Ok! Does anyone else think that it is a little bit unrealistic that everything just turns out all warm and fuzzy at the end?! When I got to the last few chapters and the epilogue, I thought that I was reading either a completely different book or a totally sold out, Disney-princess style, cheesy ending to The House of the Spirits. On so many levels, there is no way that everything could have turned out that perfectly for all the characters.
For one thing, Senator Trueba was a grouchy, abusive, single-minded hot head who raped women, beat his wife, ignored his kids aspirations and spent his entire life campaigning for the right wing government that allowed him complete power over everything. There is no possible way that all of a sudden, he makes up with his arch-nemesis, Pedro Tercero, accepts Blanca's love for a peasant, helps them escape the country, assists Alba in caring for the poor, listens to the opinions of others and just overall become a completely different person than he was for the entirety of his life and the last 350 some pages.
It also seems a bit strange that after years of not speaking to Trueba, Clara would suddenly forgive him for his heinous husbanding only days before he was about to die and from the after life no less.
Sure, one could argue that things didn't turn out 'perfectly.' Nicolas is still a weirdo, Jaime and Amanda are dead and the evil government is still intact. However, on the whole, things turn out pretty darn fine compared to the significant misery and depression that was the rest of the book.
However, in spite of all my skepticism and arguments about reality, I can't help but feel these warm fuzzy feelings welling up inside of me. I am compelled to enjoy the cyclical nature of the final chapters and how Blanca and Alba will live out the rest of their lives in happiness with the ones they love...how Senator Trueba had a change of heart and was 'reconciled' to Clara. And even though I want to say something witty about how it's the typical fairytale ending, deep down, I really like it. So Congratulations Allende. You win.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Like Mother Like Daughter
The more that I read the House of the Spirits, the more I like it (much to my chagrin). I love how the story is so interesting but it almost seems morbid, being so enthralled in the sad and depressing lives of these people. No one in the story is truly happy (except, maybe, for the people who are already dead and can escape Esteban's wrath). But I just feel so bad for everyone! I mean, loveless marriages, abortions, viscous temperamental husbands, families that have drifted apart and lovers that can never be together...it's just depressing, plain and simple. It almost makes it seem like no one was happy at the time that Allende's grandmother was alive.
However, on the bright side, I also think that as the book progresses, I am realizing some of the connections that Allende may be trying to make in the story. One of the most interesting (and saddening) is how Blanca admits to the fact in chapter 8 that she ended up in an unhappy and loveless marriage, just like her mother. After I started thinking about it, I realized that it closely parallels the idea of the socialist revolution that was happening in Chile during the time of the novel. The ideas revolving the peasants comments, "this is the way that it has always been," about the hacienda system is quite similar to how Blanca accepted her unwanted marriage to Jean; she felt pressured by her father and, because neither she nor her mother stepped up to do anything, Blanca is unhappy in her marriage too. The same thing goes for the peasants; as long as they sit back, bullied by the patrons and too afraid to stand up for change, things will never be different.
I like how Allende uses this book to comment on social issues and draw parallels between the two major problems she focuses on in the book, poverty/Socialist reform in Chile and Women's rights. For both issues in her country, and others, it takes people to stand up and speak out about the issues before change can really occur. That's probably my favorite thing about the novel so far; not only is it captivating, it has a social conscience and addresses issues that are still quite relevant for us today, even in a 'democratic' society.
However, on the bright side, I also think that as the book progresses, I am realizing some of the connections that Allende may be trying to make in the story. One of the most interesting (and saddening) is how Blanca admits to the fact in chapter 8 that she ended up in an unhappy and loveless marriage, just like her mother. After I started thinking about it, I realized that it closely parallels the idea of the socialist revolution that was happening in Chile during the time of the novel. The ideas revolving the peasants comments, "this is the way that it has always been," about the hacienda system is quite similar to how Blanca accepted her unwanted marriage to Jean; she felt pressured by her father and, because neither she nor her mother stepped up to do anything, Blanca is unhappy in her marriage too. The same thing goes for the peasants; as long as they sit back, bullied by the patrons and too afraid to stand up for change, things will never be different.
