Album of the Week: Morton Feldman - White on White (1993)

I don't know what you're even trying to say here. Get to the point.

Lisa Davis46 said:Sure, that works too—lovely. But this is where things actually get interesting. To be honest, almost nothing in music can genuinely irritate or provoke me—especially when there's absolutely nothing there. You just stay indifferent, right?

But when you feel that sudden urge to react, it means something clearly touched a nerve. Much deeper than you’d probably care to admit... 😉

And why is my opening post the only thing being discussed here? What’s your actual take on the album? Do you meditate to it, get those little euphoric chills, or deal with mood swings as volatile as mine? I ask because you’re focusing entirely on my initial post and my reactions to it; you're basically delivering an art history lecture while completely ignoring the subject at hand. Given how much enthusiasm there was during the voting, I expected at least a brief critique.

Instead, everyone acts like such an open-minded intellectual—either they descend into philosophy or they just go silent. They claim to "get" modern art, yet somehow I end up looking uncultured, uneducated, or just plain dim, simply because I had the guts to be honest and say the emperor has no clothes here. When I suggested the album could spark a debate, I thought we’d be discussing the Emperor and how the tailor manipulated him with a pathetic scam—not sitting around admiring a ghost that doesn't exist. It seems nobody else has the balls to just admit the album is garbage, that it isn't actually music, and that those of you claiming to find depth in it are just staring at thin air like the Emperor himself.

And honestly, it really grates on me—these snobs who lecture from on high, pivoting the conversation to whatever they want while failing to mention the actual topic. Meanwhile, they condescend to anyone who isn't afraid to voice an opinion, regardless of whether that opinion is impulsive or even wrong—because, frankly, if I'm blind to something, I'd actually appreciate someone opening my eyes.

Please don't take this as a jab at the moderation; the two of us have been discussing the topic strictly as forum members. From my perspective, it might be best if I just head out from this subforum altogether, since I am clearly intellectually incapable of keeping up—even though making a fool out of intellectuals is practically my profession.

Sacha Baron Cohen and modern art—unfortunately, that's exactly what the gallery owner is, and it's a perfect reflection of what modern "art" often boils down to...

Best,

Lisa Davis46 said:I don't know, I have a bit of an issue with reactions like this. I really wouldn't want this kind of communication style to become the norm on these threads. On the other hand, I wonder what triggered the need for brightwolf48 to express themselves so colorfully. Because indifference toward the music—pardon me, the content of the album—is definitely not the case here.

I’ll be the first one to jump in here: posts like this seriously get under my skin. It honestly makes me want to deck someone (no offense 😁) with that passive-aggressive attitude toward music that just isn't someone's cup of tea. Just say you don't like it and move on. You don't need to use bold text and act all high and mighty claiming that it ISN'T music, because from everything I hear, it definitely is. What else is someone going to claim, that Merzbow isn't music? Ayyy.
It feels like everything is considered pretentious and stupid these days unless it follows some rigid formula or structure.

Why should experimental music, when treated as a project, necessarily have a composition, tonality, or whatever else?

How much music out there is atonal, lacking a time signature, or pure true Drone / Noise?
A massive amount. How many projects like that exist? Tons. Is it music? Yes.

Listening to this, you've got pure ambient with crackling, Noise and Glitch mixed with Drone / Noise variations alongside white noise. It depends on which segment you're hitting. It reminds me a little of Akira Yamaoka, but extremely, and I mean VERY subdued—something that would sit in the background while something else played over the top as melodic ambient. It's not really something you just put on in the background; it's more like a semi-project you listen to once to see how it was constructed and what it's made of. Honestly, it might actually work as sleep music, though there are better options for that.

It's like when someone claims Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music isn't music. I'd laugh right in their face. Yeah, it's music; maybe you hate it, but it's music.
Personally, I don't listen to it—I gave it one spin, and that was enough for me to get the point.
Even he admits it's a totally weird project that even he doesn't fully wrap his head around. I listen to a whole heap of other Dark Ambient/Drone / Noise/Glitch stuff to know how to categorize things. And there are so many variations where those elements are used differently, or even better, in other projects.

Truth be told, this isn't really my type of ambient, and it's a bit uncomfortable to listen to because certain sequences remind me of other projects, but if the goal was to create a purely experimental project from some sort of quasi-concept, they nailed it.

