Talk:John Adams (composer)/Archive 1

Pulitzer response
Adams is quoted as saying that he had "ambivalence bordering on contempt" for winning the Pulitzer. A glance at the Village Voice article clarifies: Adams never used those words; those were the words of the reporter for the article, Gary Giddins. Perhaps eliminate or rework the sentence as to avoid such a misappropriation?

Explanation
I did a few different things I want to explain... --Larry Sanger
 * 1) I moved the composer material to the separate page. That was a good idea, because, as per naming conventions, it disambiguates nicely.  Each distinct topic will, when we finally adopt the new PHP wiki software (being tested here), live on its own page, properly disambiguated from similarly-titled topics with parentheses.
 * 2) I put the pages about John Adams' compositions on separate pages, not as subpages of John Adams--composer. The new software isn't going to be equipped with a subpage feature.  (I could explain further...it's an old issue.)  Still, I retained the same titles (but without the ugly slash in the link!).

Picture
Where could we obtain an image of Adams to accompany the article. Does it HAVE to be public domain or is there a fair use policy we could go by? Plenty of images of him on the net but I imagine none are in the clear to use on Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holders?

His website, www.earbox.com, has a "press" section with bios and pictures. The pictures are available in small or large sizes, and for print or web use. That seems to me like a very clear indication that the pictures are intended for the sort of usage found on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.76.189 (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Nixon in China
Here are two more recent productions of Nixon in China. I'm not sure how to best integrate this information, so I'll leave it here: http://www.chicagooperatheater.org/season/season6-opera3.shtml http://www.portlandopera.org/

More Work?
This article really need a seperate section devoted to discussing the composers music and style. There is to much crammed into the “Life” section. Also the article could be greatly updated with the addition of new information that can be found in some of the new interviews with Adams.I’ll start on the updates. Does anyone have any other suggestions? S.dedalus 00:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice work on the article so far, S.dedalus. One bit of advice, be aware of WP:RED. There is a lot of red links in the article, which isn't necesarily a problem if they will turn blue in the short to medium term. But if they are going to remain red forever, it might be worth delinking them for the moment. Just something to think about. Rockpock  e  t  09:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Nancy's Fancy
A quick note about my addition of Nancy's Fancy to Adams' list of works, which is undoubtedly an obscure piece (I've never heard it myself). I saw it mentioned in a list of SF Symphony premieres of Adams' work as well as in the following article in the SF Chronicle:. Rmannion 12:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox and "Coolidge"
I'd like to remove the infobox; as people have been discussing in Wikiproject Composers, they rarely add much and tend to distort the subtle distinctions among genres that we're making below.

I'm also not so happy with using the middle name as a disambiguation point--yes, that is his middle name, but no he doesn't use it on his books, it's not used in library catalogs. He tends to be "Adams, John 1947-"; as opposed to poor John Clement Adams (another Harvard grad composer) who is "Adams, John 1947 Nov. 28-." I think that we have two conflicting goals here: disambiguate among the various John Adamses and use titles which accurately reflect the names associated with each figure. I think though we've struck the wrong balance here. I would suggest a move to "John Adams (Composer b. 1947)" --Myke Cuthbert 18:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I object to the removal of the infobox (though I hadn't seen your comments when I just restored it). If it includes false or misleading content, then that should be corrected by amending it, not removing the whole box. I have no objection to the move you suggest. Andy Mabbett 20:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with the removal of the infobox, it's redundant and reductionist. As for the title, I see what you mean. The problem with using 1947 as part of the disambiguation is that I haven't seen any other Wikipedia articles which do it that way, which would make it very hard for even people who know Wikipedia well to find this page straight away. What if this John Adams were "John Adams (composer)" and the other composers could be disambiguated at the top with a link to John Adams (disambiguation)? This is on the principle that the most famous person should have the most obvious title. Mak (talk)  09:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed; as long as there is no other significant composer who publishes under the name John Adams (unlikely now that this John Adams has so clearly staked out the territory) he should get the John Adams (composer) designation. I will wait one or two more days for comments from other editors before making the move.  --Myke Cuthbert 19:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed re: dab proposal. What does it mean for your music to "embody the landscapes of Alaska" anyways?  Fireplace 19:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Se habla español?
Anyone have a good grasp of Spanish? The Spanish version of the article is quite good and has a lot of material which we could borrow. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 04:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem
It strongly looks like the bulk of the current article was cut and pasted from the Pulitzer Prize bio at http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2003/music/bio/ It was added in October of 2004, by an anon IP editor. Since the Pulitzer was announced April 2003 and the bio would reasonably be expected to be at least roughly contemporaneous with the prize, I can see no plausible way that Wikipedia could have been the source of the pulitzer's bio article. Applying WP:COPYVIO, I'm going to do a big deletion, and refer the reader to the pulitzer bio. I'll doubtless catch a little original stuff in the purge, although the bulk of the diffs seem to be formatting. I wish I had time to rewrite the article instead of deleting, but I don't Studerby