I like how Allende uses this book to comment on social issues and draw parallels between the two major problems she focuses on in the book, poverty/Socialist reform in Chile and Women's rights. For both issues in her country, and others, it takes people to stand up and speak out about the issues before change can really occur. That's probably my favorite thing about the novel so far; not only is it captivating, it has a social conscience and addresses issues that are still quite relevant for us today, even in a 'democratic' society.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Athiest Children Eating Communists...That's a New One
So far, I really like this book! I think that it has a nice flow and the turn of events is (unlike much literature we have read thus far) comprehensible and interesting enough to keep my attention. However, I think that the thing that I like most about House of the Spirits is it's emphasis on social problems and it's stark irony and hypocrisy, particularly surrounding Esteban Trueba.
One of the strongest themes that I see so far in this book is the idea of 'class warfare'. I like that Allende writes about this because it was not only a social issue in her country, it's still very relevant American culture today. I also really like how she uses Esteban to bring out these ideas of the higher class. Because, although his mother's last name puts him in the 'upper class', he's still really not that much better than anyone else, because, as we have seen throughout the past two chapters, he still has to work really hard in order to earn a living. However, he acts like he is the cream of the crop. For example, on pg. 64-65, Esteban is ranting about how he is so much better than the peasants on his hacienda. "You have to use a strong hand on these devils-that's the only language they understand...I've had to teach them everything, even how to eat...How are they supposed to know about politics when they don't even know where they live?...It would be lovely if we were all created equal, but the fact is we're not." I feel like Esteban's haughty attitudes about himself and how he thinks that he is immune to scrutiny, perfect in every way, really do have something to say to us as Americans today. The issue of class has not gone away attitudes like Esteban's are something that we have been dealing with for centuries and we will continue to deal with them for centuries to come.
I also like how Allende uses Esteban to show the irony of his position. He thinks that he is sooo much better than the peasants and that his political views are rock solid, but really he's just a dishonest upper-classer who thinks he knows better than everybody else. He ranks right up there with those 'Athiest Children Eating Communists' (pg. 70) that he hates so much!
He is so firm in his political views, but really they are just a joke. If you look just at one part of Esteban's life, it might seem like he is an honest man with honest convictions. "This is a different country. This country's a geniune republic...the Conservative Party wins cleanly and openly." (pg. 70) However, just a paragraphs before, he uses intimidation techniques and blatant dishonesty in order to win 'openly and cleanly. "...promised them (the peasants) that if the conservative candidate won the election they would all receive a bonus, but that if he lost they would lose their jobs. In additions, they rigged the ballot boxes and bribed the police." (pg. 70) Nothing clean, open or democratic about that.
Allende also brings in the issue of women's rights, once again through the point of view of Esteban. On page 67, Esteban is reflecting on the women's rights 'movement' in his country and how Rosa's mother was campaigning for equal rights for men and women, "to be allowed to vote and attend the university." To which Esteban replies "That woman is sick in the head!...Their duty is motherhood and the home." Once again, bringing out he irony in how Esteban depends on the women from his hacienda for all of his 'needs' and for the work and services that they provide for him, but how he views them like objects and doesn't recognize them for what they do. This can especially be seen in the way he treats his own mother and sister, the woman who birthed him and the woman who gave up her own life to raise him and he shows them absolutely no gratitude. Typical.
Overall, I feel like Allende did a really fantastic job inserting political and social issues into her book. Having a character like Esteban reveal the irony of these issues through his hypocritical actions just makes the book that much better and the issues of classiscm and women's rights seem more real, especially since these are issues that Americans are still battling today.
One of the strongest themes that I see so far in this book is the idea of 'class warfare'. I like that Allende writes about this because it was not only a social issue in her country, it's still very relevant American culture today. I also really like how she uses Esteban to bring out these ideas of the higher class. Because, although his mother's last name puts him in the 'upper class', he's still really not that much better than anyone else, because, as we have seen throughout the past two chapters, he still has to work really hard in order to earn a living. However, he acts like he is the cream of the crop. For example, on pg. 64-65, Esteban is ranting about how he is so much better than the peasants on his hacienda. "You have to use a strong hand on these devils-that's the only language they understand...I've had to teach them everything, even how to eat...How are they supposed to know about politics when they don't even know where they live?...It would be lovely if we were all created equal, but the fact is we're not." I feel like Esteban's haughty attitudes about himself and how he thinks that he is immune to scrutiny, perfect in every way, really do have something to say to us as Americans today. The issue of class has not gone away attitudes like Esteban's are something that we have been dealing with for centuries and we will continue to deal with them for centuries to come.
I also like how Allende uses Esteban to show the irony of his position. He thinks that he is sooo much better than the peasants and that his political views are rock solid, but really he's just a dishonest upper-classer who thinks he knows better than everybody else. He ranks right up there with those 'Athiest Children Eating Communists' (pg. 70) that he hates so much!
