|
|
There are a couple of interesting essays at the Guild's myspace page - "On the Difference Between Cleverness and Art" (which is quite interesting, and though I do not agree with every point I find myself very sympathetic to the overall thrust), "Notes On the Death of Harmony," and two historical essays about funerary violin.
I'm curious how people feel about the "European Funerary Violin Tradition" project, in terms of "legitimacy" or "honesty" in music and music history - the "hoax" issue, in other words, or "does something have to be factual to be real?" We're deep in PDQ Bach territory here, but without the obvious jokes - unlike Peter Schickele, Kriwaczek plays the Guild completely straight (I wrote to him yesterday and his reply was entirely earnest and in character). If it's not comedy, is it still a kind of satire?
As I mentioned in my previous post, some people have been responding indignantly - "It looks like someone is making fun of people who have a sincere interest in music and funerary history" - and dismissed Rohan and the other musicians involved as "megalomaniacal co-conspirator[s]." Is this kind of fictional history "good art," or are people being lied to? It's not as though the "hoax" itself holds up to even mild scrutiny (e.g. the "real" Rohan Kriwaczek was born in 1968, the "character" Guild President Rohan Kriwaczek's C.V. says he graduated from the conservatory in 1972, etc.), so that while it can be said that a lot of work went into constructing the history of the Guild and the "rediscovered" documents and recordings, not much effort was directed towards actually fooling anybody.
Some people feel that Kriwaczek crossed the line into either deception or shameless self-promotion when he posted a wikipedia entry for funerary violin (it was deleted when he was found out). Somewhat separate from the question of whether this was a misuse of wikipedia (which, by the TOS, I think it was), is whether seeking to further "authenticate" the fiction in this way was a legitimate* artistic move, or if the boundary between fiction and non-fiction was being inappropriately breached. Did he go too far?
Am I the only one fascinated by all this? Entirely possible, I suppose. I think the whole thing is marvelous, and the serious tone only makes it that much more enjoyable for me.
*I'm using words like "legitimate" advisedly, in hopes of inviting further discussion of what we mean by them in an artistic context - see also the current discussions of "honesty/realness" in popular music. |
|
|