 * You're absolutely right -- wow, let's get this started again right. It is good to know though that we now have a reliable source to refer to for some of the details.  -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 20:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, wow, thanks for catching that. Of course now there isn’t really a coherent article left. . . However this article has been bad for years and was in need of a complete rewrite anyway. I’ll get started and try to write a new article with a view to possibly making this page a FA someday. S.dedalus 19:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I was about to note how short, ill-balanced, and overall useless the article is (having only just looked it up), but I see there's a reason for that...we'll hope for a high-quality expansion that does the man and his music justice. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 19:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Importance
I classified this article as "top" importance hoping to avoid my dislike of Adams' fanatics lowering my estimate of his importance. "High" seems appropriate as well. Hyacinth (talk) 04:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Restart Opportunity?
This article was mostly blanked several months ago after it was noticed that most of it was copy-violations. Since then, it has grown a bit, but it still seems to be missing the core of the text.

My students have produced a new version of the article at User:Mscuthbert/John Adams, which, though not perfect by any means, is I believe a great improvement over most of the current article. I want to be bold and make the replacement, but I will also give others a bit of time to look it over and raise objections. The musical examples should be moved over quickly, since they are Fair Use images that are currently only in user space, and need to be used. Thanks. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 19:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I still think your exclusion of certain facts about his career, namely his presence in the video game "Civilization 4", is suspect and biased in my opinion. I haven't made efforts to add a entry regarding this fact because of you Mr.Cuthbert. You have successfully upset me to the point of apathy even failing to contact me via cellphone to discuss the matter further after I kindly provided you the opportunity to do so. Your efforts are admirable, but some of the things you've added to this biography can be treated by myself in much the same manner as you treated my entry.

I however, unlike you, respect your interest in these aspects of Mr. Adam's life that I not dare remove it. You however have demonstrated a lack of objectivity to the viewpoints of those like myself who consider such collaborations between game developers and *living* artists like John Adams important in spreading awareness to a circle of digital arts connoisseurs, about the talents of men like Mr. Adams, and how well such works can serve to enhance the quality of gaming for those of us who see games as art and appreciate the myriad things one can from such experiences.

Information should be presented as true as can be, for the sake and betterment of others regardless of differences in opinion, cultural backgrounds, race, sex, religion, or artistic preference. This view is in accordance with a democratic philosophy, where liberty of information exchange is paramount to it's essence. I believe you have violated this liberty so long as I exist, and believe me, I am not alone. I admire Mr. Adams, but it seems you are reluctant to let your colleagues know of such facts; why? Are you ashamed that his music is in a video game? Do you think Video Games and unworthy of such attention? You will come to realize that any answer you give is ultimately subjective, as it is with any discussion pertaining to the arts.

