Talk:4′33″

message: A letter to the New York Times shortly after Cage's death indicates that Harold Acton conceived of the idea of a totally silent piece of music in a prose work, "Cornelian" (1928). This may deserve mention in the "Precursers" section. Bill Jefferys (talk) 01:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, and I'm sorry this hasn't been noticed earlier. I've added Cornelian to the section, citing the book the NYT reader referenced. --Jashiin (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precursors 

message: Where is the section on the critical response?  I'm sure at least some observers called this what it was, namely, total bullshit. 98.82.21.78 (talk) 00:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from the fact that this page is for discussion of the article, not the work itself, I think the fact that this piece has engendered so much philosophical discussion and plays a part in a larger movement (see the recent Met exhibition at http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/exhibitions/1421), I think it's safe to say that we can not determine that 4' 33" is "bullshit." NewkirkPlaza (talk) 13:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This section should be removed as noted above, instead of being left as an unanswered prod. Because as it is, it leaves one with a need to second the notion this work isn't "bullshit" but rather, "self-important, unoriginal, navel-gazing rubbish." And no....I'm not a critic.  I'm an expert. Mad Bunny (talk) 00:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing section 

message: In the background and influences section there's a paragraph treating Cage's claims about his experience in the anechoic chamber skeptically.  All of it is unsourced.  I tagged it but I was hoping someone has some ideas.  If no sources are forthcoming then that stuff needs to go as it's clearly unencyclopedic OR. SQGibbon (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I guess if no one has anything I'll go ahead and remove those lines.  SQGibbon (talk) 23:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background and influences section 

message: Whilst Googling Cage, I noticed there is a Facebook group which (and I am not sure how serious they are about this) is called "John Cages 4.33 for Christmas no.1 2010". Is it worth adding a bit to the page about this? I found it rather amusing and kind of interesting in a slightly facile way. What do people think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dead celeb (talk • contribs) 22:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree; this has since been noted by The Guardian, which should constitute it being mentioned. ~~NaN 10:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think that the current Facebook campaign deserves a mention in this article, as there seem to be loads of reliable sources writing about it. I might have a go at including a section on it later, but, if anyone else would like to, here are some of the sources that I've found: The Guardian; The Telegraph; The Sun; The Sun (again); The Daily Mail; MSN UK; The Irish Times; Yahoo! Music; Scotland on Sunday; Kuar; Exclaim; Big Top 40; ;  A Thousand Doors (talk) 02:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not so sure about all this.  It seems like it's only pop-cultural reference.  What I don't see is how this advances the reader's understanding of the piece or of Cage in general.  I don't see future Cage scholars even mentioning this incident much less analyzing it to any degree.  Like I said, it's just a bit of trivia.  Further, the use of 4'33" seems more of an ironic statement and/or an attempt to pull off a prank.  In scanning the sources I didn't see anything to indicate that this was a celebration of the piece, John Cage, or 20th century classical music.  If it were any of those things then comparing it to a similar campaign to game the "Christmas Number One" program undercuts that assertion.  Putting all this together I don't see that it deserves mention in the article, but even if consensus comes out in favor of including it, and in its own section, I definitely do not think it should take up as much space as it does.  This is giving undue weight to a passing pop-cultural phenomenon that has little or no value to the article in terms of educating the reader on the significance of the piece.  Just because something is well-sourced does not mean it has to be included in Wikipedia. SQGibbon (talk) 03:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I drew a lot of inspiration for this section from the similar "Killing in the Name" article. I felt that the section had relevance to the article as it shows the cultural significance of the piece. Maybe it'll be worth waiting to see what the results of this "campaign" are - if it crashes and burns, then obviously the section should be removed. But if the piece makes the UK Singles Chart, then that should at least be mentioned in a 'Chart performance' table or something. A Thousand Doors (talk) 19:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure how the "cultural significance" of the piece is being illustrated by what is essentially a prank.  Furthermore, in the case of the other song the band became involved whereas with 4'33" neither Cage (who is dead) nor the Cage Trust have said anything about this.  Whether it belongs in the article is one thing, whether it deserves its own section and so much space is another.  I think that waiting to see "if it crashes and burns" completely misses the point.  Either it's something that helps illustrate the piece of music or it isn't.  Whether the campaign "succeeds" or not is irrelevant to understanding Cage's work. Also, just having looked at the Facebook page, what recording are they using?  I didn't see anything listed.  This makes the entire thing seem even more sketchy. SQGibbon (talk) 17:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

