Post History

We love the Second Viennese School, but daughter's practice of Boulez's music is wearying us. How can we appreciate Boulez?

[Mithical](https://music.codidact.com/users/8082) closed https://music.codidact.com/posts/281953 "as not constructive" on Sep 30, 2021. Mithical [commented](https://music.codidact.com/comments/thread/4653#comment-13957)

>Unfortunately, this questions seems extremely opinion-based; asking how to learn how to appreciate a specific artist doesn't seem like the kind of thing that can be objectively answered - music taste is a very personal thing.

But Mithical appears mistaken. First, I am asking about UltraSerialism in general. Second, UltraSerialism is factually esoteric and unfathomable. This is NOT an opinion.

I quote [this 1963 Stereo Review interview with Herbert von Karajan](https://www.overgrownpath.com/2008/09/karajan-on-boulez-stockhausen-and.html). 


>Herbert Pendergast - 'Do you think that the music of composers like Boulez and Webern will be easily understood by the musical public of the next generation?'
>
>Herbert von Karajan - 'I am quite certain that the next generation will have no problem in understanding most of the music of today. Think of the Bartók Concerto for Orchestra. Twenty years ago it was considered inacccessible; today it is a classic. Think of the Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta. When we perform it today, it sounds like a concerto grosso of Handel. With the decline of melodic inspiration in music, the serial techniques of today are a necessary self-imposed discipline for the composer...'


[Damian Thompson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damian_Thompson) [MA Oxon in Modern History (1980-3), PhD LSE in Sociology of religion (1997-2003)](https://www.linkedin.com/in/damian-thompson-416a8016/?originalSubdomain=uk) asseverated  on [24 Sept 2011](https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/understanding-boulez)



> For example, Mark Morris, in his superb _Guide to 20th Century Composers_, explains that the young Boulez took the 12-tone system and applied it to all aspects of music — rhythm, dynamics and instrumentation. This ‘total serialism’ may sound inaccessible, but it needn’t be, particularly if you ignore the composer’s intentions and only listen to short bursts at a time.


[As a graduate of Indiana University of Pennsylvania, James holds an MA in Piano Performance and a BA in Music History and Piano Performance.](https://www.jameswiman.net/) James W. Iman asseverated on [Nov 8 2017](https://crosseyedpianist.com/2017/11/08/james-w-iman-plays-schoenberg-boulez-webern-amy/)


>So first off, bravo to him for committing this music to disc. It is not performed that widely, programme planners and promoters regarding it as “too difficult” or “inaccessible” to sell to audiences (my view is that if this music is excluded from concert programmes, how on earth can audiences decide if it is too difficult or not…..?). 

Stephen E. Rubin asseverated [on March 25 1973](https://www.nytimes.com/1973/03/25/archives/the-iceberg-conducteth-boulez-at-the-philharmonic.html)

>Determined to “bring order to music,” Boulez wrote and writes incredibly complex works, but they are ordered to a mathematical precision. He has been called a musical aristocrat, and his pieces generally are inaccessible to average audiences.