To quote Julie Andrews in the Sound Of Music: "Let's start from the very beginning..."

 

To quote Julie Andrews in the Sound Of Music: "Let's start from the very beginning..."

Is this the same Julie Andrews who sang the lyric: "The hills, hills, hills, are alive, are alive, with the sound, sound, sound, of music, music, music, music..."?

Yeah. From the beginning. I can second that.

 

I like Einstein on the Beach and Glassworks, maybe a few others. However, I think Reich and Adams took Glass' ideas and made something vastly more interesting from them. It's sort of like when the Classical Era started you had to get through the Boccherinis before you got to the Haydns and Mozarts.

 

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear - shakes head in disbelief!

 

Glass' symphonies and later concerti are kinda nice in the moment you're listening to them, but yeah, they are a bit of a joke compared to his early stuff.

 

Philip Glass simply *is*. He's never gotten any better or worse. He just keeps cranking out more of the same old same old like sausages. If you like it, you snap it up, play it and zone out, marveling upon its absolute uniformity. If you don't like it, he was always just as bad.

Glassworks was constructed as a crossover album for people used to progressive rock, so I imagine it is more accessible simply because of its brevity.

 

Compared to the earliest "hard core" minimalism, all of the minimalists have expanded their scope, and both Reich and Philip Glass are more dramatic now.

I think the change for Glass (for me and thousands of other PBS viewers) was when he scored for Koyannisqatsi, and he & his collaborators realized how effective his music was in a context of dramatic action, although Koyannisqatsi is not "narrative," has no plot, yet it rolls along relentlessly, making profound point after point, without any sort of real "plot structure." That's sort of like Glass' music, isn't it?
To say it is "boring" is somewhat misleading and disingenuous, seeing as the music of mimimalism is based on repetition; get past it, and realize what is happening here, and stop making complaints that don't really apply, or go praise some other composer.

 

To say it is "boring" is somewhat misleading and disingenuous, seeing as the music of mimimalism is based on repetition; get past it, and realize what is happening here, and stop making complaints that don't really apply, or go praise some other composer.

The word "boring" doesn't apply to Glass's music? Even if a good deal of it is, in fact, boring? Somehow I find that puzzling. In any event, give me Reich or Adams any day. Yes, even early "Mr. Minimal" Adams.

 

I rather enjoy what I've heard from Glass. Select symphonies, violin concerto, Glassworks. I adore his string quartets and place SQ3 amongst my favorites. My scope isn't broad enough to comment on early works vs late works but I appreciate his music for what it is. Because of Glass, I explored Reich and Adams, yet I still prefer Glass. Now if you're referring to his skills at the piano, then yes, he certainly got bad at some point. I'd say it's time for old Phil to leave the performing to a younger generation.

 

Now if you're referring to his skills at the piano, then yes, he certainly got bad at some point. I'd say it's time for old Phil to leave the performing to a younger generation.

Repetitive actions repeated over a long period of time can cause Carpel Tunnel Syndrome.

 

I tend to side with those who think Glass was at his best at the beginning. I'll leave it at that.

 

Certainly the works of Glass that I like best - and I like them a lot - are all earlier works, from the Satyagraha - Glassworks - Akhnaten period. There's a single-minded quality about their minimalism. I think the problem for me is that when he started to compose in more traditional forms like symphonies he lost that directness. The only later opera I know is Waiting for the Barbarians, and while there's more going on in the music and it's engaging in a dramatic sense I just don't find it as appealing as the more static Satyagraha and Akhnaten.

As an aside, let me give a plug for the Dublin Guitar Quartet's wonderful recent album of transcriptions of Glass's string quartets, released on Glass's own label.

 

I think the problem for me is that when he started to compose in more traditional forms like symphonies he lost that directness.

That's my feeling as well.

 

Glass' latest works seem uninspired and always recycling the same materials.

 

Glass is getting ever better. And better. And better. And better. And....

 

or is as good now as he was then ... as he was ... as he was then ... he was then ... as ...

 

I question the genius of any style of music which is so easily parodied.

 

You very, very definitely shouldn't watch this!

 

...or this!

 

or "How to play piano like Philip Glass"

 

I have got to admit I like Glass, there is something in his approach that appeals to me. I can quite see that his minimalist repetitive style is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but then again I can't think of any composer who is universally loved by everyone on TC.
He is certainly different to Haydn but don't anticipate any name change for username

 

I enjoy his work too. But then, I am rather a fan of New Age music, so no surprises there.