He is so firm in his political views, but really they are just a joke. If you look just at one part of Esteban's life, it might seem like he is an honest man with honest convictions. "This is a different country. This country's a geniune republic...the Conservative Party wins cleanly and openly." (pg. 70) However, just a paragraphs before, he uses intimidation techniques and blatant dishonesty in order to win 'openly and cleanly. "...promised them (the peasants) that if the conservative candidate won the election they would all receive a bonus, but that if he lost they would lose their jobs. In additions, they rigged the ballot boxes and bribed the police." (pg. 70) Nothing clean, open or democratic about that.
Allende also brings in the issue of women's rights, once again through the point of view of Esteban. On page 67, Esteban is reflecting on the women's rights 'movement' in his country and how Rosa's mother was campaigning for equal rights for men and women, "to be allowed to vote and attend the university." To which Esteban replies "That woman is sick in the head!...Their duty is motherhood and the home." Once again, bringing out he irony in how Esteban depends on the women from his hacienda for all of his 'needs' and for the work and services that they provide for him, but how he views them like objects and doesn't recognize them for what they do. This can especially be seen in the way he treats his own mother and sister, the woman who birthed him and the woman who gave up her own life to raise him and he shows them absolutely no gratitude. Typical.
Overall, I feel like Allende did a really fantastic job inserting political and social issues into her book. Having a character like Esteban reveal the irony of these issues through his hypocritical actions just makes the book that much better and the issues of classiscm and women's rights seem more real, especially since these are issues that Americans are still battling today.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Roy Lichtenstein
The first thing that I noticed about the work of Roy Lichtenstein was his incredible use of color and graphic detail in the painting shown in the book. When I turned to that page (137), the painting immediately drew my attention. I love pretty much everything about what he did with his use of the comic book style/mass media commercialism as the influence of his paintings. I can't get over the extreme detail that he uses to outline everything and his use of shadows to make all of the colors stand out even more. The captions that he puts at the top of his paintings are also really wonderful. I like it because, much like a comic book, your can get a little more insight into the character's head and also, I think, a little more insight into what Lichtenstein was trying to say with his work.
I also really like how the main figure in this painting outlines what the book called his 'bringing attention to familiar cliches and stereotypes of popular entertainment...violence and romance are trivialized in the fictional lives of Liechtenstein's superheroes and helpless women." I think this picture portrays that quite accurately. This is exactly what I would expect a war-hardened general to look like, scar on his cheek, eyes narrowed in concentration, his knuckles tightly clenching the handle...I think that it does make a comment on how, after years of war, it's easy to trivialize violence.
This painting, called 'Drowning Girl' also shows the 'helpless woman' side of his work. I don't know about most girls, but if I was drowning I might actually...gee I don't know...try to swim?! But in his painting she only has two options;call for the assumably handsome and muscular Brad's help or drown. To me, that speaks to the formerly prevailing ideas in Hollywood popular films that without the hero, the heroine simply can't accomplish any thing. That without a man, a woman is pretty much helpless. However, I think that the fact that Liechtenstein's fictional character chooses to drown rather than ask for help is also indicative of the changing mindset of woman's rights at the time. She realizes that she doesn't have to depend on Brad anymore. Although things were just getting started when Lichtenstein was busy creating his paintings, I think it does speak to the shifting cultural views.
Something else that I really like about Lichtenstein is his use of multiple mediums. Along with paintings, he also did several sculptures. This one, called Brushstrokes in Flight (1984) looks pretty similar to lots of his paintings to me. The use of the bold color, the large shapes and shadows all look very similar to his painting 'Torpedo...Los'. It's just so different and eye catching that I really can't help but like it! Overall, I'd have to give Lichtenstein my stamp of approval for his work. It's appealing, it's interesting, it has a message without being propaganda-like... it pretty much has everything!
Thursday, March 10, 2011
If violence isn't the answer...you're asking the wrong question
I really enjoyed reading the poetry of Langston Hughes. Not only because his poems were beautifully written, but also because they employed a powerful political message. His poems got me thinking about the idea of art being used for propaganda. Especially concerning his "Theme for English B", I realized that art can also be used to further a social cause. Like the title of this section states, 'The Quest for Racial Equality', I think that even something as simple as a poem can make a big impact.
One thing that really stood out to me was that Hughes poetry didn't seem to radiate with anger towards white people. He seemed to long for equality for both races more than anything.