For me, it’s not "album of the week" material based on the recording process or the concept, but that's about it. So yeah, that's my *humble* opinion.

I’ll admit it—some passive-aggressive amateur just got a reality check regarding their incredibly narrow-minded view of music. Consider it proof of yet another masterpiece in the realm of modern musical art.

Later...

brightwolf48 said:Look, I’ll just admit it: some passive-aggressive know-it-all just got slapped in the face by how narrow-minded their view of music actually is. Consider this proof of yet another absolute masterpiece of modern musical art.
(...)
Later...

Sorry you aren't into Noise, but honestly, that's not my problem. It doesn't mean you "don't get it," it just means you don't like it. It's music, and it's called Noise because it *is* Noise. How hard is that to wrap your head around? lol

Now go ahead and try to tell me this ISN'T music:

So, there are two records here—one is Merzbow, the other is Boris. You can play them at the exact same time, or stagger them by a few seconds or minutes, and you'll always end up with a totally different soundscape. That's what makes it an album.
It’s not like this is some brand-new experiment either; Boris has been messing around with stuff like this for ages.

Patrick Patel4 said:Look, if you don't listen to Noise, that’s hardly my concern. It doesn't mean you lack the capacity to understand it—it just means you don't like it. This is music, and it’s called Noise because, well, it’s Noise. How hard is that to wrap your head around? lol

So why don't you try telling me this *isn't* music:
(...)
We have two records here—one by Merzbow, the other by Boris. If you play them simultaneously, or even just a few seconds or minutes apart, you get an entirely unique soundscape. That combination creates a single album.
It isn't some groundbreaking experiment either; Boris has been playing with these concepts for ages.

Don't be such a hypocrite. Based on the link you provided, it's clearly experimental music—if you actually listen closely—because after about two and a half minutes, there’s a pleasant melody lurking in the background. I know you've replayed that clip plenty of times. My link, however, lacks that element. More discerning people define music through melody and rhythm—and in Western traditions, harmony as well. Whether I personally enjoy it or not is a separate issue entirely. (By the way, Psychocandy is one of my all-time favorites, so I'm certainly no stranger to Noise.)

If none of those fundamental elements are present to define it as music, then how can we call it such? One user gave a much better definition: it's a sound installation. Such works can be intriguing, fascinating, or even pleasant, but we shouldn't label them "music." It’s like hitting a tennis ball against a wall—it might be interesting, but if you want to claim you're playing tennis, you need a court, a net, and an opponent on the other side.

Besides, let's try to find slightly more reputable sources for music theory than Wikipedia.

https://www.britannica.com/art/music-video

brightwolf48 said:Honestly, it really gets under my skin when those pretentious snobs start lecturing everyone from some high horse. They’ll pivot the conversation to something completely different and then never even touch the actual topic again. Meanwhile, they love to lecture anyone who actually has the guts to speak their mind—even if they're being impulsive or, I guess, totally wrong. It's just annoying. I mean, I’d honestly love it if someone would just open my eyes if I'm being blind to something.

brightwolf48, I’m sorry if I offended you—that really wasn't my intention. Please just ignore the bold text; I barely even use my authority over there anymore. I haven't actually written a review for a single album this week because I've been totally preoccupied with a different artist lately. Plus, I went out yesterday and impulsively bought five new vinyl records, two of which were total blind buys, so I'm a bit all over the place. But I'll get to it. 🙂

Look, since I clearly haven't said anything smart and everything I say is somehow backwards to you, let me try one more thing. I'm just trying to figure out why Brian Eno actually hit so hard for me during those first two listens...

brightwolf48 said:What’s your take on the album? Do you meditate with him, or do you get those orgasmic tremors or whatever right before your period hits like I do?
(...)
Given how much everyone was raving about the vote, I honestly expected at least a quick take on it.

Aside from my heart rate slowing down, I’m just not feeling any physical reaction to this album or this kind of music—at least not this time around. None of that stuff is happening. And honestly, I have no idea how you could possibly claim to know a third thing about it, but fine, I guess you can try to assume... though assumptions can be pretty dangerous, much like prejudices.

If you don't like something, then you just don't like it. That's that. Everyone finds exactly what they’re looking for. Just because someone else hears something beautiful where you don't, maybe it just means they perceive things differently. I don't get why that's so incredibly hard for you to accept. I've had plenty of times where someone recommends something to me that I am absolutely certain I'll love—especially when we have such similar tastes and a basically identical sensibility—and yet, it still doesn't click. It makes me feel a little bit wrong, I guess. But then, sometimes it finally hits me years later because I needed something else to bridge the gap. Or it never clicks at all, which is also fine. But seriously, what do you actually gain by trying to diminish someone else's taste like this? What kind of satisfaction are you getting from that?