Come to think of it, in all branches of the arts, I regularly run into work that I enjoy way more than I should. I have learned not to feel too guilty or stupid about it.

 

Philip Glass viewed by Southpark.

If you're easily offended, don't watch, please

 

If you're easily offended, don't watch, please

Too late. Should have had headphones on. Grandkids in the room.

 

Glass was good?

*cowers in corner*

 

Well - in a word - yes. I agree!!!!

 

This thread is needless criticism of one of our era's best composers. It would be far more appropriate to talk about his accomplishments.

 

This thread is needless criticism of one of our era's best composers.

Well, I suppose that is better than being critical of our era in general.

 

^^^

Music in Twelve Parts (1971-74)
Einstein on the Beach (1975)
Koyaanisqatsi (1982)
Songs from Liquid Days (1986)
Hydrogen Jukebox (1988)

These are his masterpieces imo, and among the best works in music of the last 40 years or so.

Then I have to repeat myself: Glass' latest works seem uninspired and always recycling the same materials.

 

I've been trying to find a quote (from Fellini, I believe) but I can't. It was basically that if you examine the whole body of work of any great artist, you will soon discover that that artist is obsessed with something. It may be an idea, or an ideal, or a problem that needs solving, or an image, another artist, etc...

I find this so be true. If it is in fact true, then what is Philip Glass obsessed with?

He is not obsessed with "repetition". He is obsessed with a handful of rhythmic patterns and arpeggios, and much of his post-EOTB music is a frantic re-working of those same patterns and arpeggios into as many different configurations as possible. This listener finds the results extraordinarily moving and fascinating to indulge in.

Some listeners just can't be pleased. The same listener might complain that Glass is too repetitious while Webern or Schoenberg isn't repetitious enough. Glass uses repetition as a musical tool, same as Webern uses a tone-row. And the repetition of Glass is deceptive. It only seems repetitious, but if by "repetition" you mean "the same thing over and over and over", then I am afraid you are mistaken. If you listen closely to any section of EOTB or Koyaanisqatsi you will discover that with almost every so-called "repetition" some sort of change has occurred. The drama and intensity in the music comes largely from the fact that the development occurs over a longer period of time than you may be used to.

To call Philip Glass' music "bad" is to be a bad listener, I think. I may not like Aaron Copland's music very much, but I had no choice to admit that he was certainly gifted and brilliant and he certainly knew what he was doing. I could say the same for the poetry of Sylvia Plath. I do not enjoy reading her work, but I would never be foolish enough to call her a "bad" poet.

Glass is often compared and contrasted with Reich. What Glass has that Reich does not have is a thorough training in the Western classical tradition. He understands harmony and form in a way that Reich does not. Glass has a historic grasp of the tradition he is a part of, and Reich does not. Once again, this does not make Reich "bad". But to call Glass "bad" is to overlook how great his sense of melody is, how lush his harmonies and orchestrations can be, and how unique his music is among music.

I personally find that Einstein On The Beach is when he got good, and he has been great ever since.

 

I've been trying to find a quote (from Fellini, I believe) but I can't. It was basically that if you examine the whole body of work of any great artist, you will soon discover that that artist is obsessed with something. It may be an idea, or an ideal, or a problem that needs solving, or an image, another artist, etc...

Apparently, Fellini filled notebook after notebook with drawings of women's t**s and a***s (as he put it), which may be a clue to his obsession.

But I digress.

 

Apparently, Fellini filled notebook after notebook with drawings of women's t**s and a***s (as he put it), which may be a clue to his obsession.

That's mostly what my notebooks are filled with!

 

I haven't listened to a single work from Glass. I might go do that.

 

I'm actually enjoying some of his stuff quite a bit. I've heard a few symphonies and Itaipu. You just have to know what you're getting into. I knew from the start he was fond of repetitive structures, but as I'm such a fan of Feldman... that doesn't frighten me. I dig it.

 

Did Philip Glass Get Bad at Some Point?

When he gave up taxi driving to become a composer, perhaps?

 

OOOFFF!!!

 

I don't understand the criticism very well. If minimalism and repetition in music is his style, then how can he be disliked or his works considered inferior for employing repetition?