Looking at line 31, Hughes writes:
"You are white-
yet a part of me, as I am a part of you.
That's American.
Sometimes perhaps you don't want to be a part of me.
Nor do I often want to be a part of you.
But we are, that's true!"
I admire him greatly for his beautiful writing style, but more for his attitude. He had a desperate desire to be free from racial discrimination, but his life wasn't colored by hate, just by a desire for change for the better.
It really seems to contrast with the message of Malcolm X. His writing from Grass Roots on page 106 made me feel really uncomfortable. He writes:
"We have this in common: We have a common oppressor, a common exploiter, and a common discriminator. But once we all realize that we have a common enemy-on the basis of what we have in common. And what we have foremost in common is that enemy-the white man."
It seems like Malcolm X has the reverse attitude of Hughes. Now, I am in no way trying to discount the extreme injustices that African Americans faced at the hands of white people. However, I do think that the writings of these two men are just so drastically different in their outlook on life and the problems they were facing at the time. I think that the old phrase "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" really applies here. It seems to me that more people would be willing to listen and understand someone like Langston Hughes. His message seemed so much more positive and definitely less threatening. And while I completley understand that Malcolm X had a very good reason to be angry, I don't see why he would think violence was the answer to his problems. It was violence and discrimination and hatred that caused the problems in the first place.
One thing that really stood out to me was that Hughes poetry didn't seem to radiate with anger towards white people. He seemed to long for equality for both races more than anything.
Looking at line 31, Hughes writes:
"You are white-
yet a part of me, as I am a part of you.
That's American.
Sometimes perhaps you don't want to be a part of me.
Nor do I often want to be a part of you.
But we are, that's true!"
I admire him greatly for his beautiful writing style, but more for his attitude. He had a desperate desire to be free from racial discrimination, but his life wasn't colored by hate, just by a desire for change for the better.
It really seems to contrast with the message of Malcolm X. His writing from Grass Roots on page 106 made me feel really uncomfortable. He writes:
"We have this in common: We have a common oppressor, a common exploiter, and a common discriminator. But once we all realize that we have a common enemy-on the basis of what we have in common. And what we have foremost in common is that enemy-the white man."
It seems like Malcolm X has the reverse attitude of Hughes. Now, I am in no way trying to discount the extreme injustices that African Americans faced at the hands of white people. However, I do think that the writings of these two men are just so drastically different in their outlook on life and the problems they were facing at the time. I think that the old phrase "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar" really applies here. It seems to me that more people would be willing to listen and understand someone like Langston Hughes. His message seemed so much more positive and definitely less threatening. And while I completley understand that Malcolm X had a very good reason to be angry, I don't see why he would think violence was the answer to his problems. It was violence and discrimination and hatred that caused the problems in the first place.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Mecanique = Magnifique
Wow! What a film! Right off the bat I have to say that I like this one about a million times better than the surrealist film we saw last week. For starters, it isn't disturbing or gross and it actually kind of interested me! Instead of not looking away because I 'couldn't take my eyes off the train wreck,' I was truly intrigued by the objects shown. I loved how some were so mundane and easily recognizable that you wouldn't have thought them the possible subject of a short film. Others were so hard to distinguish! For me, it almost made it more enjoyable. I would be so close to figuring out what the object on the screen was and then it would be whisked away only to be replaced by another one. The only thing that didn't suit my taste was the smiling woman...her smile looked a little odd... but, other than that, I liked the film aspects very much!
(sorry, it's in two parts)
The only thing that I really wasn't a fan of was (sadly) the music. It was so random and chaotic, which I guess is kind of the point, but it was also seemed frantic with a sense of gloom and doom. George Antheil's score includes not only the crazy piano but also airplane propellers and electric buzzers. In my opinion, the buzzers really fit the whole mechanical feel of the movie. Even before I knew that they were buzzers the sound distinctly reminded me of a power saw or some other piece of construction equipment. I thought that buzzers really added to the menacing feel of the music. It was well thought out, but I'm just not a fan.
One thing that I really thought was cool was that before he made Ballet mecanique, Fernand Leger was a cubist painter. And thankfully for me, it was Cubism (not surrealism) that influenced his filming. Something that I really found interesting was this painting by Leger created in 1918 titled Le mecanicien.
