Poetics of Music in the Form of Six Lessons

One of the things this offers is real insight into the creative process. If you're having writer's block, I recommend these lectures for you. Igor's ideas may well help in clearing up some of the problems we create for ourselves.

These six lectures were given at Harvard during the 1939-40 academic year in French. They are presented here in English translation and have been the subject of a great deal of discussion over the past sixty-plus years. In re-reading them, I have to say that my opinion of them has risen a great deal from my student days. Maybe it is because I am now about the age he was when he gave them, maybe it is because I am no more well read and have thought more about music since my youth, or maybe it is because I now see the solid philosophy and healthy insights he had and the rather unhealthy directions that academia was taking that he was resisting. Probably it is all of these. Reading these lectures are not easy sledding for those not already familiar with Stravinsky, his life, work, and the context for these lectures. Also, the reader will need to go to the various conversation books Stravinsky did with Robert Craft to get later clarification and further insight into what he was saying. However, they are not profoundly technical in music theory. What they require from the reader is a broad understanding of music, art, and European political and religious history to have a framework for understanding what Stravinsky is saying. The first lecture lays out what he intends to do with the lectures. The second talks about what he believes music is, what it isn't, and provides great insight into what Stravinsky believes is important in the art of music and what corrupts it. In the third lecture he talks about composition and provides wonderful insights into what it is for him. He really does undermine the common notion of the role of inspiration in composition. The fourth lecture says it talks about musical typology (whatever that is). What it talks about is what the composer must do in choosing his own rules in composition. In Stravinsky's view the stricter the rules the more free the composer is to create. I think this is a particularly strong lecture. The Russian character in music and the Soviet corruptions of that are the topic of the fifth lecture. In 1939, taking on Stalin was a brave thing even in the West because of the way academics and the media lauded Uncle Joe. The last lecture talks about performance issues that were of particular concern to him. This is also quite interesting because of the way performance practice became such a vital force in the last quarter of the twentieth century. His principles and desires are quite profound and interesting, and do require the clarification from the conversation books to avoid being taken out of context. The epilogue ties things up nicely and raises the issues of ontology once again. Along the way Stravinsky over and over again talks about religion and music in the Church versus the attempts to replace religion with art (which Stravinsky considers a terrible and failed notion). A fine and important work by one of the great composers.

it is always interesting to me to read a book by an artist talking about his art. why read on the subject of some art by a critic rather than artist, who can reveal the thought process and energy that goes into the actual creation? here, the art is music, but the whole book (especially chapter three) should be read by artists in all fields. here he discusses inspiration, and the role that it plays and how it functions in making art (less than one might suppose). the crux of stravinsky's claim is that artists should always make art, as a function of their being, and not wait for inspiration (which should, in any case, be found everywhere). being a fan of other russian composers, especially those of communist ussr, the chapter on russian composers was interesting. he discussses the role that politics played and how it stiffled music and art there. there is also an interesting discussion on the role of the artist in contemporary times. he abhors the notions of 'modern' and 'academic,' and considers himself (and the 'rite of spring') as conservative music, and not revolutionary, while demeaning the critics and listeners whom he describes as 'snobs.' (in fact it is this conservativism that allows him to attack wagner and deride his music.) the arguments that he presents in such discussions are very enlightening for any artist, as well as a musician.

As a composer of over 250 classical and jazz works, I can't stress enough how important "Poetics of Music" was to me in my musical development. I read this book from a composer's perspective with hopes that I could get into the mind of this great composer. From "Poetics of Music" I learned that inspiration is never contrived and always accidental. Stravinsky said that a composer "improvises aimlessly" the way an animal grubs for food. Both seek personal satisfaction. He said this in the context of the "rules of music", making it clear that there really are no rules in musical composition. All that drives us in our art is that need to find our musical satisfaction.

Stravinsky was an engaging writer and thinker as well as a great composer. Here he discusses aesthetics and defends his music. (I also recommend PENTATONIC SCALES FOR THE JAZZ-ROCK KEYBOARDIST by Jeff Burns.)