If the goal of an encyclopedia is to provide objective facts, I cannot see your reasons for removal of my entry as anything but subjective and will eventually add my entry once more, and will continue to do so until I am given a rational, objective, and non-personal view as to why such information does not belong here. Your argument that I ought not do it because you find it would create extra clutter in the wiki entries of composers like Bach, Beethoven, etc., is subjective in my view. I have reasons why it is more appropriate to do so for a composer like Adams than Bach or Beethoven, mostly because his life's time line takes place at the same time as the digital age of Video Game Media, and is therefore relevant to his career in that his works have traversed the various media of his lifetime with success. I am disappointed in your inability, as a PHD recipient, to see merit in this, with all honesty.~Daniel Decastro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.19.73 (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * All you need to do is find an independent reliable source that shows that the use of Adams's music in Civilization IV is a significant point in Adams's career and I will be happy to add back this information. You might also want to assume good faith that I have don't have ulterior motives of hating video games and video game music--I teach the history of video game music in my courses at MIT -- this is simply not an important part of Adams's career.  You may want to look at the guidelines for reliable sources and notability on Wikipedia before continuing to add your own contributions. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 02:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

What constitutes an independent reliable source to you? You keep decreeing by fiat, without evidence, that this is not an important part of Adam's career, I believe it is as again, it demonstrates the affinity his work has with the various media of his time, in the same way we can show that Bach's music was idiomatic to the various mediums of his time. I believe this is work for a musicologist to demonstrate, and if you know anything about the history of video games, you should also know that my attempts are probably amongst the first at securing game audio as an independent entity of research and cultural importance. I've been advised by faculty at NYU to pursue a doctorate in musicology in which case I myself would be one of those "Independent reliable sources". Your decrees are suspect in that they fail to address my own arguments, as I think your comments fall short of anything but fiat. I cannot in good faith see that there may be no ulterior motives on your part; academics like yourself have often times mounted high horses and I cannot say that you display an approach to my concerns which would lead me to think the contrary.

I would assume you'd also fail to recognize Philip Glass's inclusion in the game "Grand Theft Auto 4" unimportant to his career, at which point I'd be extremely disappointed in your lack of knowledge on the subject of game audio and would caution prospective students to take your course on the history of video games. If 9.5 million projected sales does no good for Philip Glass's music, then everyone listening to "Pruit Igoe" on the radio will never ask who's music that is. Such is your logic, and it is very presumptive to say the least. You need no "Independent reliable source" to expose such logic as absurd. As far as I'm concerned, I am your independent reliable source.~Daniel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.19.73 (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Current consensus on this page is that the use of Adams music in video games in not notable. Please stop posting disruptive comments here. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Give me a valid reason for such consensus, and I will stop being frustrated, until then, you have the freedom to ignore my frustration (Or disruptive behavior as you so subjectively put it) as much as I've the freedom to express it and challenge the views of those who disagree, even if the manner is less cordial than you are used to. I will not sugar coat my true character, so don't bother to ask me to do so. I see nothing disruptive about expressing frustration, shame on you if you do. If it's one thing I don't try to do, its act holier than thou, or like a robot. I'm as real as it gets, and I expect you to also be real with me. If you are frustrated with my reasoning, I welcome your expression of disappointment with it, unlike you, and am ready to deal with the insults, especially if the person expressing frustration with me has valid reason to do so. If you want to be an emotionless robot, go right ahead, but I as a human being will continue to be human and express my emotions.

By the way, since when did providing objective facts on a wikipedia entry become a matter of consensus by people who don't give valid cause to reject information? I don't think any of you have bothered to seek the sources of information required to convince yourselves of the validity of your arguments in regards to mine, and yet you ask me to find this information in light of the citation-less entries you allow to remain on the page. My arguments are based on inductive reasoning, and should be challenged on that level. Trying to challenge my induction by imposing on me the task of deduction; this reeks of a "Tu Quoque" fallacy. Not once did I see a genuine attempt by any of you to challenge yourselves first by searching for the sources you seek, or explain to me why such sources are a necessary requirement of posting information on wikipedia, to justify keeping my entry. "The onus is on you". The fair thing to do would have been to add a "Citation needed" link next to my entry.

