John Cage 's Work Of Art

In today’s society, we are constantly being bombarded with visual art forms. Whether they be classical paintings from the Renaissance, a towering and modern skyscraper, or even a cheesy 90’s R&B music video, they all have one thing in common. According to Carolyn Dean’s definition, these would all fall under the category of “art by intention.” In her essay “The Trouble with (The Term) Art” she advocates a distinction between art by intention and what she deems “art by appropriation.” The difference is that one work was created with the intention of being consumed for visual pleasure, while the other was not. However having been educated in the Western school of thought, many art historians cannot help but project their rigid definition of art onto civilizations that may have

In a world that has become immune to accepting all types of art, Marya Mannes believes we have lost our standards and ability to identify something as “good” or “bad”. In her essay, “How Do You Know It’s Good”, she discusses society’s tendency to accept everything out of fear of wrongly labelling something as being good or bad. She touches on various criteria to judge art, such as the artist’s purpose, skill and craftsmanship, originality, timelessness, as well as unity within a piece rather than chaos. She says that an individual must decide if something is good “on the basis of instinct, experience, and association” (Mannes). I believe that by using standards and the process of association, we will be able to judge what makes an art piece good in comparison to others. However, Mannes forces me to consider the difference between what may be appealing versus what is actually good, and when deciding which art we should accept, which is truly more important. I believe that “good” and “bad” are two ends of a large, subjective spectrum of grey area. It is possible for a piece of art to be good in some areas and bad in others, and if something does not live up to all of our standards, it does not necessarily mean it should be dismissed. Thus, I believe my personal standards for judging art are based on which my standards are largely based on the personal reaction evoked from a piece of art. Though I agree with Mannes’ standards to an extent, I believe that certain standards, such as evoking a personal response, can be more telling of if a piece of art is good as opposed to its timelessness, or the level of experience of an artist in his/her craft.

Sonata V of John Cage has binary form which consists of small-ranged irregular phrases. The piece as a whole does not have a distinct melody. The first section has a smooth, repetitive rhythm, and percussive sound of prepared piano is ethereal. There is a regular pulse throughout the first section, and the pulse is delayed in some places with a couple of extra notes (“Sonata V,” 0:12-0:16). The second part is more like the developmental part of the Classical sonata form. It is more dissonant and irregular, and there are pauses between some phrases. The piece as a whole differs from Western music in almost every aspect. Some parts of the piece resemble African drumming (“Sonata V,” 0:47-0:52). However, Cage was actually inspired from Javanese Gamelan, an orchestra of metallic percussion from Indonesia (Forney et. al., 374).

Rather than a musical composition or visual installation, the work 4’33’’ is a concept in art history. Therefore, I think there is no need to separate music and visual art. To be honest, 4’33’’ is the silence within 4’33’’ that presents ideas to the audience. Cage

Barry Jenkins’s 2016 film, Moonlight, is a work that is characterized by its silences, both in what is unsaid, as well as the unresolved nature of many of its central tensions. In the film, silence functions to emphasize the interiority of the film’s subject, and to make the audience aware of itself. Such strategic use of absence recalls John Cage's groundbreaking composition, 4'33; a work that is distinguished by its lack of any audible musical accompaniment. For many, the piece is reflective of Cage's sexual identity as a gay man; the silence functioning as a metaphor for the “closet” (Katz 241). The scholar Jonathan Katz has pushed against such a totalizing reading of Cage's oeuvre, by noting that silence was part of his larger aesthetic and religious practices, and thusly cannot be considered as simply an aural manifestation of the closet (242). Katz argues that, "Silence was much more than conventionally unmusical; it provided a route toward an active challenge of the assumptions and prejudices that gave rise to homophobic oppression in the first place. For Cage, silence was an ideal form of resistance, carefully attuned to the requirements of the cold war consensus, at least in its originary social-historical context." (241).

