C
Composer
@bospress, I agree there's a practical advantage in sitting down with the poet/novelist/libettist and go over a project together, espcially if there are multiple interpretations of some text is unclear and one wants to remain faithful to the author's meaning. But I don't believe there's any moral "right" or "wrong" about it, just that (in this case) a Bukowski poem set to music is a different experience than his words read by himself. It can be uncomfortable to experience an adaptation when one knows the original, as when one ses a film made from a favorite novel.
Of all the poets I've come across, none more than Bukowski seemed more interested in "classical music" (his term). Aside form his many references to pieces he listens to, he repeatedly uses the piano as a metaphor for his typewriter, or his work generally. So I don't think it's much of a stretch to adapt some of his work musically.
@mip, may I quote you on the CD cover? "Noodling, masturbatory auditory torture" has a nice ring to it.
Some poets, I believe T S Eliot was one, flatly refused to allow his work to be adapted in any form. Vincent Persicheti wrote "The Hollow Men" for trumpet and orchestra, meant to "evoke" the poem, which is as close as he could get. Others give permission only if their poems are used without changes or abridgements. Still others tend to disassociate artistically from their work since it's finished and published, and give permission easily.
Using a poem as sung text does change it, but the same is true when a novel is made into a film, or to a less extent when somebody else reads a poet's work aloud. And if you mean it's wrong in some moral sense to adapt a writer's work unless you know he or she approves, why would that change once the copyright has expired?
Of all the poets I've come across, none more than Bukowski seemed more interested in "classical music" (his term). Aside form his many references to pieces he listens to, he repeatedly uses the piano as a metaphor for his typewriter, or his work generally. So I don't think it's much of a stretch to adapt some of his work musically.
@mip, may I quote you on the CD cover? "Noodling, masturbatory auditory torture" has a nice ring to it.
Some poets, I believe T S Eliot was one, flatly refused to allow his work to be adapted in any form. Vincent Persicheti wrote "The Hollow Men" for trumpet and orchestra, meant to "evoke" the poem, which is as close as he could get. Others give permission only if their poems are used without changes or abridgements. Still others tend to disassociate artistically from their work since it's finished and published, and give permission easily.
Using a poem as sung text does change it, but the same is true when a novel is made into a film, or to a less extent when somebody else reads a poet's work aloud. And if you mean it's wrong in some moral sense to adapt a writer's work unless you know he or she approves, why would that change once the copyright has expired?
