The Challenges of Horror and Dissonance
- Dette emnet har 12 svar, 6 deltakere, og ble sist oppdatert 1 måned, 3 uker siden av
.
-
Innlegg
-
I’ve always veered more towards the tonal. Dissonance and atonal music is interesting, but mostly on an academic level. For horror scores, I prefer those that are in a socalled “delicious darkness” style, meaning darkly romantic. Like certain Chris Young efforts, some synth horror scores etc.
I’ve also found that there are certain kinds of dissonance I can take, and some that I cannot. I can love Ligeti, Penderecki, Goldenthal, Goldsmith etc. in atonal mode, but can’t get into Morricone’s variation of the same, for example.
What’s your take on this? I know that we have some members here, like Graham Watt (where did he run off to after his initial posts here?), who seem to thrive on 60s and 70s dissonant music. Is there emotional pleasure to be derived from it, or is it just academic?
I feel similar. Morricone seems rather hard to listen to. Much more edgy that the others. Maybe partly because it seems more chamber music like and often maybe also rather improvised?
I have to admit, I don’t have a “problem” with dissonance or atonal music per se, I don’t see it just “interesting on an academic level”, but enjoy much of it on a very visceral, deeply engrossing — sometimes even soothing — level. I know most people probably just enjoy “tonal” or “melodic” music and don’t listen to any more abstract music at all, but I was always drawn to these type of compositions. Now if I were to view (or perhaps better “hear”) them as mere “paper music”, music with an “interesting” concept on paper or in (music) theory but just awful to listen to, I would not find much pleasure in listening to it.
One of my favorite works is Pierre Boulez “Sur Incices”. Now this is a composition by one of the most radical and uncompromising composers of “paper music” there is, and I understand why Boulez was a very important but also highly divisive composer. Still, when I hear “Sur Incices”, it’s like bathing in a soothing kaleidoscope of musical shimmers, colors, rhythms, and sounds. I find that music very spiritual, actually, and my mind can deeply relax to these sounds. Why? I don’t know. Then again, I don’t know why I like any piece of music, really. Because I don’t like music for rational reasons, but because some music somehow resonates with me. All the “talk” and “writing” about music is just an attempt to get a grasp on how and what a certain score does and why it speaks to some, and perhaps not to others.
By no means does that mean I like all dissonant (though I don’t find Sur Incises dissonant in any way) or atonal (Sur Incises is certainly not classical “tonal” music though) music, no more than I like all tonal or melodic music. Obviously not.
But perhaps because I already grew up with a lot of “classical” classical music (Brahms, Beethoven, Wagner, Schubert, etc.), I found it very interesting when I came across radically different works by composers such as Stravinsky, Schönberg, Webern, Ligeti (this one indeed via 2001), Stockhausen as a teenager. Again, I didn’t like all their music right away, but I found it quite interesting.
Oh yes, definitely interesting. And RATIONAL value can be just as valid as an IRRATIONAL one when it comes to musical enjoyment. I’m often fascinated by complex, avantgardistic music — a desire to analyze them, deconstruct them, finding patterns within the complexities. I saw Stockhausen’s “Sternklang” performed in a park during the Oslo-based music festival Ultima a few years ago, and it was mesmerizing. But give me a broad melody, and I’m swept off my feet. Sometimes, there are scores that can do both at the same time — Goldsmith’s ALIEN, for example. But if I were to choose, I’d take the latter type of music any day of the week.
In my twenties I was much more tolerant when it came to dissonant music. Much later to my surprise I realized how dissonant some music pieces actually were that I used to enjoy a lot in my youth.
Still I find dissonance ok for certain effects in film music. But it also can be too much. Talking about Chris Young, that is what I thought, when I checked out his score of “Pranks”. If I have a delicious tonal horror score with some sprinkles of dissonance like JNH’s The Village, that is the degree that I can still enjoy.
Apart from that it always depends if there is something actually interesting happening in the music, tonal or dissonant or not.
For those interested in 20th century orchestral music avoiding dissonance I strongly recommend to listen to the works of Ruth Gipps. But that’s not film music.
By no means does that mean I like all dissonant (though I don’t find Sur Incises dissonant in any way) or atonal (Sur Incises is certainly not classical “tonal” music though) music, no more than I like all tonal or melodic music. Obviously not.
By the way, I often mix up dissonant with atonal. Atonal means for my understanding noise that cannot be associated with certain frequencies. While dissonant means, a chord of clear tones in a non-harmonic composition. Right?
I believe atonal means the music doesn’t adhere to any particular key; all notes have equal importance, while dissonant music has an abundance of dissonant intervals.
The terms are used interchangeably (and I’m guilty of that sometimes too, like in my first post here), but Sigbjørn is right, they have different meanings. Atonal is mostly associated with the new Viennese school, I think – 12-tone, Schönberg, Berg, Webern, that kind of stuff. While dissonant is a more general term for discordant phrasings. So you can have dissonant scores that are not atonal, for example.
There is a lot of dissonance in tonal music… in fact, one could argue that actual “dissonance” can be found only in tonal music, because dissonance usually refers to harmonic tension, whereas atonal music lacks a harmonic tonal center to begin with, so there is neither “dissonance” nor “consonance” (its opposite) in atonal music.
There is a lot of dissonance in the music of Richard Wagner, Gustav Mahler, Richard Strauss, or Hector Berlioz, yet their music remains (mostly) tonal. On the other hand, Olivier Messiaen’s music often ventures deep into atonal territory (though it’s never strict about it, and it’s not “12-tone”… just not always within a certain harmonic tonal center), but I don’t find it particularly dissonant.One more thing on this. Dissonance stresses me usually more in golden age scores than in good modern horror or thriller scores.
I actually like Ennio Morricone’s dissonant/atonal scores because of their cinematic and listening qualities.
I also like dissonant/atonal classical music because of their innovative and artistic qualities. Clearly I like “art” in films and scores, which is one reason I like this kind of music equally to lyrical and melodic scores.
I like Morricone’s as well but it is just more challanging as Goldsmith’s to me. I have a some special connection to Stockhausen’s KONTAKTE as I proof-read a doctoral thesis of a friend some years ago (for typos, not really the content ;-)).
Also I can even find noises interesting as overlaying noise e.g. from machines (put your ear on your fridge while it is working) can create dissantant rhythmic sounds.
- Du må være innlogget for å svare på dette emnet.