Richard Taruskin’s essay helps expound on John Cage’s notion of autonomous art. He writes that, Cage brought about the true aesthetics of Western art in what he calls to ‘its purest peak.’ Taruskin also relates to Cage’s work as having a notion of ‘purposeful purposelessness.’ Cage’s work was in itself a form of autonomous art because of its hallowedness and special modes of performance, like the piece 4’33”. In addition, there is a middle man who interfaces the audience

Art like this though cannot depend on content alone. Someone can listen to this piece and enjoy its beauty just as much as someone who knows the meaning behind it. This is another protest

4 and 4' 33" by John Cage to be very interesting and enjoyable in a good way. In 4’ 33”, I felt that John Cage was trying to say that anything can be music, whether the music is coming from instruments, or even the nearly-quiet environment of a performance hall. Going along with this thought, I believe that 4' 33" is indeed music. 4' 33" is music that differs every place, time, and performance. It may not fit any certain category of music, but it is a sort of noise that is produced and then listened to by an audience. When it comes to chance music such as Cage’s Imaginary Landscape No. 4, I think that this type of music is an interesting idea. The fact that the composer does not have control of whatever noise happens, whether that be a radio or random background noise during a performance seems kind of scary, but also appealing at the same

I personally do not believe John Cages 4’33” to be music. I do however believe it to be art. The piece it’s self seems to show a bit of “defiance to the norm/standard”. I feel that because of that it, in my opinion, it becomes more of an art piece and less like a piece of music. It seems to push the bounds of what people expect. It definitely feels more like an art showpiece or instillation. Something made to show something or make a point/statement; not to be necessarily technically “amazing”.

The great Twentieth Century philosopher Michel Foucault once pondered: “What strikes me is the fact that in our society, art has become something which is related only to objects and not to individuals, or to life. That art is something which is specialized or which is done by experts who are artists. But couldn't everyone's life become a work of art?” (Foucault 350). In this quote, Foucault calls into question the foundations of art. He thus wonders why art is only the study of objects. Why can't art exist as some charming, healing entity that relates to all us humans? The answer I, and others, suspect is that it can, and it does.

Noël Carroll claims that there are cases in which “the reason [a given] artwork is aesthetically defective- in the sense of failing to secure audience uptake- and the reason it is morally defective may be the same” (235). His claim assesses moderate autonomism and his beliefs about it. Although his claim may be true in certain instances, I ultimately disagree with his claim because form, understanding, experiences, the time period, and current events surrounding and affecting the audience all have an effect on the reason for aesthetic and moral defectiveness of a piece.

Arthur C. Danto in “The Artworld” provides us with the argument that, “To see something as art requires something that the eye cannot descry-an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art: an artworld.” Danto shows us the importance of the artworld in order to know that a work of art is more than just what we can plainly see. Danto provides two theories he calls the “IT” (Imitation theory) and the “RT” (Reality theory). With these two theories, Danto explains how we can define art and why “The Artworld” is needed to help understand art, because after all, “these days one might not be aware he was on artistic terrain without an artistic theory to tell him so.”

Just as other works that reflect art, pieces in the category of fine arts serve the important message of passing certain messages or portraying a special feeling towards a particular person, function or activity. At times due to the nature of a particular work, it can become so valuable that its viewers cannot place a price on it. It is not the nature or texture of an art that qualifies it, but the appreciation by those who look at it (Lewis & Lewis, 2008).

As literary critics, Plato and Aristotle disagree profoundly about the value of art in human society. Plato attempts to strip artists of the power and prominence they enjoy in his society, while Aristotle tries to develop a method of inquiry to determine the merits of an individual work of art. It is interesting to note that these two disparate notions of art are based upon the same fundamental assumption: that art is a form of mimesis, imitation. Both philosophers are concerned with the artist's ability to have significant impact on others. It is the imitative function of art which promotes disdain in Plato and curiosity in Aristotle. Examining the reality that art

The area of art is popularly known for heightening emotions, challenging stereotypes, and ultimately providing insights into how individuals view the surrounding world. The artist and the observer time and time again see pieces in overwhelmingly different ways. Individuals may wonder why this is so. What could possibly create such a drastic change from one perspective to another? When it comes down to it, experiences are the answer. The artist and the observer have different