea, link him to some of the Edition Wandelweiser composers (Beuger, Werder, Frey, Pisaro etc). I'm not as familiar with their stuff but most of it takes 4'33" as a musical starting point rather than a gimmick or a profound philosophical statement, so there's lots of stuff that's silent or nearly so. Jakob Ullmann is another composer in that category. You could do a live performance of Lucier's I Am Sitting In A Room, if that's even possible. Tim Rutherford-Johnson likes David Dunn's Purposeful Listening in Complex States of Time (or whatever the title is), which I've never... er... done... but theoretically you could run off a few hundred photocopies and pass them around to the audience and orchestra alike. They might find it rather pointless if they came to hear Beethoven though.
The piece was composed in 1952 and has now outlived its usefulness as Cage himself pointed out. If anyone is going to perform it, it certainly doesn't need an orchestra to do it: that body of players would be best using their energies in other ways. There have been a number of orchestral performances in recent years: the perceived reason has often been perceived as being for amusement rather than for serious enquiry which, lets face it, is mor effectively achieved in a chamber setting. If it needs to be achieved at all in this day and age. Do people still need to be informed?
Quote from: amw on October 14, 2013, 07:04:42 PM
They might find it rather pointless if they came to hear Beethoven though.
I thought AMW's response was reasonably constructive until this possibly dismissive (or merely pragmatic?) last line. I could imagine Beethoven sounding a lot fuller, deeper, and more profound after a good sitting with 4'33". Another more drastic possibility---and a number of people who love music have had this experience----is that Beethoven might sound indescribably ugly and barbaric after a productive sitting with 4'33". It might sound like music that would naturally produce a tradition of ugly, dismissive, "cultured" barbarians whose aesthetics would at times almost seem like barely-sublimated impulses towards ethnic cleansing and imperialism. I'm not talking about "German Nazis", but that very specific context was on Cage's mind (everybody's mind) when he put the piece together. Going back to that essay he won an award for as a teenager, where he wrote "by being hushed and silent, we should have the opportunity to hear what other people think". Even the biographical Wikipedia entry mentions this passage with a remark on its presaging 4'33".
Perhaps a kind of 'Socratic' vengefulness did take hold later on, after years of Cage trying to forge a path in the face of ridicule, condescension, complacency, and dismissiveness. I've thought that perhaps, possibly, he had a bit of a nasty streak that you can even hear in his radio interviews with Morton Feldman from ~1966; it sometimes glimmers out like a nasty, pedantic tendency, an overconfidence that gives the lie to what seems like the original ethic motivating that California teenager. I'm still not sure if it especially harmed his music or even his writing: I've partaken of lots of it and just because it's trying to teach something doesn't mean that it's tipped into "the pedantic". (I have developed an allergy to this teacherly tendency in lots of the avant-garde, so-called. Still, I find that I'm not turned away from Cage's exercises/experiments. I like to take Copland's comment about Cage just wanting to amuse himself for a few hours, as a kind of compliment, though I can't imagine it was intended that way. I wish it had been phrased with more admiration: here's a man who is devoted to working relentlessly to discover things, even things inside boredom.)
If I thought that this piece or Cage's sensibility was a simple matter of pranksterism, vandalism, devotion to "the absurd", then I think I would chuck him right out. I'm conservative, and I also don't have a temperament for games (a disability of mine); but even when I'm not drawn to listen to his music repeatedly the way I am to other kinds of composers (Beethoven, who I can listen to a lot, too much, and that is part of the problem), I still find even this overcelebrated little gesture to be incredibly valuable, perhaps mainly as a litmus test of sorts.
Of course, none of this amounts to "respect Cage, or you're a Nazi". Goodness. I mean really, how much Beethoven have I bragged about acquiring in the past ~year I've been on GMG (oodles), and how much Cage (like four or five discs max)? But that pragmatic, temporary preference doesn't explain anything. Cage made Beethoven a richer and more dangerous affair for me, more interesting. The fact that The Institution Called Beethoven [and this doesn't mean only or even Beethoven's Music] can so easily obviate everything in its path, is probably cause for concern. In this sense, I think I understand Cage when he puzzled and infuriated people by (allegedly) saying, "Beethoven was wrong!"
