I suppose I should begin this blog entry by apologizing for my absence. It has been a while since my last post on the Hand, partially because I was caught up in the academic doldrums of the summer, and partially because I was launching my new video blog, The Brazen Drum. While the video blog is my shiny new toy, I plan to continue blogging here as well because: a) I enjoy writing, and b) I see these two mediums as serving different (yet complimentary and possibly overlapping) purposes.
Well, now that that’s out of the way, let’s go wandering in the wilderness again and explore another topic in new music: Totalism. While sometimes used in political terms as a synonym for totalitarianism, totalism in music refers to a specific branch of post-minimalist music which developed in the 1990s. Indeed, while I was listening to Pearl Jam (Vs. is by far their best album, don’t try to argue with me) and scouring the local Goodwill for the perfect flannel shirt, a group of young composers in New York were developing their own brand of post-minimalist music.
The “total” in totalism (as noted by Kyle Gann) does not refer to the music itself, but to the intended audience. The driving force behind totalism is pairing an accessible surface (usually through familiar harmonies or rhythmic activity), which the casual listener is able to grasp, with a deeper structural complexity, which reveals itself to the more sophisticated listener. If I may offer a metaphor, consider the ocean. The surface of the ocean, vast and beautiful, is accessible to any viewer. Occasionally, marine life near the surface give glimpses of what is beneath. To the well-equipped, however, there is a depth and complexity which we are only beginning to explore with modern submarines and diving apparatus.
While it’s not an essential trait of the genre, totalist composers often draw on rock and pop music influences. While the surface harmony is often accessible to the casual listener, these pieces are generally more harmonically adventurous than traditional minimalist music.
Now, a few representative examples:
“Sun Dance” from “Custer and Sitting Bull” by Kyle Gann
This excerpt is from Kyle Gann’s musical drama, “Custer and Sitting Bull.” Gann is, among other things, a microtonal composer. In lay terms, this means he uses intervals small than a half step (the smallest on tonal music). This accounts for the “out-of-tune,” disorienting surface harmonies.
Please pardon the self-promotion, but this example, taken from my last recital at MSU, features a piece by totalist composer Joseph Waters. This piece is based on rhythms taken from Cuban Santeria rituals. This piece exhibits and exciting, accessible surface, but is structurally complex in it’s use and development of rhythmic motives. There are often several layers of the same rhythm, played at different tempi.
I wanted to include this piece because Maya Beiser is a bad-ass cellist, and because Michael Gordon is a major player in the totalism scene. Note how the video in the background can represent a metaphor for totalism: a very active surface, but with a complexity that eludes the viewer.
Finally, this beautiful piece by John Luther Adams. The active surface of this piece is provided by the piano and percussion, while the strings and winds play complex, slowly developing harmonies. Many people believe that Adams’ sparse, sprawling textures evoke the barren plains of Alaska where he currently lives and works.
This concludes this foray into the wilderness of totalism. I leave you with a few questions. Which of these pieces did you enjoy? Which did you dislike? Why?
For further reading, checkout this excellent article by Kyle Gann.
Until next time, keep wandering…
#1 by Matt Schoendorff - October 27th, 2009 at 00:29
Good stuff, Ty! I checked out the links and read Gann’s article and am really glad I did. I especially enjoyed the John Luther Adams piece; probably because I, too, have been interested in the Feldmanesque sound clouds (which seem ever more important these days in relation to what musicians are doing now with electronics).
#2 by Phillip - October 27th, 2009 at 18:23
Great Post! I remember having a meeting with Dr. Falvo, the percussion God at Appalachian State, about this “ism” in 2004. He wanted to describe it as “the borrowing of everything” factor in order to appeal to all audiences. I didn’t realize it was considered a “post-minimalism” movement, whatever that means. I’m perplexed by the thought of something being “kind of” minimalistic, but way more intricate and advanced and therefor not minimalistic, which negates the idea of minimalism. I guess the main factor is texture. By this “totalism” definition, I can definitely say that idea can be applied to a lot of my music. I’m sure it could be applied to a lot of us who draw from pop/rock/folk/etc. However, I find it to be vague… when you say “this piece is totalistic” what are you going to expect to hear? You know what you are going to get when you label the other “isms.” Maybe it is too new to have a distinctive sound and characteristics. The idea is awesome and completely valid, and some of us should pick it up and run. Or maybe we should just write music and let some music theorist apply an ism to what we’re doing. Fuckisms.
#3 by Ty - October 28th, 2009 at 09:14
Matt – I think the Gann article is really interesting. I’m considering revising the post a little bit to give it a stronger recommendation.
Phillip – Good thoughts. Here are a few responses/thoughts:
I think the idea behind both post-minimalism and totalist movements is to take the populist appeal of minimalism and infuse it more sophisticated compositional ideas. Sure, it’s not minimalist anymore (Gann argues pretty persuasively that minimalism was a dead end from the beginning), but it follows in the trail blazed by minimalism.
I think the definition of totalism is vague by necessity. I think it’s more of a philosophical distinction than any definable musical style. Even within minimalism, the approaches taken by Glass, Reich, and Adams are vastly different and an uninformed listener may not recognize these pieces as belonging to the same style (Does “Drumming” sound anything like “Glassworks”? How similar are “Einstein on the Beach” and “Dr. Atomic”?)
I think many composers today exhibit totalist tenancies, whether or not they refer to it in those terms. Composers of our generation are coming to realize that the alienation of the casual listener that occurred in art music of the early/mid 20th century was harmful to our cause and are working to bridge the gap and invite these disillusioned listeners back in.
I hope that all makes sense. Thanks for reading and commenting!