Where have all the giants gone?

[bassybill]

I was just listening to the Planets Suite by Gustav Holst and was once again amazed by how exceptional this guy was. He just sat in his house and created this with a pen and some paper. When you think about it, it's pretty incredible.

Sure, he's not the only example and music is not the only field in which this used to happen. But it seems that nowadays this level of talent is pretty much non-existent in any area. We have talented people, but nobody so head-and-shoulders above the herd that they'll stand out like this guy. What happened to us that stops us having genius people today?

[T-Bird]

Hi.

I blame the music industry and it's greed to make a fast buck with proven top-ten formulae.

Crap is being slung at us by so rapid pace, that we probably couldn't even recognize talent if it hit us square in the nerds.

The giants of every generation will eventually rise above the crap, but that'll most likely take at least a decade.

Regards
Sam

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by bassybill

I was just listening to the Planets Suite by Gustav Holst and was once again amazed by how exceptional this guy was. He just sat in his house and created this with a pen and some paper. When you think about it, it's pretty incredible.

Sure, he's not the only example and music is not the only field in which this used to happen. But it seems that nowadays this level of talent is pretty much non-existent in any area. We have talented people, but nobody so head-and-shoulders above the herd that they'll stand out like this guy. What happened to us that stops us having genius people today?

Holst wasn't head and shoulders above his peers.

I'd put Stravinsky and Schoenberg ahead of Holst when it comes to head and shoulders above the crowd.

As for why we see less of what appears to be singular genius... It's because we're exposed to more of genius, and what constitutes genius has become very specialized due to the massive expansion of knowledge.

[Jim Nazium]

I think there just as many highly talented people today as there were at any time in history, but in most fields you have to be so specialized to make any advance that very few people will hear about it or appreciate it. No one can re-discover gravity or re-invent calculus today, like Newton did 300 years (ish) ago. People can and do make important discoveries in physics and math, but they are so advanced and specialized that very few people can understand them.

Turning to music, who is going to play more complex harmony than Coltrane? No one, because that's as complex as it can get. Who is going to slap the bass with more dexterity than Victor Wooten? Maybe someone, but let's face it, there's only so many notes per second that you can hear. There may be people as talented as Coltrane and Wooten, but there are fewer truly new things for them to do because so much has been don already.

[champbassist]

Originally Posted by Jim Nazium

I think there just as many highly talented people today as there were at any time in history, but in most fields you have to be so specialized to make any advance that very few people will hear about it or appreciate it. No one can re-discover gravity or re-invent calculus today, like Newton did 300 years (ish) ago. People can and do make important discoveries in physics and math, but they are so advanced and specialized that very few people can understand them.

Spot on. There are certain examples of recent scientific breakthroughs that are known to a lot of the general public (e.g. the LHC) but the statement is true.

[Sketchy]

I have to admit, I do like The Planets, but I have to agree that maybe all that we can concieve in music is fast being done, but someone will come along and do something completely original, and maybe they'll be remembered, maybe they'll just be washed out by what gets played on the radio (I suspect the former is most likely).

However, what I think is certain is that this level of genius does still exist, and it'll make itself obvious when it occurs.

[ugly_bassplayer]

Originally Posted by bassybill

I was just listening to the Planets Suite by Gustav Holst and was once again amazed by how exceptional this guy was. He just sat in his house and created this with a pen and some paper. When you think about it, it's pretty incredible.

Sure, he's not the only example and music is not the only field in which this used to happen. But it seems that nowadays this level of talent is pretty much non-existent in any area. We have talented people, but nobody so head-and-shoulders above the herd that they'll stand out like this guy. What happened to us that stops us having genius people today?

IMO Squarepusher is one of those genius'

[bassybill]

Originally Posted by aborgman

Holst wasn't head and shoulders above his peers.

I'd put Stravinsky and Schoenberg ahead of Holst when it comes to head and shoulders above the crowd.

Personally, I wouldn't presume even to attempt such a comparison.

[burk48237]

I suspect their all programming video games or setting up auto tuners.

