I watched Cory Arcangel’s Schoenberg’s Cats video again Tuesday at The Power Plant’s summer group show, Adaptation Between Species, and was reminded of how little I’ve engaged in the discussion of that piece. According to exiting Senior Curator Helena Reckitt’s wall description, Arcangel’s youtube mash-up uses the cats to make fun of the “my kid could paint that” criticisms of avant garde art. Once hated by the Nazi’s, Schoenberg’s a-tonal piece now revered sees uneven acceptance by the elite music establishment. Though interesting, this isn’t essential knowledge to “getting” the video, which basically runs with the punchline “Even random cats walking across a piano can remake this famous noise piece. Ha ha!” “Nazis would love this” is just an added chuckle.
What’s missing in Reckitt’s description is a contextualization of this work relative to the lectures on the internet’s flattening of visual material presented by Arcangel and partner Hanne Muggas. These lectures are mostly the tedious experience of watching Arcangel pretend to surf badly and draw the following point from Muggas’ curated list of videos: The internet speeds imitation and renders repetition transparent. Um, duh.
Needless to say, I’m not a fan of this work or the cats. The video’s funny enough, but it stands a little too close to like-minded internet projects whereby a knowing cynicism accompanies the joke. Arcangel’s piece removes the careerism, but maintains a whiff of This-is-Why-You’re-Fat-self-conscious-emptiness in the place of real content.
{ 34 comments }
Schoenberg’s 12 tone system (where all semitones in a 12 note scale are given equal weight, regardless of combinations that are discordant to Western ears) was the academic norm for decades. Making fun of its pretensions has been a “downtown” strategy for a few less decades–this video comes rather late to the party, and unlike (one -time) downtown “tonal” artists such as Philip Glass, who at least makes music, this offers nothing but sneers. It completely reinforces bubba-ish “my cat could do that” sentiments. Piano-playing pet videos are better by themselves, without all the editing and high-concept–that’s how they were presented by surf club artists such as (as I recall) Brian Blomerth. Here is one video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM ) recommended by techno music critic Alan Lockett: the cat playing a couple of notes and listening to them intently is rather poignant and lovely.
Schoenberg’s 12 tone system (where all semitones in a 12 note scale are given equal weight, regardless of combinations that are discordant to Western ears) was the academic norm for decades. Making fun of its pretensions has been a “downtown” strategy for a few less decades–this video comes rather late to the party, and unlike (one -time) downtown “tonal” artists such as Philip Glass, who at least makes music, this offers nothing but sneers. It completely reinforces bubba-ish “my cat could do that” sentiments. Piano-playing pet videos are better by themselves, without all the editing and high-concept–that’s how they were presented by surf club artists such as (as I recall) Brian Blomerth. Here is one video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM ) recommended by techno music critic Alan Lockett: the cat playing a couple of notes and listening to them intently is rather poignant and lovely.
Is the idea that Schoenberg is revered by the “elite music establishment” from Arcangel? Because, insofar as there is a single cohesive elite music establishment, it has a much more complicated relationship to Schoenberg than simple reverence. Begrudgedly acknowledged historical importance notwithstanding, a great many of the more popular/successful/moneymaking composers and musicians working right now disdain Schoenberg as a sort of pompous modernist figure whose serialist program was basically an unpleasant (and un-beautiful) mistake. Musical minimalism (Steve Reich and Phillip Glass, and later the post-minimal work of e.g. John Adams and Bang on a Can) was and is frequently presented as a kind of antidote to serialism/modernism. And that rhetorical tack works; post-minimalism is where the money goes, now. This institutional power shift away from modernism is also the historical-explanatory key to Arcangel’s Reich-inspired kinetic phasing sculpture.
I think what I’m getting at is that making fun of Schoenberg isn’t transgressive, it’s the status quo. If this work is a joke at the expense of modernism, then it doesn’t antagonize the current musical power structure (the prankster’s job!), but supports it.