Sorry for the blab. That's my Cage quota until next summer.
Quote from: Dax on October 14, 2013, 07:25:04 PM
The piece was composed in 1952 and has now outlived its usefulness as Cage himself pointed out.
Where did he point that out? I've read a pretty large chunk of writings and interviews, but I don't remember that.
Offhand, I don't know what it accomplished ~1952-1970 that isn't required all the more sorely in an age of WALL-E style screen slaves and pachinko-parlor levels of stimuli at every turn. I have trouble understanding the world or its inhabitants as having become quieter or stiller since 1952.
Quote from: Dax...amusement rather than for serious enquiry which, lets face it, is mor effectively achieved in a chamber setting. If it needs to be achieved at all in this day and age. Do people still need to be informed?
When you say "If it needs to be achieved", does the "it" mean "serious enquiry"? What do people need (or not need) to be informed about?
This sort of thing really irritates me. "4'33'', hee, hee. Wasn't that Cage a silly man. We can ignore anything else he did now." It's lazy, smug, and contemptuous of the audience and the composer.
As is often the case, Daverz, I agree with you and envy you your concision, but am trying to rein in my counter-condescension impulses. RTFM is a response that doesn't bear much fruit in me personally, so I'm trying to make a good faith effort to describe my own pleasure in Cage's little credo. I agree that it is frustrating that the questions seem so loaded, so already-decided. My revulsion at that attitude almost makes me want to avoid anything that people like that admire. But that would be ridiculous.
I guess my whole wheedling screed above was just trying to make the point that 4'33" (just like lots of music that is much close to normal music, notes played from a page) is a fragile exercise. It requires participation and an almost cultic level of trust.....but only for four and half minutes. After that, one goes one's own way. I don't think the point is to "believe in the exercise" [i.e. Cage the ultra-fascist, assuming a copyright on all sound/silence everywhere] as much as it is to believe in attention as a powerful experience. I've always been flummoxed that composers don't love this piece (4'33") as a way of putting audiences (listeners sitting together) in their shoes, in composers' shoes, replete with not just the stillness but also the anxiety. "This is how it feels!" Almost as though 4'33" offers a template for the first rustling of forms before they coalesce and need to be transcribed into the calcified (and wonderful) set of instruments and performance practice.
EDIT: Pace the "people like that" comment above, I actually withdrew a while back from listening to a lot of avant type musics because of the bad luck I was having with people I encountered in that world, i.e. being insufferable. That's completely anecdotal (and "data is not the plural of anecdote") and I don't stand by the impression. But maybe people who hate the idea of Cage---discourse on Cage, this or that experience of Cage---have had similar experiences? Vanguardism in any form can cultivate a kind of "escape mania" that manifests itself as a posturing from some position outside the clueless throng of fish-in-water. I find myself sympaethic with Subcommandante Marcos' frustrated, punky, vaguely Vonnegut-meets-Sun-Ra "I shit on all the revolutionary vanguards of this planet." I still admire Nietzsche's writing and I still sometimes try to read Heidegger, but woo-boy: dudes have a lot to answer for. In spite of all this, I'm not going to let these epigone avant hucksters and traditional museum guards rob me of my pleasure.
Quote from: Daverz on October 14, 2013, 08:19:33 PM
This sort of thing really irritates me. "4'33'', hee, hee. Wasn't that Cage a silly man. We can ignore anything else he did now." It's lazy, smug, and contemptuous of the audience and the composer.
Not so. Maybe this will help: http://solomonsmusic.net/4min33se.htm
QuoteQuote from: Dax on Today at 07:25:04 PM
The piece was composed in 1952 and has now outlived its usefulness as Cage himself pointed out.
Where did he point that out? I've read a pretty large chunk of writings and interviews, but I don't remember that.
. . . from Michael Nyman - Experimental Music - Cage and Beyond (written in 1974)
QuoteIt [4'33"] is also - certainly for Cage - a work that has outlived its usefulness, having been overtaken by the revolution it helped bring about. ('I no longer need the silent piece' Cage said in an interview in 1966.)
It's not important, it's only music after all. ;D
I think Cage was out to provoke us to reflect upon what music is and how we listen to it, and every time I see a thread like this, it confirms the usefulness of the piece. The more you get your knickers in a twist about it, the more you confirm that the piece had a point.
