BABBITT, FOR ME, THE POINT OF CONTINUATION OR HOW TO LEAVE THE SERIALISTIC LANGUAGE FRAMEWORK (TO THE FRAMEWORK OF THE NEW LANGUAGE, NOT REALITY) WHICH THE SERIALISM HAS BEEN DEFINED IN (TO GET ITS OUTSIDE/INSIDE RESOLUTION)…
Put simply, for Boulez and other Europeans, serialism was a revolutionary act with sociological and even political implications; whereas for Babbitt it was simply a self-evident advance in compositional practice. Perhaps because of this difference, Babbitt has maintained his basic orientation towards and dedication to twelve-tone procedures, while virtually all of the other members of this compositional generation soon reacted against them and moved on to sometimes drastically different practices. At the same time, he has consistently avoided using expressionistically extreme musical rhetoric, preferring a cooler and more restrained idiom.
…if it be contended that research, even in its least “practical” phases, contributes to the sum of knowledge in a particular realm, what possibly can contribute more to our knowledge of music than a genuinely original composition? Granting to music the position accorded other arts and sciences promises the sole substantial means of survival for the music I have been describing. Admittedly, if this music is not supported, the whistling repertory of the man in the street will be little affected, the concert-going activity of the conspicuous consumer of musical culture will be little disturbed. But music will cease to evolve, and, in that important sense, will cease to live.
What exactly is going on here?
… SpaceTime is not the Space + Time. It is an instrumental structure, which we can see different outside/inside resolution through. And that´s exactly our task also in serialism. It is not the Pitch + Duration + Dynamics + Rhythm+ … n