Is the idea that Schoenberg is revered by the “elite music establishment” from Arcangel? Because, insofar as there is a single cohesive elite music establishment, it has a much more complicated relationship to Schoenberg than simple reverence. Begrudgedly acknowledged historical importance notwithstanding, a great many of the more popular/successful/moneymaking composers and musicians working right now disdain Schoenberg as a sort of pompous modernist figure whose serialist program was basically an unpleasant (and un-beautiful) mistake. Musical minimalism (Steve Reich and Phillip Glass, and later the post-minimal work of e.g. John Adams and Bang on a Can) was and is frequently presented as a kind of antidote to serialism/modernism. And that rhetorical tack works; post-minimalism is where the money goes, now. This institutional power shift away from modernism is also the historical-explanatory key to Arcangel’s Reich-inspired kinetic phasing sculpture.
I think what I’m getting at is that making fun of Schoenberg isn’t transgressive, it’s the status quo. If this work is a joke at the expense of modernism, then it doesn’t antagonize the current musical power structure (the prankster’s job!), but supports it.
That said, it might also be a weird kind of high-level 3D-chess style backhanded homage.
That said, it might also be a weird kind of high-level 3D-chess style backhanded homage.
I’ll need to update the post. The wall text only described Schoenberg as “rarefied”, and my understanding of it’s current reception was not complete.
I’ll need to update the post. The wall text only described Schoenberg as “rarefied”, and my understanding of it’s current reception was not complete.
I’ll need to update the post. The wall text only described Schoenberg as “rarefied”, and my understanding of it’s current reception was not complete.
This work could not exist without Schoenberg.
Its statement is one of Neutrality. It says “I am not here to harm you.”
Is this “good” or “bad”
Its neither.
This work could not exist without Schoenberg.
Its statement is one of Neutrality. It says “I am not here to harm you.”
Is this “good” or “bad”
Its neither.
Ah… I was glancing and thought this had something to do with “Schrödinger’s cat,” but no. Although you could argue that the pieces (Schoenberg’s & Arcangel’s) do revel in and exemplify some audio/visual “Verschränkung!”
Ah… I was glancing and thought this had something to do with “Schrödinger’s cat,” but no. Although you could argue that the pieces (Schoenberg’s & Arcangel’s) do revel in and exemplify some audio/visual “Verschränkung!”
“Revered” may be too strong but respected certainly. Beau’s and my comments seem mostly in agreement. I have a problem with the zone where a “high-level 3D-chess style backhanded homage,” if that’s what this is, veers into plain old garden variety American anti-intellectualism. Paddy pegs it well as “a whiff of This-is-Why-You’re-Fat-self-conscious-emptiness in the place of real content.”
“Revered” may be too strong but respected certainly. Beau’s and my comments seem mostly in agreement. I have a problem with the zone where a “high-level 3D-chess style backhanded homage,” if that’s what this is, veers into plain old garden variety American anti-intellectualism. Paddy pegs it well as “a whiff of This-is-Why-You’re-Fat-self-conscious-emptiness in the place of real content.”
I think the best part of this piece is the question i see arcangel asking himself, “What would happen if I used ‘cats playing piano’ videos from youtube to create a performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11.?”
i see it more as an experiment that tries to take random elements (cats making piano sounds) that would have felt at home in a pseudo john cage-like chance piece and ordering them very specifically into something completely rigid like a Schoenberg twelve-tone piece. It’s an interesting idea and exists more as a musical performance and new musical score (from arcangel’s hacked code and process) than it does an art video.
I think the best part of this piece is the question i see arcangel asking himself, “What would happen if I used ‘cats playing piano’ videos from youtube to create a performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11.?”
i see it more as an experiment that tries to take random elements (cats making piano sounds) that would have felt at home in a pseudo john cage-like chance piece and ordering them very specifically into something completely rigid like a Schoenberg twelve-tone piece. It’s an interesting idea and exists more as a musical performance and new musical score (from arcangel’s hacked code and process) than it does an art video.