Lets put it this way; by the logic of your treatment on my entry, any entry on this page that requires citation, should be removed. Why weren't any of those citation-less entries removed instead of mine? You see, I hope you begin to realize that my frustrations are based on the hypocritical behavior I've witnessed throughout this community. I personally don't think that such entries should be omitted, but if you in all fairness ask of me for citations, yet remove my entry because of lack of them, you are most obviously contradicting yourselves by not removing those citationless entries as well. Perhaps if you look into why you'd allow such entries to remain, you'll begin to see a part of why I believe mine should remain as well. I will not tolerate this unfair and biased treatment, nor would you, nor should you, especially since it is the lot of you who started this with me. This is why I suspect bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.19.73 (talk) 13:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Different John C. Adams
Note: this appears to be an entirely different John C. Adams; both born in the same year and with similar backgrounds and instructors, also at Harvard, but different works. It must have caused confusion in Boston at the time. Beware the temptation to confuse the two people. Badagnani (talk) 07:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

John Adams in Video Games
I believe it is important to acknowledge the presence of John Adams's music in the cutting edge world of gaming. His contribution to gaming pretty much demonstrates that his works can fit with games appropriately and effectively to convey a rich storyline and atmosphere.

I've noticed that there is a certain somebody who has the habit of deleting my entry. Care to comment on why you are doing so?

The body of music that Adams agreed to donate to the video game world is a good way to see how well concert works fit in with video game narrative. This not only contributes to refuting the stigma and myth that game audio is simply background music, but rather, a legitimate venue of artistic expression and possibilities which lend weight to game subject matter that touches upon the state of human affairs. Civilization IV is a masterpiece of technical ingenuity and should be taken very seriously. The persons involved in the game creation process are highly intelligent, many of which are university graduates, including Jeff Briggs, who holds a Doctorate in Musical Composition and Theory from the University of Illinois. Before deleting my entry again, please allow me to address your concerns, and I will be more than happy to inform you further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.175.66 (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Daniel DeCastro, M.A. in Music Composition (New York University) www.decastromusic.com


 * First off, the addition isn't sourced. Second, if it was, it's worth no more than a passing mention in the article body as it is one minor blip in Adams' career.  It definitely does not deserve a separate section.  The track list is totally out of place here; it belongs in the Civ IV article, but not here.  I think your persecution complex over video game music has long been disproven anyway by the Video Games Live tour and various video game sound arts curricula that have been established. Finally, if all the music is second-hand, Adams really didn't do anything substantial to contribute to the video game, and their use of his music really doesn't provide any insight into Adams himself.  If Adams had composed original music for video games, that might be interesting, but let's not pretend that saying "OK, go ahead" to using snippets of old pieces somehow revolutionizes or legitimizes video games any more than using Einstein on the Beach in a Pepsi commercial somehow represents Glass' coronation of soft drink ads as high art. Torc2 (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed -- the presence of JA's music in a particular game--unless interacting with the music were a plot point of the game--is a passing mention and not appropriate for this article. I give a lecture on Adams and a lecture on video game music in my course at MIT, but I don't think that the presence of a single composer in a video game is sufficiently notable.  Try adding the information about Civ IV's music to the other composer articles (Bach, I believe? etc.) and I think you'll find a similar response. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 06:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I've considered the points above carefully and I can write a book on my issues with those points, and my first issue with the claims above is that they force me to ask questions, and seem to be proclamations of fiat. If it is not sourced, Wikipedia gives those looking for sources the option to say that it is not sourced. That would encourage me to find the time to list a source and I would do so gladly; this was not done, hence not my fault if you complain.

Second, your claim that it is only a minor blip in John Adam's career is subjective, and there are those out there like myself, who do not find it a minor blip, but rather a major indicator of John Adam's philosophy. My professor from NYU, Dr. Deniz Hughes, told me that Mr. Adams was once an academic and formalistic composer who decided for various philosophical reasons to break away from such a shallow approach and try his hand at a style that was often critiqued by formalist and modernist circles; minimalism. Having dealt with modernist attitudes in academia myself, it was an extremely unpleasant experience that I am thankfully not alone in having suffered. Given this, in order to further challenge modernist attitudes, largely a product of ignorance, elitism, and bias, I think it is important to inform those elitists who happen to be fans of John Adam's music that he is open minded enough to consider the game world seriously enough that he would give permission to lend entire works of his to be used in a gaming context.