Quote from: amw on October 14, 2013, 07:04:42 PM
4'33" is a bit overplayed (in a manner of speaking)—suggest to the conductor one of Cage's other pieces in the same vein, such as 58, 74 or 108 (depending on the size of your orchestra of course).
Excellent suggestion, avoiding the "I want to program some
Ravel — what do you think of the
Boléro?" trap.
You need a hobby, James.
Hah!
Quote from: sanantonio on October 15, 2013, 05:32:59 AM
Maybe Cage felt about himself that he no longer needed the silent piece, and it is true that the controversy surrounding 4'33" did overshadow it's meaning. That said, these days we are assaulted 100 times more from media surrounding us than in 1952 and, if anything, I think 4'33" is more relevant today and even more useful than when it was premiered.
I totally agree here! :) I think this world needs more opportunities to ponder, reflect, and be used to quiet.
James, you are as ever missing the several points. But your mind is snapped shut viz. Cage, so repeating those points were a waste of energy.
Ah, that open mind and actively inquisitive intellect we have all come to respect so highly.
I should actually enjoy being in the audience for a performance. Because, whether you're talking about the Beethoven Op.68, or Cage's 4'33, reading about it is one thing, and being in the space while it is happening, something else entirely.
I had the pleasure to experience 4:33 in a concert of American music. (The programme consisted of Barber's Adagio, 4:33, Gershwin's Piano Concerto and Bernstein's Symphony No. 2 -- in this order.)
The piece was performed with the soloist at his piano, with his hands on the keyboard.
I think it went well, mostly because I felt that the majority of the audience did not know what they were in for. 8)
Quote from: James on October 15, 2013, 09:18:22 AM
I was responding to karl.
Yes, and that is the point.
Quote from: James on October 15, 2013, 08:18:31 AM
I've been around for awhile and have read all of the lame & extensive explanations too many times before, it is always the same ol' shit.
The funniest thing about your supposing that you know what I am going to say, and dismissing it in advance, unheard, is how oblivious you are to this being an icon of The Closed Mind.
I don't even make my points . . . and you post multiple times, as if you had answered them.
And we all appreciate the amusement.
After all the hubbub about Cage Against The Machine in Great Britain, Reinbert de Leeuw performed Cage's 4'33 in a popular talkshow on the Dutch telly, december 2010.
[Performance begins at 6:40. Before that De Leeuw talks (in Dutch) about Cage's fascination for silence and detachment (and about his admiration for Satie).]
http://www.youtube.com/v/7KXaylNMJMs
Quote from: Marc on October 15, 2013, 10:02:19 AM
After all the hubbub about Cage Against The Machine in Great Britain, Reinbert de Leeuw performed Cage's 4'33 in a popular talkshow on the Dutch telly, december 2010.
[Performance begins at 6:40. Before that De Leeuw talks (in Dutch) about Cage's fascination for silence and detachment (and about his admiration for Satie).]
http://www.youtube.com/v/7KXaylNMJMs
Thanks for that,
Marc. My immediate reflex was the thought that I would not watch the video . . . but then I thought,
Why not? and so I did.
I found (quite possibly to my surprise) that it was time well spent. As with just any other piece of music, it all depends on what you do with the time, and with your concentration.
The experience of (I smile almost just to type this) watching a video of a performance of
4'33 made me think of a story told me by a friend in upstate New York, of a Dutch architect teaching a class at the time when mechanical pencil sharpeners had just been installed at each of the desks in the classroom. The architect got the students attention, saying, "Before we begin, let us sharpen our pencils."
All of the students used the sharpeners at their desks, turned the handle a few times, and in seconds all of them were done.
The architect sat down in front of the class, took his pencil, took out a knife, and without any apparent hurry, patiently whittled a sharp point. All the students sat and watched this, who knows what thoughts and emotions ran through each student's breast.
At last, the architect spoke again, "Well, then. Where are we now? You all have sharp pencils, while I — I have designed an interior."
Well, I for one, will be exploring John Cage's music. Not Stockhausen's.