I think the best part of this piece is the question i see arcangel asking himself, “What would happen if I used ‘cats playing piano’ videos from youtube to create a performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11.?”
i see it more as an experiment that tries to take random elements (cats making piano sounds) that would have felt at home in a pseudo john cage-like chance piece and ordering them very specifically into something completely rigid like a Schoenberg twelve-tone piece. It’s an interesting idea and exists more as a musical performance and new musical score (from arcangel’s hacked code and process) than it does an art video.
ghostfuk3r, you are suggesting we listen to the piece with the video off! In any case, I would trust that the computer program the artist used (not made, not hacked–it’s called Comparisonics) could do the drudge work of comparing an existing Schoenberg recording to a long file of random cat notes. (Also, what is a “pseudo Cage-like chance piece”? You’re describing an imaginary work that, again, sounds to me like the way people who hate modern music think modern music sounds.)
Schoenberg Cats is basically a computer-assisted version of the old joke “if you had enough chimps and typewriters you could produce the works of Shakespeare,” only using music that is still, to this day, popularly believed to be written by chimps. The play it is getting both in the art world and heavily trafficked websites like kottke’s suggests to me that it is not a neutral work, as Martin suggests, but plays to and reinforces the stereotype.
ghostfuk3r, you are suggesting we listen to the piece with the video off! In any case, I would trust that the computer program the artist used (not made, not hacked–it’s called Comparisonics) could do the drudge work of comparing an existing Schoenberg recording to a long file of random cat notes. (Also, what is a “pseudo Cage-like chance piece”? You’re describing an imaginary work that, again, sounds to me like the way people who hate modern music think modern music sounds.)
Schoenberg Cats is basically a computer-assisted version of the old joke “if you had enough chimps and typewriters you could produce the works of Shakespeare,” only using music that is still, to this day, popularly believed to be written by chimps. The play it is getting both in the art world and heavily trafficked websites like kottke’s suggests to me that it is not a neutral work, as Martin suggests, but plays to and reinforces the stereotype.
tom – i’m not suggesting we listen to the piece with the video off. What I’m suggesting is that the piece is more of a musical gesture than an art gesture. I’m fine that it is both – it’s why it appeals to me, but i think it has more merit as a musical piece. It marries chance with a rigid structure using technology and media as the instrumentation. It’s a variation on an important historical piece of music.
as for the “pseudo cage-like chance piece” remark – pseudo may have been the wrong word choice to convey that the chance operation of cats playing notes on the piano are a derivation of a process that is often attributed to john cage.
i don’t agree with your sentiment that arcangel’s piece is “basically a computer-assisted version of the old joke “if you had enough chimps and typewriters you could produce the works of Shakespeare.” I think it’s an amusingly crafted musical interpretation/performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11. I don’t see it as reinforcing a stereotype – i see it as a clever manipulation of chance and rigid structure.
tom – i’m not suggesting we listen to the piece with the video off. What I’m suggesting is that the piece is more of a musical gesture than an art gesture. I’m fine that it is both – it’s why it appeals to me, but i think it has more merit as a musical piece. It marries chance with a rigid structure using technology and media as the instrumentation. It’s a variation on an important historical piece of music.
as for the “pseudo cage-like chance piece” remark – pseudo may have been the wrong word choice to convey that the chance operation of cats playing notes on the piano are a derivation of a process that is often attributed to john cage.
i don’t agree with your sentiment that arcangel’s piece is “basically a computer-assisted version of the old joke “if you had enough chimps and typewriters you could produce the works of Shakespeare.” I think it’s an amusingly crafted musical interpretation/performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11. I don’t see it as reinforcing a stereotype – i see it as a clever manipulation of chance and rigid structure.
tom – i’m not suggesting we listen to the piece with the video off. What I’m suggesting is that the piece is more of a musical gesture than an art gesture. I’m fine that it is both – it’s why it appeals to me, but i think it has more merit as a musical piece. It marries chance with a rigid structure using technology and media as the instrumentation. It’s a variation on an important historical piece of music.
as for the “pseudo cage-like chance piece” remark – pseudo may have been the wrong word choice to convey that the chance operation of cats playing notes on the piano are a derivation of a process that is often attributed to john cage.
i don’t agree with your sentiment that arcangel’s piece is “basically a computer-assisted version of the old joke “if you had enough chimps and typewriters you could produce the works of Shakespeare.” I think it’s an amusingly crafted musical interpretation/performance of Schoenberg’s Op.11. I don’t see it as reinforcing a stereotype – i see it as a clever manipulation of chance and rigid structure.
