LETTER : Wherefore silence? It's all relative ...

Jonathan Proctor
Wednesday 10 May 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mr Jonathan Proctor

Sir: Paul Vallely ("Silence. For two whole minutes. Can this man be serious?", 8 May) is right to emphasise the importance of silence in music as presaged by the groundbreaking innovation of John Cage, yet, erroneously, he states that devotees searching for meaning in Cage's music were "searching in entirely the wrong direction". The point that Cage was striving to make when he wrote 4'33" was that there is in reality no such entity as silence. Ironically, this is a point that Mr Vallely makes early in his article, but fails to apply to Cage's piece.

As the story goes, Cage first realised there was no such thing as silence when he entered a sound-proof room - an anechoic chamber - at Harvard. In the chamber, instead of the total silence anticipated, Cage heard two sounds - one high and one low. The high sound, he was told, was his nervous system in operation and the other was the circulation of his blood. Cage thus proposed that silences in a piece of music could be defined simply as, "sounds not intended". This theory is exemplified by 4'33" and still has a profound bearing on much of the contemporary music being made today.

Yours sincerely,

JONATHAN PROCTOR

Sheffield

8 May

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in