There’s this solid thread connecting classical, minimal, and ambient music—including those drone and noise corners—that I just tend to gravitate toward. I’ve been deep into classical for way longer, though, in a much broader sense. Honestly, I rarely find that kind of clarity, peace, or balance in any other genre. There’s a certain softness to this album too, a real tenderness in the dynamics, even if everything feels a bit diffused and muted. Even with the minimal tools and the atonality, you can still feel it. A hand gesture.It’s kind of like that image I mentioned:

Everyone knows Malevich intended for those squares to look like they’re just hovering there. Using white really drives that home, too—it's all about that sense of peace, infinity, and just being timeless. The thing is, the painting doesn't belong to any specific era or location. It just exists. What’s actually wild, though, is that the piece isn't totally soulless, which seems weird since he only used white paint. If you look closely, you can see these subtle shifts in the shades of white. The way the paint was applied varies across the canvas, too. I guess when you sit with it and just quiet down, it’s hard not to feel this sudden sense of calm or even a bit of healing.

Honestly, I really vibed with this the first time I heard it that night. On second listen, I found even more beautiful moments—like how it just totally quiets everything down inside you... which is something I need pretty often. Patrick Patel4 already mentioned it, but this sound is actually successful at calming you down, so maybe it’s a solid choice before hitting the sack. There aren't any traditional instruments here, and even though the music is digitally constructed, it doesn't feel cold, even if it manipulates silence way more than actual sound. I don't know how he pulled it off, but somehow he did.

It feels somewhat reminiscent of the more well-known Morton Feldman, whose work definitely influenced Brian Eno, especially this (just a snippet):

And one more thing: I still don't see any "black letters" here. Everything you're saying about yourself and some kind of limitation? I didn't get that impression at all. I wouldn't have said anything like that to you myself. However, I just can't accept this tone of communication, which is what I said at the start. That attitude doesn't necessarily have to be aimed at me, it's just an issue in general. So, I'm going to step away from this topic and move on to Sweet Trip, but feel free to keep going if you think that's more productive. 🙂

@Lisa Davis46/">@@Lisa Davis46
If you actually bothered to notice, I already mentioned to bairbb in my second or third post that if he pairs this with meditation—and if it affects him that way—then that’s fantastic. Sound or visual stimuli hit everyone differently.

When I said it was garbage, I was speaking strictly in terms of music—as in, for me, it lacks anything resembling melody, rhythm, or harmony. But since lemonzoo pointed out it could be viewed as a sound installation that impacts people uniquely, I agreed that if you approach the work from that angle, it becomes interesting. Why shouldn't a sound installation be preferable to what we traditionally define as "music" in certain contexts?

Regarding that link you shared—I actually listen to similar stuff quite often before bed. Dirty Three has that same effect on me; they're calming, and their compositions tend to be unstructured in a similar fashion.

Here is my actual response to bairbb from the first page of this thread. It seems everyone here decided to fixate on my very first comment as if I’d committed a felony or personally insulted someone:
"In this context, I can absolutely understand your take on this album. We all process things differently; certain sonic or visual experiences can be soothing, relaxing, or spark creativity in one person, while triggering the exact opposite reaction in another. For me, it likely felt like a negative stimulus. The world would be a pretty dull and shallow place if we all thought exactly alike."

So, based on that, how exactly am I being intolerant of different perspectives, as you've been implying in your subsequent posts?

My apologies for the PMS comment—I remember how much my ex used to struggle with that, especially when she was dealing with thyroid issues, so I can only imagine how rough women feel during those times. I didn't mean it as a sexist insult.

Lisa Davis46 said:even with zero budget or atonality, you can still feel the human touch in the work.

Basically, there’s actual intent behind it—meaning the way the sounds are organized isn't just random noise. That’s pretty much the bare minimum definition of art. It’s obvious this counts as music, too; it’s got its own specific genre, its own set of composers and performers, and all that.

Exactly, Dennis Martin6. That’s what I was trying to get at, though I probably phrased it pretty clumsily.

brightwolf48 said:So how can you claim I’m unable to accept diversity when you keep implying that in your later posts?

