I find the whole concept of John Cage’s 4:33 very interesting.
I think the idea that “all sounds are music” is very beautiful in a way and something I could agree with.
That being said, I could totally see how this performance would be angering and upsetting to people. If I went to an event hoping to hear beautiful music and was met with over four minutes of silence, I’d be a little angry.
I like the concept of life being art and the idea that there is art in our everyday lives, even including the sounds we listen to. But at the same time, I’m not totally sold on the 4:33 piece. I think it would be interesting to go listen to the piece if you have an understanding of it beforehand, but if you go into it without knowing what to expect, it just wouldn’t make any sense. I also think it would be entertaining if there really are surrounding sounds like wind, creaking buildings, and other outside noises, but 4:33 would get kind of boring if it’s literally just silence. But again, I can respect the piece and the fact that it had an impact on not only individual people, but all of art.
I think that’s all that really matters, that it had an impact. It changed the way people thought about art, altered perceptions, made a statement, and challenged what people deemed “acceptable” as art. I love how this article mentions that even Cage’s biggest admirers questioned his work at times. It doesn’t matter if his work was “pretty” or if it subjectively sounded good. He made people think, he challenged people’s idea of art, and that’s all that really matters.
<3 Elise
Comments