[knumbskull]

a lot of creative endeavours are monetarized these days - or at least that is how their success is measured. so the selling, rather than the creating, becomes the thing people fixate upon.

then again, maybe that was the case in Holst's day as well?

[bassybill]

As an aside to the discussion - I was talking in general terms rather than music specifically, and Holst was just an example. But if we're looking for that sort of creativity in modern music, then some film composers are carrying on in that vein pretty well. Try listening to Jerry Goldsmith or James Newton Howard. There's also some really interesting stuff being written for video game scores.

Anyway, back to the main theme of the thread. Where's our next Einstein or Darwin coming from?

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by bassybill

Personally, I wouldn't presume even to attempt such a comparison.

You attempted exactly such a comparison by claiming Holst a singular genius.

[BassChuck]

As a bit of a side note. Holst was a music teacher and trombonist. Many of the people who knew him probably weren't really sure of his compositional skills. Bach was a church organist, and acknowledged as one of the best. His compostional skills were not widely known in his lifetime.
Anyone today who wishes to promote themselves as a composer has to, as always, support themselves in some other avenue. Beethoven was one of very few exceptions to this.
Also, many of the 'giants' of music we admire, did not have to compete with recordings of great music from centuries before. If, say in Haydn's time, a group of people wanted to hear some symphonic music, they had to go a concert and listen to what was programmed, or hire an orchestra to play what then wanted. In either case it was about the same amount of work to present a new piece as it was an old one. If I wanted to, I could listen to all Beethoven symphones this afternoon, well performed and sound pretty darn good right here in my home. No one in 1827 could do that. I wonder how many people in 1827 had heard all of Beethoven's symphones any more than once?

We live in wonderous times when the intellectual work of mankind is at our fingertips, and at our bidding. There is a price to pay for that. We have taken the great thoughts of the past and created a grey roar of perfection that is very difficult for new ideas to penetrate. Add to that the act of creating music has radically changed in the last 30 years... it may take a generation to uncover the new possibilites of technology.

We need to approach new ideas with the hope they will stimulate our thinking and not just entertain us. Art requires involvement, not comsumption. Everyone needs to be a part of that.

[AcidFripp]

Are you guys really comparing classical musicians with pop musicians? Really, now?

Oh, you forget that Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Karl Heinz Stockhausen, and Iannis Xenakis are all modern.

[bassybill]

Originally Posted by aborgman

You attempted exactly such a comparison by claiming Holst a singular genius.

I did? Wow. That's amazing.

[EdHunter]

Holst, Wagner and Elgar über alles (I like my music biiig and heavy...)!

In terms of the crux of this discussion, the next genius/Earth shattering piece of brilliance won't become apparent until it becomes apaprent. I've no doubt that something the scale of Darwin's statement of theory of evolution by means of natural selection or the Cruyff turn is in the works, we jsut won't know about it until it emerges. Which it will. At some time.

[colcifer]

Well, we at least have Joss Whedon (not that it means much when Fox keeps canceling his shows).

[FilterFunk]

Here's the stock answer: "The giants are out there; you just have to find them," presumably on the internet. Of course, that means you have to sift through a mountain range of crap and hope to get lucky.

[Quickie]

Originally Posted by aborgman

As for why we see less of what appears to be singular genius... It's because we're exposed to more of genius, and what constitutes genius has become very specialized due to the massive expansion of knowledge.

Wrong. We are not exposed to more genius...we are exposed to more redundancy, idea stealing (sampling) "artists" that could care less about the music and care more about the pay day.

And when someone nowadays say's "he/she is a genius"....nope...just different from the norm. Lady Gaga comes to mind....that is of course if you forgot Madonna...which Lady Gaga is. Real music is still alive in the classical sense....composers still writing brilliant pieces for an orchestra.

Pop, Rap, even country is just now yesterdays regurgitated soup.

[Arr MiHardies]

Originally Posted by colcifer

Well, we at least have Joss Whedon (not that it means much when Fox keeps canceling his shows).

He just needs to get away from fox. He needs to say, "no man you can't have my show. You'll just air it out of order then cancel it."