Sorry about the mood swings. I remember back when my ex was going through it—she had thyroid issues on top of everything else—so I guess I know how rough things can feel for women sometimes. I didn't mean to sound sexist.

Please...
can we just leave all the talk about cycles and bodily fluids out of this thread?
😁

If you spend five different posts insisting that something is "garbage" and isn't music,
and you clearly don't feel it or you have some weird resistance to it, then how are you actually embracing diversity?

Don't stress about it anymore. Everything's been said. We'll just agree to disagree.

brightwolf48 said:Don't try to play both sides with me here. It’s pretty obvious from that link you shared that we're talking about experimental music—if you actually listen closely for like, two and a half minutes (and I know you've looped this track a dozen times already), there’s this really pleasant melody buried in the background. My link? There's no melody there. Look, smarter people usually define music as a combination of melody, rhythm, and, in Western music, harmony. Whether I personally dig it or not is a whole different conversation. (By the way, Loveless is one of my absolute favorite albums, so don't think for a second that I'm not hip to noise.)

If nothing actually defines music as music, then how can we even call it that? Lemonzoo hit the nail on the head with that definition—it’s more like a sound installation. Sure, a piece like that can be super intriguing, genuinely interesting, or even just vibe-heavy and pleasant to listen to, but we don't necessarily have to label it "music." It’s kind of like hitting a tennis ball against a wall; it might be fun, but if you want to say you're actually playing tennis, you need a court, a net, and someone on the other side of the net to rally with.

Anyway, let’s try to find some actually decent sources for music theory instead of just relying on Wikipedia.

So, I was falling down a rabbit hole reading through some deep dives on the history of music videos, and man, it really makes you realize how much we take for granted today. It’s wild to think about how much the whole medium has shifted from just being a promotional tool to this massive, standalone art form that can basically define an era. I was thinking about those early days where it was all about the visual hook—something to get people to buy the record—but now? Now it's its own beast. You have artists who treat a video like a short film, completely independent of the track itself. It’s almost like when you listen to something heavy like Sunn O))) or experimental stuff from Merzbow; the visual element becomes this sensory overload that changes how you perceive the sound entirely. It reminds me a bit of how certain ambient projects work. Like, if you're listening to Stars of the Lid, you're already in this headspace, right? But if you pair that with the right cinematography, the experience goes from "background music" to "full-on cinematic immersion." It's that jump from passive listening to active experiencing. Anyway, I'm curious what you guys think. Is the music video still a vital part of the artist's identity, or has it just become another way to chase clicks on YouTube? Does a killer video actually make a song better, or does it just distract from the music? Personally, I think if a director can capture the *vibe* of a track—not just show the singer lip-syncing in a desert—it's pure magic.

Honestly, you could just throw a single record into the mix and end up with pretty much the same results as what we've been talking about above.
Look, even Merzbow has those lighter, more approachable albums if you know where to look. But honestly? If you just stick to Boris, it’s still a smooth ride. They’re incredibly versatile. I’d say they’ve mastered at least ten different genres over their career—maybe even more. Some tracks blend them all together in a single album, while others just drift through different styles seamlessly.

You could honestly just take some Merzbow tracks, bundle them up as a standalone album, and it would sound exactly how you’d imagine. It works perfectly fine on its own. As for Gensho, it isn't exactly "easy listening" by any stretch, but as a project? It's super interesting. And hey, this isn't even the only instance of Boris + Merzbow stuff out there—there's plenty more where that came from.

I’ll be honest, I don't really vibe with Merzbow—just doesn't grab me. I’m much more into stuff like Taj Mahal, Ben Frost, Fennesz, Oneohtrix Point Never, Stars of the Lid, The Caretaker, Boards of Canada, or Aphex Twin. Most of those aren't even strictly "noise" music, but they all have that massive ambient approach that I love. Actually, if I'm looking for something on the noisier side, I usually gravitate toward Noise pop or that specific sound Sonic Youth was doing back in their EP days.

Whatever, honestly—no matter how you slice it, it’s all just music in its own unique way.
You could literally just grab some old dial-up connection samples, throw them into a DAW, and suddenly you’ve got a whole damn musical composition on your hands.
If we’re talking about the whole Drone scene—you know, stuff like Boris, Sunn O))), and Earth—it's wild how much they've evolved when it comes to their gear and how they actually use it. In the early days, everything was super minimalist, just raw and stripped back. But lately? They've branched out into some seriously massive, complex territory.