text: I removed that section as you are correct, the citation does not support the text at all.  I'm guessing that whoever made the edit copied in the wrong reference. SQGibbon (talk) 16:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facebook group 

message: Contentious text copied from article:
On December 5, 2010 at 2100 hours (GMT), an international simultaneous performance of Cage's 4'33" took place involving over 200 performers, amateur and professional musicians, vocalists and artists. The global orchestra, conducted live by Bob Dickinson via video link, performed the piece in support of the Cage Against The Machine campaign to bring 4'33" to christmas number 1 in 2010. Made up of many of the fans of the official facebook page promoting the Cage Against The Machine campaign (facebook.com/cageagainstthemachine), the performance was also recorded by engineers at performances across continents This was the first time Cage's piece had been performed at simultaneous venues worldwide. Full documentation of participants and their audio/video input at a multitude of global locations have been collected on an event site for future reference. A second performance is due to take place to coincide with the release of the Cage Against The Machine charity single on Sunday 12th of December 2010, with many more expected to take part. Links to the event can be found at the official Cage Against The Machine facebook page (facebook.com/cageagainstthemachine)
These all appear to be primary sources thus there is not a reliable source establishing the notability of the event (needs to be reported by a reliable source such as a newspaper). The claim that this was the first such performance also needs a reliable source to back that up (otherwise it's original research).  I do not doubt that this event happened but that it was notable.  Until a reliable secondary source establishes notability I do not believe this paragraph belongs in the article. SQGibbon (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the paragraph, as it currently is, relies far too heavily on primary sources. But I think that enough secondary sources exist to justify its inclusion in the article, for example: The Independent, The Guardian, BBC News, Metro, Spinner and Yahoo! Music. Hopefully, these sources should be enough to verify any contentious material about the performance. Given the pedigree of acts that have come together to produce this recording, I think that it qualifies for inclusion in the article. Although, given also its link to the Facebook campaign, maybe it would be better placed for inclusion as part of the section below it. A Thousand Doors (talk) 01:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: These aren't the same things, though, are they?  The original paragraph was about a world-wide collaboration whereas what you've linked to (at least the two I checked) are about a different recording.  I could be missing something though.  SQGibbon (talk) 03:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you're right actually. My apologies, I should've checked the sources a bit more carefully - I assumed that, since they were both connected to the Facebook group, that they were the same thing. I've had a look for some reliable third-party sources regarding the Bob Dickinson performance, but I can't find any, so I guess that the above paragraph should be omitted. I think a mention of the other recording would be appropriate though. A Thousand Doors (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 23:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I was wondering whether it'd be worth having information about the campaign in a separate article under the name Cage Against the Machine (currently a redirect to 4'33"), then just leaving a brief summary in the "Performances and recordings" section of this article. I might start drafting it out at some point. A Thousand Doors (talk) 14:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if such an article would be able to survive the deletion process.  Perhaps better would be an article dealing with all the efforts to get a song to the top of the Christmas chart like the Rage Against the Machine campaign, the "Never Gonna Give You Up" attempt the year before that, and a competing campaign this year as mentioned here.  I'm not positive that even that article would stand up to the deletion process but I think it would have a better chance.  It might also be the case that putting all the information in the Christmas number one single page would be best. SQGibbon (talk) 22:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

text: By the way, it's "SQGibbon" - all one word; it's not a name, just a random set of letters.  Anyway, I answered all this on your talk page before noticing that you had posted it all here (in addition to my talk page).  If anyone is interested it's there or if someone wants to copy it over here that's fine too. SQGibbon (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I've responded on your talk page. SQGibbon (talk) 22:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance by Bob Dickinson 

message: (Note: this is copied verbatim from a message I left on another editor's talk page and I'm not bothering to edit it anymore here).  In no way was my removal a slight against Ms. Kuhn or the Cage Trust. Let's look at the text I removed "Additionally The John Cage Trust, and in particular, Laura Kuhn, executive director of the Trust, have documented the Cage 4' 33" campaign taking place in the UK." All this is is another source documenting that the recording happened. Nothing in this text added to the understanding of the recording (or more importantly to the subject of the article 4'33"). For instance the bombing of Pearl Harbor was probably documented by thousands of newspapers all over the word but we don't need to cite all of them if they're essentially saying the same thing. We are justified in just citing some of them. Likewise the text about Ms. Kuhn added nothing to the section so removing it doesn't hurt anything. If you want to add her back as an additional reference then that's fine (or I could do it if you're unfamiliar with the process) but I don't see that we need to mention her acknowledgement of the recoding of the text itself. If you think that mentioning her acknowledgement adds to our understanding of then I would be interested in your argument noting that the text I deleted was not an endorsement of the recording just a mention of it. SQGibbon (talk) 00:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of the Kuhn reference from the 4'33" article 