“Clever” and “amusing” it is. It’s great if you like the audio more than the video, but then you’ve still got all these cats and their cute behavior, cat-owners being stage moms, etc. That’s the reason anyone is discussing this piece, much as you might like to play down that content. I think the cats should be left as they are (great found video) and think Glenn Gould’s Schoenberg probably doesn’t need a “barking dogs sing Christmas carols” version. Just because it’s done with a computer doesn’t make an old idea important. And anyway, this is already a canonical work, regardless of what a few dissatisfied critics might have to say about it.
“Clever” and “amusing” it is. It’s great if you like the audio more than the video, but then you’ve still got all these cats and their cute behavior, cat-owners being stage moms, etc. That’s the reason anyone is discussing this piece, much as you might like to play down that content. I think the cats should be left as they are (great found video) and think Glenn Gould’s Schoenberg probably doesn’t need a “barking dogs sing Christmas carols” version. Just because it’s done with a computer doesn’t make an old idea important. And anyway, this is already a canonical work, regardless of what a few dissatisfied critics might have to say about it.
“Clever” and “amusing” it is. It’s great if you like the audio more than the video, but then you’ve still got all these cats and their cute behavior, cat-owners being stage moms, etc. That’s the reason anyone is discussing this piece, much as you might like to play down that content. I think the cats should be left as they are (great found video) and think Glenn Gould’s Schoenberg probably doesn’t need a “barking dogs sing Christmas carols” version. Just because it’s done with a computer doesn’t make an old idea important. And anyway, this is already a canonical work, regardless of what a few dissatisfied critics might have to say about it.
This piece is situated in the back end of the gallery and while you can here it, you can’t see it most of the time. The first thing a viewer sees is the explanatory show text, which explains that the exhibition’s about communication with animals. I didn’t even have to see the piece before thinking to myself: “An animal must be playing the piano…this sounds like art” When I finally saw the video, I wasn’t at all surprised to find out that it was a cat playing the piano. There was a giant cat piece nearby, but also, there’s basically an endless supply of found cat footage. I think that in and of itself makes the cat-youtube-medium difficult.
This piece is situated in the back end of the gallery and while you can here it, you can’t see it most of the time. The first thing a viewer sees is the explanatory show text, which explains that the exhibition’s about communication with animals. I didn’t even have to see the piece before thinking to myself: “An animal must be playing the piano…this sounds like art” When I finally saw the video, I wasn’t at all surprised to find out that it was a cat playing the piano. There was a giant cat piece nearby, but also, there’s basically an endless supply of found cat footage. I think that in and of itself makes the cat-youtube-medium difficult.
I don’t suppose anyone has stopped to consider how the internet’s ceaseless repetition of visual tropes resembles fascism’s?
I don’t suppose anyone has stopped to consider how the internet’s ceaseless repetition of visual tropes resembles fascism’s?
I don’t suppose anyone has stopped to consider how the internet’s ceaseless repetition of visual tropes resembles fascism’s?
Yes, but with the difference that you can now put up a site called catsthatlooklikehitler.com without being taken away. Why, you can even buy an app in the Apple app store to “throw a shoe at Bush”—oh, wait, you can’t do that.
Yes, but with the difference that you can now put up a site called catsthatlooklikehitler.com without being taken away. Why, you can even buy an app in the Apple app store to “throw a shoe at Bush”—oh, wait, you can’t do that.
Yes, but with the difference that you can now put up a site called catsthatlooklikehitler.com without being taken away. Why, you can even buy an app in the Apple app store to “throw a shoe at Bush”—oh, wait, you can’t do that.
Comments on this entry are closed.