There are certain things that just define what music actually is. This album hits on all of them, but it does it in such a stripped-back, minimalist way that it’s almost microscopic. It’s honestly tough to even pick out individual sounds, let alone find any kind of actual progression between them. I mean, we don't even have to call it music—if you can even call it that.
So I was just falling down a rabbit hole reading up on Merzbow, and man, my brain is kind of fried. It’s wild how much history there is behind this guy. If you haven't spent any time digging through his discography, you're basically missing out on one of the most intense sonic experiences possible. It's not exactly "background music" for a chill Sunday brunch, that's for sure. I mean, think about the sheer scale of it. We're talking about someone who has been pushing the absolute limits of noise for decades. It’s heavy, it’s overwhelming, and honestly? It’s kind of beautiful in its own chaotic way. It makes you wonder how anyone stays sane while producing stuff this loud. Anyway, I was browsing some old threads and saw Patrick Patel4 mentioning him earlier, and it got me thinking about how different the noise scene feels depending on what you're into. Are you more of a pure wall-of-sound person, or do you need a bit of structure? Personally, I can go for a long session of pure chaos, but sometimes I need to pivot to something like Stars of the Lid just to make sure my eardrums don't actually burst. What do you guys think? Is Merzbow a genre unto himself, or just the king of a much larger, much louder playground?

I mean, he’s literally spelling it out for you right there. Genre: Noise.
If it doesn't sound good to my ears, then I’m just not feeling it. Period.

You know, whenever I head out to a show, nothing gets me more hyped than that pre-set guitar tuning ritual during the opening act. It’s like this weird, anticipatory tension. Once the actual performance kicks off, though, I don't care nearly as much about those little details—everything becomes so clearly defined and intentional. Obviously, when the headliner takes the stage, I expect them to deliver exactly what I paid to hear, but there’s just something uniquely fascinating about what that tuning process can stir up. Some seriously chill sounds. I need to get myself into the zone before the band even hits the stage—honestly, I’m probably more hyped up than the guys playing tonight.

First off, my apologies to vanchaa for that awkward comment earlier.

Patrick Patel4, we actually agree on more than you might think—it’s just difficult to articulate certain things within these specific constraints. Where our perspectives diverge again: running, whether it's just for fun or competitive, is definitely a sport, but it's also a broader form of physical activity. Similarly, playing with sound and experimenting doesn't necessarily have to result in a "musical work," but the end product can often be more intriguing and higher quality than something we would formally categorize as music.

I listened, but I didn't hear a thing. Maybe I'm just going deaf. It felt more like I was floating on a space station, straining to catch some distant frequency that just wouldn't reach me.

I think I’ll tackle translating that interview with Günter from the mid-2000s. Might as well get to work.

brightwolf48 said:Playing with sound and experimenting doesn't always have to yield a "musical work," but the result can end up being more intriguing and higher quality than something we traditionally label as music.

Exactly. This specific album was actually the product of two years spent messing around with two samplers and an Atari—basically gear and software from the late 80s and early 90s.

Now you've given me an idea for the next Album of the Week. It's another artist from Germany, but from an earlier era. An electronic album, highly influential in certain circles, born from just one night of playing around with a few instruments—no software involved. It was released raw, without any overdubbing or editing, and it is simply brilliant.

Arthur Brown6 said:You’ve actually inspired my next "Album of the Week" pick. It’s another German artist—going back a bit further this time—and once again, we're looking at an electronic record. This one was incredibly influential within certain niche circles. The coolest part? It was basically captured in a single session using just a few instruments, no software involved. It was released raw, without any heavy overdubbing or cutting, and honestly, it's just brilliant.

Could it be this one?

https://www.discogs.com/Roland-Kayn-Tektra/master/84822

??

😁

Lisa Davis46 said:So how do you even accept diversity then?

It's simple— not every noise counts as music! 🧐

Just like not every sentence is literature. Or every video is cinema. Or every sketch is fine art. 😛

Günter is basically just a collector of noises. A musician? I guess not, definitely not!

Chris Myers said:It’s pretty simple—not every sound qualifies as music. 🧐

Just as not every sentence is literature. Not every video is cinematic art. And certainly, not every sketch is a masterpiece hanging in the MoMA. 😛

Gunther is quite clearly just a collector of noise. A musician? Sorry, but he's nowhere near that level.