I agree that the track list is totally out of place, but since no one made it clear to me why my previous entries were removed, I thought it was due to lack of information. You say it is too much, so thanks for letting me know. I actually felt that way too.

About your comments regarding the Video Games Live tour, you still have many game audio artists going out of their way to give concerts for the included purpose of demonstrating that game audio is not just background music and is indeed concert quality music. The director of the Eminence Symphony Orchestra, Hiroaki Yura, addressed this issue in an interview not that long ago, about 7 months to be exact, Hitoshi Sakimoto as well. This interview can be seen in my thesis on my webpage; it is the very last quicktime video. I cannot in good conscience accept your claim that Video Games Live has disproved anything so long as you have individuals in academia making negative and biased claims about game audio, and believe me, there are quite a few, with strong influence I might add. Two names I'd throw out there are Dr. Dinu Ghezzo from NYU, and Dr. Justin Dello Joio from NYU as well. If intelligent, musically educated men/teachers with strong influence over their students hold such biases, and exist in a prestigious university like NYU, I could only imagine where else they are capable of existing. I've had to deal with the negative response towards game audio from the students of these professors, and they stem from the same ignorant and elitist mentality as their professors. Fortunately, they happen to like John Adams, and if I were them, finding out that John Adam's music was part of a video game would make me think twice about my stance on the world of game audio. Who knows, it may lead me to think that Hillary Clinton is wrong about video games, and that it may in fact be a strong venue for artistic expression. I can go on and on about people who've had to deal with the same things that I did in school and admire John Adam's decision to donate his works to game audio in light of the negative attitudes many of his colleagues have towards the video game world.

Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven are not part of a live network of musicians such that questions can be asked about why their music was put in a video game, and hence, would not bother to include such information in their Wiki entries. If someone else decided to do so however, I'd have no qualms with it. I'm sure some kid who regularly listens only to hip hop music may be persuaded to stop thinking about Beethoven's music as "nerdy" if he knew it was used in one of their favorite video games. It'd only contribute to accomplish what professors teaching music appreciation classes across the country try to do on a daily basis, and I see that as a positive and important thing.

I am reluctant to accept the claim that the use of his music was second-hand. There is a huge community of gamers out there who take the audio aspect of gaming seriously, including myself. We are far from being a minority as can be seen from websites like www.vgmusic.com, www.chudahscorner.com, www.cocoebiz.com, and many others. I enjoyed the use of Adam's music in civilization 4 so much that I became an instant fan, and it was through games that I discovered the beauty of his music. This is not a "Second-Hand" effect.

"Snippets" of John Adam's music were not used; entire works in their entire lengths were used in game. Comparing a video game of this scope to a 30 second commercial is to me like comparing apples to oranges. Also, your comment seems to suggest that we should not consider the commercial that uses Philip Glass's music high art; I consider some commercials during Super Bowl halftime to be forms of extremely high art indeed.

End response to "Torc2

Professor Cuthbert, I think I addressed your point about Bach and others in my response to Torc2. Otherwise, I don't understand what it is about interacting with music in plot points throughout a game that makes it more significant than hearing the music and how it represents and enhances the context of the plot point in a game. Care to elaborate further?

Also, care to elaborate on why you thinking that the presence of a single composer in a video game is not sufficiently notable such that you'd agree that my entry be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.175.66 (talk) 04:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, let's see:


 * Second, your claim that it is only a minor blip in John Adam's career is subjective, and there are those out there like myself, who do not find it a minor blip, but rather a major indicator of John Adam's philosophy.


