To those who draw false conclusions from this tape: Feldman actually was one of the most witty people I ever met. (Even from a Hegelian point of view as Heinz Klaus Metzger, who adored Feldman, would have told you). It is important to realise that at that point he was very tired of quick wise-cracking as demonstrated by the interviewer who constantly interrupts him. He hated stereotypes and kept reflecting on art from all sorts of angles. Later it would even include nomadic rugs which he studied in-depth. Frequently he mentioned the heated discussions with his teacher Stefan Wolpe earlier in his life. Conversations with Rothko or Guston certainly introduced a degree of hesitancy, of questioning a standardised 'academic' discourse. That's also what he made responsible for the decline of Boulez and Stockhausen who were stuck in those schemes.
It gets interesting by the 38-minute mark when Feldman starts talking about his composition process. I do think it could have been better with a less pedantic interviewer, genuinely interested in listening to the composers' ideas. The name-dropping was excessive and the guy focused too much on promoting some sort of hyper-intellectual spectacle.
I think Feldman comes across as reasonably humorous here, and I have no idea why commenters are so critical of the interviewer. It seems to me he knows his subject and engages Feldman quite effectively.
Hah, wow, when he starts talking he sounds completely different than I imagined his voice. He sounds confident, open and sort of a bit streetwise or something even. I have listened to his music a lot especially for Bunita Marcus and I would have imagined him sort of shy or recluse, introvert or whatever. I guess I'm just projecting things from myself on to hs music and assuming that his him. Maybe if you would have met Beethoven he talked like Robin Williams. :-)
I think it might be the New York accent that makes him sound streetwise and brash. But anyway, Feldman didn't have much to say about theories...he himself always said, in effect "Just write down the notes!" That's why Cage was so astonished with the fact that Feldman didn't know "how" he wrote a given piece.
That's because the interviewer always jumps in with a hash-up of stereotypes. I knew Feldman and listened to him for hours and hours on end talking. At one point in 1984 he talked for a week with very little interruptions. He might have been the most eloquent person I ever met, including my mother.
Why not? In any event, Feldman had an out-sized ego and an over-blown estimation of his “talents”. In every interview of him I’ve read/heard, he comes across as a snotty jerk. Post-1967, he wrote a few interesting pieces - Rothko Chapel, The Viola in My Life, for example - but the longer pieces are mostly a waste of time (I sat through the world premiere of the complete version of the 2nd string quartet and sat through it again 2 years later, still hate the piece). By the way, what had Feldman written as of 1967 to warrant the attention he was getting then?
@@eai554 Because he was a professional composer in lifetime and his music is still a cultural point of reference within modern music and in other arts as well. Whether you or I like it is another matter. I wouldn't call Max Richter anything but professional even though I don't care that much for his music. Personally, I've had profound experiences with Feldmans hour long string quartet. I don't know about his personality and would prefer not to regard his music though that anyway. From the few interviews I've heard, he seems witty and smart although maybe a bit self important.
Not smart. A pretentious name-dropper. I believe that he was aware of and defensive about his overall lack of formal education. He read a few things, and faked it. His comments about certain composers are off-putting, to say the least. He managed a few good pieces, very nice, give him credit for that. But overall a mediocre musical presence.