Doesn't this 'guy' in the painting kind of remind you of the figure featured at the beginning and the end of his film?! I thought that that was pretty interesting! Leger definitely had a mechanical theme in his work. The only question I am left with is whether or not Leger intended for there to be meaning found in his work. The book goes into depth about what his meaning must have been (the new methodical, impersonal world) but did he intend meaning to be found in his film and paintings? Or are we not supposed to think about it's possible implications as the surrealist filmmakers requested?
(sorry, it's in two parts)
The only thing that I really wasn't a fan of was (sadly) the music. It was so random and chaotic, which I guess is kind of the point, but it was also seemed frantic with a sense of gloom and doom. George Antheil's score includes not only the crazy piano but also airplane propellers and electric buzzers. In my opinion, the buzzers really fit the whole mechanical feel of the movie. Even before I knew that they were buzzers the sound distinctly reminded me of a power saw or some other piece of construction equipment. I thought that buzzers really added to the menacing feel of the music. It was well thought out, but I'm just not a fan.
One thing that I really thought was cool was that before he made Ballet mecanique, Fernand Leger was a cubist painter. And thankfully for me, it was Cubism (not surrealism) that influenced his filming. Something that I really found interesting was this painting by Leger created in 1918 titled Le mecanicien.
Doesn't this 'guy' in the painting kind of remind you of the figure featured at the beginning and the end of his film?! I thought that that was pretty interesting! Leger definitely had a mechanical theme in his work. The only question I am left with is whether or not Leger intended for there to be meaning found in his work. The book goes into depth about what his meaning must have been (the new methodical, impersonal world) but did he intend meaning to be found in his film and paintings? Or are we not supposed to think about it's possible implications as the surrealist filmmakers requested?
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
A Weird Famous Guy... What Else Is New?
OK... so I know that I am writing about music again, but I feel that the last two columns of every chapter just doesn't do the musical giants of the 20th century justice. So, to give them their just desserts, let's talk about Erik Satie.
Firstly, I would like to say that the book spelled his name wrong... its' EriK Satie... because he changed his name from Eric to Erik in 1886 to honor his mother who was Scottish. Sometimes people still spell it Eric... but they are clearly incorrect. :-)
On to the music! The first thing that caught my eye in the paragraph that mentioned him was the fact that it said he used typewriters and doorbells in some of his music. Unfortunatly, I wasn't able to find any of this music online. What I did find however, surprised me to my great delight. The book makes him seem like some crazy guy who composed weird music, so when I went searching for songs I was expecting some weird spastic stuff that no one would like. However, the pieces that I found are absolutely beautiful! Take a listen...
Gymnopédie No.1 (orchestra version)
Aren't they just amazing??? The slow, haunting melodies are totally different from what I was expecting! I find them almost relaxing and definitely enjoyable music. In fact, according to several websites about Satie, he pretty much invented the idea of background music. It was his intention to create something that you wouldn't necessarily listen to, but just kind of enjoy from a distance.His laid back style even inspired some of the other composers of his time, such as Debussy, in their creations as well.
These two pieces almost make Satie sound like a normal guy.... but, like any famous artist/writer/musician/poet/sculptor, he wasn't. Don't get me wrong, it was a amusing sort of weird that I very much enjoy. Satie was not only creative, he was witty. He would write comments on the side of his sheet music that had to be specifically asked to not be read aloud because they were so funny. And instead of using traditional musical elements to describe his pieces like "allegro, forte, allegretto," he opted for the non-traditional variety and wrote things that he made up, such as "don't make your fingers blush", "from the top of your back teeth", and "do your best"! Throwing musical function out the proverbial window, EriK sometimes refused the use time signatures or even measures! He also came up with super random and creative titles for some of his works. Flabby Preludes, as the book mentions, was one of them. The actual title is apparently Flabby Preludes (for a dog). While the music doesn't sound at all flabby to me, the unusual title was certainly an inventive marketing technique!
But Satie's humor wasn't limited to his writing. His music was funny as well. Like this piece that he composed titled Vexations; an 18 measure song that he wrote with the intention of it being played 40 consecutive times for a total of 18 hours... I would hate to have been at that premiere concert....
Good thing they took turns! Oh, and it took the combination of pianists 19 hours and 20 minutes to complete the piece!
So, while Satie had his eccentricities (starting his own one member church and only eating white foods, to name a few) he was an incredible musical genius with a flair for beautiful melodies and a great sense of humor. And for all you naysayers of 'classical music', here's a list of all the more modern songs that have elements of Satie's music which, if you'll note, includes Frank Zappa. So the next time 'Apostrphe' comes on the radio, grab yourself some mashed potatoes and thank EriK Satie.
