Unrelated anecdote, but I once went to a 3 hour John Cage concert. Genuinely awful, and about as thought provoking as a piece of cardboard.
That was avant-garde, apparently.
That was avant-garde, apparently.
Calling music by this term communicates a powerful judgment about its place in musical history. And it is simply, unavoidably incorrect. It has nothing to do with the music itself - it has to do with his musical process and how it jives with the basic musical environment of his time.
If the whole musical world were like John Cage, Philip Glass's works would definitely be avant-garde. But because the musical world is a lot more like Philip Glass, using the word "avant-garde" to describe his contributions is simply untrue.
I struggled and read a lot to understand the foundations of modern art. I found a lot of the intellectual constructions very unconvincing contrivances. I imagine I'd feel the same way about such compositions; an area in which I am certainly a neophyte
I don't think it would convince you to enjoy his work, but I found it to be a really good read, regardless!
https://www.amazon.com/Begin-Again-Biography-John-Cage/dp/08...
Here's an Unplugged version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVjwEmzxy_w