Same Review, Reviewed Again

How’s this for cliché—the new music piece was difficult; Schumann is no Beethoven; Beethoven was the highlight of the concert? More specifically, how about this—John Adams’ music is more fun than Schoenberg’s, but it isn’t great; Robert Schumann’s orchestration and thematic development is not very imaginative; Beethoven’s worst is still better than most?

Sound familiar? Thought so.

Here’s another rehashing of the same outline, this time filled in by James McQuillen of the Oregonian. At least thesauri abusers make the review sound original.

Enjoy Your Symptom!


Sator Arepo said...

Yep. You nailed it. Beethoven, even at his self-admitted mediocre, beats Schumann every time. Oh, well!

Anonymous said...

Since when is a piece entitled "Chamber Symphony" supposed to be funny? For the love of god, this is the reason that program notes suck ass. If no one knew the genesis of the material for that third movement, then I wouldn't have to read bullshit commentary, like "it's not funny". Memo from John Adams, "Fuck you".

Here's a news flash, music is never funny, nor is it happy or sad or constipated, it doesn't cry at Meg Ryan movies nor laugh at Will Ferrell movies (but that's actually because they aren't funny--at all)... and how the hell would sound have human emotions any way? Stop judging music by expected emotional outcome. Fuck you.

BTW, how did the Schumann Symphony make you feel? Ejaculatory?

Sator Arepo said...

Also, nice Zizek reference. I missed it the first time. Perhaps we need a "zizek reference" tag?