> A musicologist friend was telling me recently of
> attending a performance of John Cage's 4'33?. He had
> found it impressive indeed. I rather doubt that a
> recording of it would be of much interest.
It's really difficult for me to imagine that a live performance of that piece would be impressive, and a recording would not. The principal issue of the piece is the composition itself; the performance -- and thus your personal experience of the performance -- can only add to it. It cannot subtract. Have you listened to a recording of the piece? I don't think you have. (Personally, I find it enjoyable, no matter if I'm in a concert hall with a chair that's too uncomfortable and an unfortunately chosen sweater making me sweat or in a park under a tree with earbuds and an iThing and the sun shining on my face while traffic zooms by the periphery. I can't help but nod my head in agreement the entire time.)
> And of course a video of it could not possible incorporate
> the ambience of the concert hall or present the pianist's
> departures and returns between movements.
As you tie this critical noose around your neck, I'm finding it more and more difficult to believe your initial premise: that your friend's experience could be impressive to you.
> If the video did not focus on his hands as they turned
> the pages of the music it would falsify the performance,
> but it would also falsify the performance if it did so
> focus, since members of the audience were at varying distances
> from the performer, and hence would be aware of different
> sounds floating in from outside, the scraping of feet, and so forth.
Now I'm convinced that you don't understand Cage a whit. And I think you've missed the point of Doug's complaint about Cornell West.
/jordan