message: I added the reference to the popular K-drama show, "Beethoven Virus," where there was a highly significant scene in which 4'33" played an integral role. Now, I cannot find an "official" citation in which the scene is shown. Obviously, it's a scene in the show, and the main BV site does not have a play-by-play of the entire drama like DramaBeans. My question is how to include the link from the show, if there is no "official" site that designates that particular scene? I can link to the actual production site, but it doesn't contain the particular context of the actual scene like DramaBeans. The revision for that particular scene is located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3&diff=413212550&oldid=413205385 Thanks for your help!
:Does the official site at least list all the music performed in each episode?  If so that would be enough (we don't really need any context, just evidence that the piece was performed).  Sometimes performers do long periods of silence without making any overt reference to Cage's piece so we really need something reliable that specifically states it was 4'33".  You can use the show itself for a source. Here's a link to a list of citation templates, just scroll down to the one that says "episode (television or radio): citation templates.  Did that episode specifically mention it was performing 4'33"? SQGibbon (talk) 07:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your clarification. The main site (Korean language) does not have a list of non-OST musical selections in the show, such as various Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, and Chopin standards. However, the show is available to view online at Hulu.com as of this time, so it is easy to actually see the reference. The official Korean language show site is located at http://www.imbc.com/broad/tv/drama/thoven/ , while the particular episode is located at http://www.hulu.com/watch/182185/beethoven-virus-episode-16#s-p1-so-i0 (the segment with 4'33" starts at the 35:20 mark with English subtitles). Finally, Beethoven Virus was the most awarded television show in Korea in 2008, so it is not a flash in the pan show. The reason that I hesitate to use the actual show at Hulu is that they can remove the online viewing link to the show at any time, therefore negating the link here. One more question: what would Dramabeans have to do to become an "accredited" citation source for Wikipedia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.139.35 (talk) 12:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of the Beethoven Virus reference from the 4'33" article 

message: Can 4′33″ be categorised as a Minimalistic composition? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the article Minimal music, "prominent features of the style include consonant harmony, steady pulse (if not immobile drones), stasis or gradual transformation, and often reiteration of musical phrases or smaller units such as figures, motifs, and cells. It may include features such as additive process and phase shifting". If 4′33″ fulfills one or more of these criteria then, yes, it could be categorised as minimalist.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 15:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Minimalist?

message: Why do I think there was a recording of this in the LP days where you "enjoyed" the natural crackle of your LP's groove?
But I don't recall any details at the moment.
Varlaam (talk) 02:51, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The idea that anyone would want to issue a recording seemed preposterous but checking the Library of Congress Worldcat shows that this has been done at least eight times. One, indeed, dates back to the LP era: Nova musicha, n. 1, on Cramps CRSLP 6101, containing (in addition to 4'33") Music for Marcel Duchamp, Music for Amplified Toy Pianos, Radio Music, and Sixty-two Mesostics Re Merce Cunningham: frammento. It was issued in 1974.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:22, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty certain Cage himself released an LP at least once. 68.146.70.124 (talk) 22:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recordings 

message: Shouldn't there be a reference to the fact that 4 minutes 33 seconds is 273 seconds, -273 Celcius is absolute zero, the inspiration for the length and name of the piece.
User:jgharston 13:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is documented somewhere, yes, probably, only with "Celsius" spelled correctly, of course.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's sometimes mentioned, as in this article in Die Zeit, "Ob's Gott gefällt", 3 May 2006, but that article also states that Cage was not aware of this connection. (Found article via Talk:4′33″/Archive 1#Findings about the -273°C mystery! Read this!.) -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There IS a widespread belief that choosing a length and title equal to 273 seconds is a reference to the Celsius or Centigrade reading for Absolute Zero (-273 degrees). The existence of this belief is so widespread that it should be mentioned in the article. The article doesn't need to say that the belief is an "encyclopedic fact", merely that it exists. Someone who cares more about this topic than I do should then include, in the article, citations asserting that this assertion is true, and/or citations asserting that this assertion is false, and/or citations asserting that it's impossible to verify either the truth or falseness of this assertion. But it shouldn't be left out of the article entirely. I did a word-search on the article for the words "absolute", "zero", "273", "=273", "Celsius", "Centigrade", and "Kelvin", and I don't find anything, so I believe it's an assertion that this article entirely omits.2600:1700:6759:B000:9DF9:4036:83B6:2CCE (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also discuss the story that "Absolute Zero" is the Rate-A-Record rating (out of a possible 10) that this John Cage piece received when it (or maybe the Extended Dance Remix "Seven Interminable Minutes Of Silence") was played for audience-members on Dick Clark's "American Bandstand". Probably false, but do the research.2600:1700:6759:B000:9DF9:4036:83B6:2CCE (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absolute Zero 