No one has ever twisted my arm to listen to Cage's music, and now I might be ready to explore it. Plus, I really like Octave's avatar! :)
On Stockhausen, his music is the least I am willing to explore (of all composers), and it is all because of James, and his incessant trying to cram Stockhausen continuously, day after day after day, down our throats. It ain't working James, very few people want to explore his music, because of your shitty attitude, and your constant need to tear down Cage....for what??
Clearly this topic is an excuse to bring out all of the simmering bitterness and bile.
What's the big deal? I've always been curious if the audience is supposed to know that 4'33" is going to be "performed," or if they are supposed to think that the performing group is just fidgeting and fussing before they begin playing an actual piece.
Could it be that Cage was able to foresee the Internet and wrote the piece as troll bate?
Quote from: Octave on October 14, 2013, 08:07:57 PM
I thought AMW's response was reasonably constructive until this possibly dismissive (or merely pragmatic?) last line.
I actually wasn't talking about 4'33" itself, but about a different piece that is however based on similar principles (for "solo listener" iirc). I generally agree with you, active and sympathetic listening (even if only to ambient sound) can make almost any subsequent experiences richer and more profound. I was at a performance of Cage's 103 in New York last year and was on a bit of a contact high for the rest of the evening. >_> (Very nearly wrote a rather silly review in which a phrase along the lines of "pulled back the surface of the universe to reveal the music beneath" would have figured prominently.) I imagine that giving the audience a score to "perform" would cause a good deal of eye-rolling and grumbles about the dreadful state of modern music and why can't any of these so-called composers write a
tune? however.
A problem with 4'33" is that it's a known quantity, so audiences will already have formed preconceived notions about it. A less well-known piece (whether by Cage or someone else, whether silent, near-silent or nonsilent but employing similar time-container and evasion of structure principles) would be received more openmindedly and therefore, perhaps, successfully.
http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/some-recent-silences/ (http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/some-recent-silences/)
(For some reason my internet died just as I tried to post this the other night. Luckily, it seems I haven't missed anything ::) )
4'33" might be a deeply profound experience, exploring the articulated silence of a hall filled with people, some of whom happen to be singers and instrumentalists. But it could be easily over-programmed. Of course, its advantage is that you really don't need a concert hall, or even a recording--just a stopwatch or a good time sense, and "Instant Music"! :)
Yet although I have never heard 4'33" performed live, I love music that stretches most folks' definition of music, and this definitely does that! Maybe I'll just sign off GMG and listen to it now. ;D
Quote from: karlhenning on October 15, 2013, 11:07:59 AM
Thanks for that, Marc. My immediate reflex was the thought that I would not watch the video . . . but then I thought, Why not? and so I did.
I found (quite possibly to my surprise) that it was time well spent. As with just any other piece of music, it all depends on what you do with the time, and with your concentration.
The experience of (I smile almost just to type this) watching a video of a performance of 4'33 made me think of a story told me by a friend in upstate New York, of a Dutch architect teaching a class at the time when mechanical pencil sharpeners had just been installed at each of the desks in the classroom. The architect got the students attention, saying, "Before we begin, let us sharpen our pencils."
All of the students used the sharpeners at their desks, turned the handle a few times, and in seconds all of them were done.
The architect sat down in front of the class, took his pencil, took out a knife, and without any apparent hurry, patiently whittled a sharp point. All the students sat and watched this, who knows what thoughts and emotions ran through each student's breast.
At last, the architect spoke again, "Well, then. Where are we now? You all have sharp pencils, while I — I have designed an interior."
:)
A true craftsman.
My dad, also a teacher btw, learned us to sharpen our pencils with a knife.
When I left home to live by myself, it really took me some years to finally buy me a sharpener.
I must have made quite a few interiors during my younger years.
On topic, about Cage's composition: to me, it's kind of a lesson to appreciate and enjoy the silence. Nothing more, nothing less.
AMW, sorry, I think I was too jumpy when I said "possibly dismissive", and also shouldn't have used "merely" beside "pragmatic".
I'm pretty sure I have the measure of your point now. $:)
And of course ambushing/browbeating audiences bears the peril of being Bad Pedantry. "We know what they need!" (Exceptions encouraged, e.g. Haydn etc etc. Pranking or trolling? You decide!)
My thanks too to Marc for that video.
Quote from: Marc on October 15, 2013, 08:19:41 PM
[...] I must have made quite a few interiors during my younger years.