 * So...your subjectivity is better than my subjectivity? If you want to put forth the argument that Adams lending his music to Civ IV is somehow a major milestone in Adams' career, you can just provide a source that backs that up.  This wasn't Boulez conducting Zappa, Pierre Henry and Spooky Tooth, or even Reich Remixed; this was more analogous to the Glass Pepsi ad, or Reich's Proverb being used in an episode of Nip/Tuck.  There has been no evidence put forth that this is anything more than  a game developer's idea and a licensing agreement.


 * My professor from NYU, Dr. Deniz Hughes, told me that Mr. Adams was once an academic and formalistic composer who decided for various philosophical reasons to break away from such a shallow approach and try his hand at a style that was often critiqued by formalist and modernist circles; minimalism.


 * First off, stop trying to impress people with credentials and name dropping. I have a Ph.D. in composition, too. Who doesn't?  I have taught at a summer session where Adams was guest composer, have talked with him about music for hours, and installed a mixer in his house less than a month ago, and I still wouldn't claim the authority to speak for him instead of deferring to published articles, interviews and writing.  You don't know better than other people just because you have a degree.  Second, the extent to which Adams was an "academic" is that he went to Harvard.  And Minimalism isn't "formalistic"?  And, he "broke away" from traditional composition in the late '60s, when he was in his early 20s, which doesn't really suggest he was firmly entrenched in any modernist style.  Fluent in it?  Sure, but a lot of composition students are.


 * I am reluctant to accept the claim that the use of his music was second-hand. There is a huge community of gamers out there who take the audio aspect of gaming seriously, including myself. We are far from being a minority as can be seen from websites like www.vgmusic.com, www.chudahscorner.com, www.cocoebiz.com, and many others. I enjoyed the use of Adam's music in civilization 4 so much that I became an instant fan, and it was through games that I discovered the beauty of his music. This is not a "Second-Hand" effect.


 * Did he compose new music specifically for the video game, yes or no? No?  It's second hand.


 * "Snippets" of John Adam's music were not used; entire works in their entire lengths were used in game. Comparing a video game of this scope to a 30 second commercial is to me like comparing apples to oranges. Also, your comment seems to suggest that we should not consider the commercial that uses Philip Glass's music high art; I consider some commercials during Super Bowl halftime to be forms of extremely high art indeed. 


 * Do you think Glass consider the use of Einstein in a Pepsi commercial to be high art? No, he saw it as a way to fund his studio for a year.  (How do I know?  He said so in a lecture at SUNY Buffalo a couple years back.)  Do you have any verifiable, sourced evidence that Adams, (1) wrote any new music or had any part in the use of preexisting music beyond simply approving its use, (2) donated that music for free (3) because he considers video games as high art, and that he (4) considers this a major step in his career?  Do you really believe this warrants as much screen time as winning the Pulitzer Prize or being named the BBC Symphony Orchestra's Artist in Association?  No, this is important to you, and you're projecting that it must therefore be important to Adams or to most readers.  If it is, simply find a reliable source that says this.  Find the interviews or published article that discuss the significance.  It really is just that easy to get this information included.


 * Also, care to elaborate on why you thinking that the presence of a single composer in a video game is not sufficiently notable such that you'd agree that my entry be removed?
 * This is false. Adams is not the only composer in the game; he's not even the only living composer in the game.

--Torc2 (talk) 05:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * "So...your subjectivity is better than my subjectivity?"
 * No, I never claimed this, I was merely pointing out that subjective claims have no place in an encyclopedic entry. And by agreeing to remove my entry, you obviously seem to think that your subjectivity is better than mine. Is this considered vandalism? Hypocrisy much? I think it should be.


 * "If you want to put forth the argument that Adams lending his music to Civ IV is somehow a major milestone in Adams' career, you can just provide a source that backs that up."
 * I don't need to because this isn't about a milestone in his career. This is about information exchange, interesting facts, and as I said before, my entry touches upon an interesting topic; human bias. I like to think that the goal of information exchange for places like Wikipedia are to not only provide interesting facts about people, but also to challenge conventions and notions that people may hold about certain persons places or things. You seem to be reluctant to admit that John Adams being in a game is significant in any way. I want to, need to, and will challenge that. So long as the entry for film music is allowed, I see no reason for the entry for game music not to be. Even if it was about a milestone in his career, Civilization 4 sold 1.5 million units worldwide, which means you have 1.5 million extra people exposed to his music. I don't know where you draw the line for milestones, but last I checked, it takes 1 million album sales to go platinum.