message: It will open with a single idea which I will attempt to make as seductive as the color and shape and fragrance of a flower. The ending will approach imperceptibility.
Shouldn't the adverbial form "imperceptibly" be used here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.44.28.30 (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imperceptibly? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on 4′33″. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060212191730/http://www.cbc.ca:80/sask/features/artist/journal2.html to http://www.cbc.ca/sask/features/artist/journal2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:59, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I recall quite distinctly there being a legal case some years ago - either plagiarism or copyright infringment - regarding 4'33 against someone who had either used a similar idea or had performed/recorded the composition without payment. I don't recall the details but I do recall it generated discussion as to whether one can actually copyright "silence" (or ambient sound, in this case). If someone can find info on this, I think it would make valuable addition to this article. 50.66.121.20 (talk) 17:59, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, there was indeed a lawsuit for copyright infringement  of the “composition” 4′33. It was against a man by the name of Mike Batt, a composer, starting in the 60’s, who wrote songs for the likes of Steeleye Span, Art Garfunkle, and the children’s TV show charector’s The Wobbles. He put out an album the included a piece called “One Minute Of Silence” in which he made credited to “Betts/Cage”. It was The mention of Cage as a co-composer that caught the attention of the Cage estate and led to a copyright lawsuit. Had a just left out Cages name no lawsuit likely would have occurred. The case never went to trial though as he settled the case for a small figure leaving the question of whether you can copyright a silence “song” or not for another day. Here is a link With info on he lawsuit: http://legendsrevealed.com/entertainment/2012/08/04/was-a-musician-really-sued-for-infringing-on-the-copyright-of-a-silent-song/ —-2600:1700:56A0:4680:DC73:E0A7:AEAB:14F8 (talk) 04:52, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been discussed here and at Talk:John Cage#Batt lawsuit. However, it's a hoax by Mike Batt; see "Wombles composer Mike Batt's silence legal row 'a scam'", 9 December 2010, BBC News. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:04, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal action related to composition

message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleepify
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3
Should there perhaps be a category of music that consists only of silence? Benjamin (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  category 

message: It's not discussed in this article whether the heirs/assignees/designees/estate of John Cage receive royalties when excerpts of this work (typically a minute in length, but I don't know if that's the first 60 seconds of the piece, the last 60 seconds, or an except from the middle) are performed at funerals and commemorations of fatal disasters or persons sacrificing their own lives to save others. Nor is Cage's art of fugue discussed. Are some sections of the score the same as others played backwards? At double-time? At half time? Inverted pitchwise around a center-tone? What about modulations from one key to another? All of this craftsmanship has been left out of the article. (By the way, my tongue is NOT in my cheek. This post may receive criticism for being silly, BUT THAT IS ONLY GOING TO PROVE MY POINT, and in fact what I'm writing is serious. Just as John Cage can extend the meaning of "music" so that it becomes absurd, I can do the same thing in extending the meaning of "scholarly debate" and "music theory" so that it becomes absurd. Anyone who calls me "silly" should be prepared to have this article's subject be called "silly". The same standards apply to both. It's not out of the question that if John Cage were asked for permission to perform a 60-second extract of this work at a funeral, then he would not be offended but, rather, pleased, feeling that such a request artistically extended whatever point he was trying to make.)2600:1700:6759:B000:9DF9:4036:83B6:2CCE (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Royalties?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians. I am currently attempting to fix this article to promote it to 'good article' or, perhaps, 'featured article' status, so your help would be highly appreciated. I chiefly seek to create a new 'influences' section, which delineates how Cage's 4'33" has impacted music and popular culture, adding a segment on the plagiarism associated with the work, adding some information from the German article, and making general quality of life improvements, such as the reorganization of references and sections. DannyRogers800 (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work in progress