Show me the construction! ;) :)
Quote from: karlhenning on October 15, 2013, 11:07:59 AM
Thanks for that, Marc. My immediate reflex was the thought that I would not watch the video . . . but then I thought, Why not? and so I did.
I found (quite possibly to my surprise) that it was time well spent. As with just any other piece of music, it all depends on what you do with the time, and with your concentration.
The experience of (I smile almost just to type this) watching a video of a performance of 4'33 made me think of a story told me by a friend in upstate New York, of a Dutch architect teaching a class at the time when mechanical pencil sharpeners had just been installed at each of the desks in the classroom. The architect got the students attention, saying, "Before we begin, let us sharpen our pencils."
All of the students used the sharpeners at their desks, turned the handle a few times, and in seconds all of them were done.
The architect sat down in front of the class, took his pencil, took out a knife, and without any apparent hurry, patiently whittled a sharp point. All the students sat and watched this, who knows what thoughts and emotions ran through each student's breast.
At last, the architect spoke again, "Well, then. Where are we now? You all have sharp pencils, while I — I have designed an interior."
If he was more honest he probably would have said,
"Well, then. Where are we now? You all have sharp pencils, while I — I have made love to Marilyn Monroe on a deserted beach in Tahiti."
:)
Quote from: Scarpia on October 16, 2013, 06:25:41 AM
If he was more honest he probably would have said,
"Well, then. Where are we now? You all have sharp pencils, while I — I have made love to Marilyn Monroe on a deserted beach in Tahiti."
:)
8)
I have heard
4'33" live a number of times: by a solo pianist, solo cellist, string quartet, and large chamber ensemble. Each time the sensation was acute: an audience listening to silence (or what they thought was silence) and paying keen attention. Inevitably you start to notice the tiniest sounds audible in the room: someone's chair squeaking, or the air-conditioning system, or coins shifting in a pants pocket.
And while I wouldn't want to hear it if I were in the mood for
Wagner, listening to
Cage's opus gets you thinking about all sorts of things. If nothing else, how many of us experience 5 minutes of silence in a day (sleep excepted)? But even if we all did, there's something about framing a few minutes - making a snapshot of them - that is silly, revolutionary, eye-rolling, profound.
--Bruce
And the communal silence in a concert hall, Bruce; again, you can yammer about it, but if you haven't experienced it . . . .
We get it, James: you don't like it, you don't get it. You don't get it, but, you want to enjoy the cachet of "I understand this, it's no big deal, because I know everything in music that is a big deal.
We get it, James: you don't care for Cage, but you feel that your opinions are of such over-arching importance, that it would not be enough not to participate in this thread; no, the world needs James's opinion that it's no big deal. You poor, deluded Cage fans, if you would only open your eyes, you would obtain true enlightenment and fawn all over Stockhausen, just like me! If you people were at all intelligent musically, you would all agree with me! Threads like this would disappear!
Quote from: Brewski on October 16, 2013, 08:48:27 AM
8)
I have heard 4'33" live a number of times: by a solo pianist, solo cellist, string quartet, and large chamber ensemble. Each time the sensation was acute: an audience listening to silence (or what they thought was silence) and paying keen attention. Inevitably you start to notice the tiniest sounds audible in the room: someone's chair squeaking, or the air-conditioning system, or coins shifting in a pants pocket.
And while I wouldn't want to hear it if I were in the mood for Wagner, listening to Cage's opus gets you thinking about all sorts of things. If nothing else, how many of us experience 5 minutes of silence in a day (sleep excepted)? But even if we all did, there's something about framing a few minutes - making a snapshot of them - that is silly, revolutionary, eye-rolling, profound.
--Bruce
Hear hear!
So, which ensemble did you like most in the piece? 0:)
Quote from: North Star on October 16, 2013, 12:53:38 PM
Hear hear!
So, which ensemble did you like most in the piece? 0:)
That's hard to say - truly! The chamber ensemble (c. 13-15 people) might have provided the most stimulation, just from the sheer number of people onstage, and watching them sit, smile, fidget, meditate, look down, shuffle their feet. But in the solo piano version (sorry, the name escapes me) the pianist sat on the bench, but also opened the lid and closed it (quietly), and inspected other parts of the instrument, adding elements of movement to the silence.