Firstly, I would like to say that the book spelled his name wrong... its' EriK Satie... because he changed his name from Eric to Erik in 1886 to honor his mother who was Scottish. Sometimes people still spell it Eric... but they are clearly incorrect. :-)
On to the music! The first thing that caught my eye in the paragraph that mentioned him was the fact that it said he used typewriters and doorbells in some of his music. Unfortunatly, I wasn't able to find any of this music online. What I did find however, surprised me to my great delight. The book makes him seem like some crazy guy who composed weird music, so when I went searching for songs I was expecting some weird spastic stuff that no one would like. However, the pieces that I found are absolutely beautiful! Take a listen...
Gymnopédie No.1 (orchestra version)
Gnossienne No.2 (piano version)
Aren't they just amazing??? The slow, haunting melodies are totally different from what I was expecting! I find them almost relaxing and definitely enjoyable music. In fact, according to several websites about Satie, he pretty much invented the idea of background music. It was his intention to create something that you wouldn't necessarily listen to, but just kind of enjoy from a distance.His laid back style even inspired some of the other composers of his time, such as Debussy, in their creations as well.
These two pieces almost make Satie sound like a normal guy.... but, like any famous artist/writer/musician/poet/sculptor, he wasn't. Don't get me wrong, it was a amusing sort of weird that I very much enjoy. Satie was not only creative, he was witty. He would write comments on the side of his sheet music that had to be specifically asked to not be read aloud because they were so funny. And instead of using traditional musical elements to describe his pieces like "allegro, forte, allegretto," he opted for the non-traditional variety and wrote things that he made up, such as "don't make your fingers blush", "from the top of your back teeth", and "do your best"! Throwing musical function out the proverbial window, EriK sometimes refused the use time signatures or even measures! He also came up with super random and creative titles for some of his works. Flabby Preludes, as the book mentions, was one of them. The actual title is apparently Flabby Preludes (for a dog). While the music doesn't sound at all flabby to me, the unusual title was certainly an inventive marketing technique!
But Satie's humor wasn't limited to his writing. His music was funny as well. Like this piece that he composed titled Vexations; an 18 measure song that he wrote with the intention of it being played 40 consecutive times for a total of 18 hours... I would hate to have been at that premiere concert....
Good thing they took turns! Oh, and it took the combination of pianists 19 hours and 20 minutes to complete the piece!
So, while Satie had his eccentricities (starting his own one member church and only eating white foods, to name a few) he was an incredible musical genius with a flair for beautiful melodies and a great sense of humor. And for all you naysayers of 'classical music', here's a list of all the more modern songs that have elements of Satie's music which, if you'll note, includes Frank Zappa. So the next time 'Apostrphe' comes on the radio, grab yourself some mashed potatoes and thank EriK Satie.
- Arrangements in popular music
- In 1968, Blood Sweat & Tears released their second album, which included an adaptation of Erik Satie's Trois Gymnopédies (arranged by Dick Halligan) which they titled as Variations on a Theme by Erik Satie (First and Second Movements). Its instrumentation consisted only of flutes, an acoustic guitar and a triangle and the song's length was 2:35. In 1969, Halligan received a Grammy Award for Best Instrumental Performance for "Variations On A Theme By Erik Satie" from the album Blood, Sweat & Tears.
- In 1980, Gary Numan's 7-inch "We Are Glass" featured "Trois Gymnopedies (First Movement)" on the B-side.
- In 1999, electronic music act Plaid's CD "Restproof Clockwork" included a track called "Tearisci" which is an uncredited version of Satie's "Pièces Froides, No. 2: Danses De Travers: III. Encore".
- In 2000, ex-Genesis guitarist Steve Hackett released the album, "Sketches of Satie", performing Satie's works on acoustic guitar, with contributions by his brother John on flute.
- Frank Zappa was also a devoted fan of Satie, incorporating many elements into both his rock and orchestral works.
- The English electronic duo Isan recorded versions of the three Gymnopédies for a 2006 7-inch single, "Trois Gymnopedies" on the Morr Music record label.
- The 2nd movement of his Gymnopédies has been used in the original soundtrack of 2010japanese animated film The Disappearance of Haruhi Suzumiya by Kyoto Animation studio. The full Gymnopédies as long as Gnossiennes are included in the 2nd CD of this OST.
- Ogive Number 2 (incorrectly labelled Ogive Number 1) was re-recorded electronically by William Orbit on his album Pieces in a Modern Style
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)