Finally, someone else is actually using some logic here.

Here’s a little "thought experiment" for you. I grew up in a big music family. Most of us sang in choirs, almost everyone plays an instrument—some play several, actually—and a few even went through formal conservatory training. Not many of us make a living from it, but that’s beside the point.

So, if I were to run an experiment with Bernhard Günter - UN Pea de Neige Salie and let everyone hear it—which isn't really possible since our crew is scattered all over the US now, but bear with me—I’d bet my life that the only one who would truly vibe with it is a guy who graduated from a fine arts academy and worked as a painter and sculptor. 😁

Of course, that’s a tiny, biased sample size.

Now, if we look at music in the broadest sense as just an organization of sound, you could classify this album as music, and specifically under the umbrella of atonal music. Technically, the original definition of atonality refers to music lacking a clear tonal center, using chromatic scales in specific ways, rather than any random arrangement of sounds left to the creator's whim.

By that logic, you could say a painting is "atonal" in a broader, more formal sense. It wouldn't be a lie, because a painting doesn't contain tones or a tonal center anyway. 😁

Personally, I’m totally fine listening to stuff like this. I dig plenty of artists who push music toward "anti-music" territory. But my absolute favorite thing is when you get a synthesis of those two worlds. You see it in the early days of Autechra, or with NIN, or Sonic Youth, and so on. I won't list them all.

Chris Myers said:It’s simple— not every sound counts as music! 🧐
(...)
Günter is basically just collecting noise. A musician? Sorry, but no, not even close!

I mean, I guess Kanye is just a noise collector too...
but I still wouldn't say what he does isn't music.
😁

Quote : Weekend Warrior

Gerald Jackson48 said:So, we could probably argue that a painting is atonal in both the broad sense and a strict logical one. It wouldn't exactly be a lie, I guess. After all, a painting doesn't actually contain any tones, nor does it have a tonal center. 😁

But at the end of the day, it’s still just a painting. I mean, look at Malevich back in 1918. Even then, critics were already tearing into "white on white" for basically the same reasons. Nah..

Gerald Jackson48 said:Malevich’s white on white painting probably caused a massive uproar when it first dropped. But honestly, what is the whole point of "trying to provoke an audience" through art if the artist can't—or won't—actually handle the fallout? I guess it just seems a bit hypocritical.

No, it's definitely not some scandal-free classical music!

There were earlier examples that might actually be better—like that jazz masterpiece that predates jazz itself. The last one, I guess. The 32nd Sonata. Maybe? I don't know. It’s hard to pin down. 😍 I don't know. Maybe? Or maybe not. I guess we'll see. Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t stop thinking about 'Grosse Fuge.' It’s heavy. Intense. Honestly, it hits differently every time I sit down with it. I guess some people find it overwhelming, but there's something about that raw complexity that just sticks. It's a lot to process. 🙏Honestly, this kind of thing just makes me think of 1916 and one of those early true minimalists—even if he did eventually drift back toward those classic Impressionist circles. They won't let us. Join them—Erik Satie was just wonderful. It wasn't just that he stood his ground after the premiere of his avant-garde ballet, *Parade*; he actually went as far as sending a cheeky postcard to one critic:
😁



It was basically a one-act play, maybe ran about 15 minutes. Cocteau handled the script and the whole plot, while Picasso took care of the visuals. I guess you could call it cubist. Or maybe just messy. I don't know. It feels like that sort of thing where everything gets broken down and put back together in a way that doesn't quite make sense at first glance. Maybe it does, though. Who am I to say? The set design and costumes were one thing, but the actual music was where things got messy. It was problematic because, back then, they actually had the nerve to experiment with weird new sounds and non-classical instruments within a traditional ballet structure.

The score was packed with all these random noise-makers—think typewriters, foghorns, a bunch of milk bottles, even a pistol. Cocteau threw them all in there, which I guess kind of annoyed Satie.

Why did an orchestra throw oranges at a performer? Why did Cocteau get beaten up after a show? I mean, Erik Satie ended up in court and even faced jail time, while whatever happened with Picasso... probably nothing. Honestly, painters seem to walk away much cleaner from these kinds of scandals than musicians do. I guess people just find it way easier to judge and tear down music and the composers behind it.

I have to say, I’m actually pretty curious to see how your experiment turns out. 😁