--Bruce
Quote from: Brewski on October 16, 2013, 01:12:34 PM
That's hard to say - truly! The chamber ensemble (c. 13-15 people) might have provided the most stimulation, just from the sheer number of people onstage, and watching them sit, smile, fidget, meditate, look down, shuffle their feet. But in the solo piano version (sorry, the name escapes me) the pianist sat on the bench, but also opened the lid and closed it (quietly), and inspected other parts of the instrument, adding elements of movement to the silence.
--Bruce
Yes, there truly are differences in the versions. I recall that the opening/closing of the lid is written in the score?
Quote from: North Star on October 16, 2013, 01:16:12 PM
Yes, there truly are differences in the versions. I recall that the opening/closing of the lid is written in the score?
I actually :-[ have never seen the score, except the front page! Have to fix that...
--Bruce
Quote from: Brewski on October 16, 2013, 01:28:07 PM
I actually :-[ have never seen the score, except the front page! Have to fix that...
--Bruce
I thought the score just says, fidget for 4'33"
Quote from: Scarpia on October 16, 2013, 01:29:48 PM
I thought the score just says, fidget for 4'33"
8)
--Bruce
Does anyone have access to a facsimile of the score?
Quote from: jochanaan on October 16, 2013, 02:17:16 PM
Does anyone have access to a facsimile of the score?
I have seen the score a while ago, and I believe it just has three movements that just says "Tacet". I could be wrong though.
Quote from: jochanaan on October 16, 2013, 02:17:16 PM
Does anyone have access to a facsimile of the score?
There are a couple of versions of it. I've seen one where each movement is simply marked "Tacet" and one where the rests are actually written out, I don't know which came first.
Neither of them tell the pianist to open/close the lid iirc, that's something Tudor came up with, I think.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/4′33″
Has information regarding the various scores
Quote from: PaulR on October 16, 2013, 02:43:54 PM
I have seen the score a while ago, and I believe it just has three movements that just says "Tacet". I could be wrong though.
That's the version I have seen. (Fun to have textual questions on this piece, eh?)
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 15, 2013, 11:53:11 AM
Well, I for one, will be exploring John Cage's music. Not Stockhausen's.
No one has ever twisted my arm to listen to Cage's music, and now I might be ready to explore it. Plus, I really like Octave's avatar! :)
On Stockhausen, his music is the least I am willing to explore (of all composers), and it is all because of James, and his incessant trying to cram Stockhausen continuously, day after day after day, down our throats. It ain't working James, very few people want to explore his music, because of your shitty attitude, and your constant need to tear down Cage....for what??
Take it from me for what you will, but I enjoy them both greatly, James notwithstanding (I was listening to Cage and Stockhausen for some two decades before James "saw the light"). I can say that Stockhausen appeals to a different sort of listening and part of the brain. I would venture to say that despite the tremendous value and richness of Stockhausen's oeuvre, truly an ear-opener, Cage's is, in its simplicity, a mind-opener.
Quote from: amw on October 16, 2013, 02:49:18 PM
There are a couple of versions of it. I've seen one where each movement is simply marked "Tacet" and one where the rests are actually written out, I don't know which came first.
Neither of them tell the pianist to open/close the lid iirc, that's something Tudor came up with, I think.
Correct on both counts.
Quote from: James on October 31, 2013, 04:44:03 AM
I highly doubt this, as I'm almost double your age, I know both well enough. Though I have come into the later works of Stockhausen only since his death. You are certainly correct about Stockhausen .. though of course truly "opening the ears" does open or trigger the mind, widen perception & sensitivity .. but with Cage; "mind-eraser" would be a more apt description of his thing, and no .. I'm not talking about the drink or the roller coaster. More like a form of amnesia or disassociation as far as thoughful composition is concerned rendering things invalid.
Get over it; some people will see more into some other composers' works than you do. But I appreciate you giving the benefit of the doubt.
I think the OP has all the opinions he needs. Of all the things in the world to NOT get worked up about. ::)
In future, I think it would be prudent if people would avoid starting new threads on this topic, that way all the eccentric stuff will be concentrated in one spot, where it won't require reiteration.
GB
8)