 * "There has been no evidence put forth that this is anything more than a game developer's idea and a licensing agreement."
 * Actually, I grant you that it very well is nothing more than a game developer's idea and a licensing agreement. So what? This shouldn't make it any less significant a form of information.


 * "First off, stop trying to impress people with credentials and name dropping. I have a Ph.D. in composition, too. Who doesn't?  I have taught at a summer session where Adams was guest composer, have talked with him about music for hours, and installed a mixer in his house less than a month ago, and I still wouldn't claim the authority to speak for him instead of deferring to published articles, interviews and writing.  You don't know better than other people just because you have a degree."
 * I wasn't trying to impress anyone, and by dropping the fact that you have a PHD makes you a hypocrite. Why do you think I need to know that you have a PHD? I can tell you that I have absolutely no problem knowing that you have a phd, unlike you. Unlike you I respect that there is a greater chance of you knowing more than I do having a PHD. I'm not that full of myself nor am I so insecure that I have to scold others for mentioning their creds. Anyhow, I'd love to sit down and ask Adams why he gave the "OK" for such a thing considering the stigma attributed to video games. How does he feel about his music working so well in a video game? There are indeed those who would say that game music is just background music and has no real effect outside of the game. Such claims are easily refuted with the evidence that I post above, so how would Adams respond to that? You keep removing this however and contribute to allowing ignorant claims run rampant.


 * "Second, the extent to which Adams was an "academic" is that he went to Harvard. And Minimalism isn't "formalistic"?  And, he "broke away" from traditional composition in the late '60s, when he was in his early 20s, which doesn't really suggest he was firmly entrenched in any modernist style.  Fluent in it?  Sure, but a lot of composition students are."
 * You are incorrect. Adams, embraced academic music early on and shunned popular culture and other forms of music like many elitists and modernists do. He was a biased young man with narrow views given this. He broke away from this mentality (Thankfully) by taking up the practice of minimalistic composition, a style shunned by many of his contemporaries at the time. As a musician, you should know the crap that minimalists had to deal with from modernist formalists out to find flaws in minimalism and go out of their way to consider it "Pop" music with no lasting art value. This is no secret. Ask him yourself next time you see him. If you can, show him my posts, maybe he can set me and my professor straight once and for all. Minimalism is formalist, I never denied that or said that it wasn't. Be careful. Dr. Justin Dello Joio, a modernist formalist from NYU doesn't like Philip Glass. Ask him why and you'll see the biased and ignorant comments he makes. All I know is, I feel worried for Mr. Dello Joio's students who are fans of and composers of minimalist music. Dr. Ghezzo, director of music composition at NYU was still showing his students the flaws of minimalism as a whole last I checked. This is a major mistake considering how far Mr. Adams has taken the style, and how capable he is of inspiring emotive responses like tears, heart racing, and galvanic skin response; the highest and most positive form of human emotive responses. Haven't you ever gotten goosebumps from Adam's music? I have and let me tell you, when music can do this to someone, the composer has done something very interesting. Dr. Ghezzo is not alone in his stance and I find it frightening.

Mr. Adams has contributed to demonstrating how well art can work within the world of gaming, a world that seems looked down upon by persons like yourself.


 * "Did he compose new music specifically for the video game, yes or no? No?  It's second hand."
 * Did Bach compose his music specifically for a harpsichord, yes or no? No?  It's second hand, Then again, not really. We don't say that Bach's music when used with a different instrument is second hand, so why say it with a video game? That is one of the beauties of Bach's music is that you can set it to damn near any combination of instruments and can fit to express subjects which the music has affinity with. I wouldn't dare call the use of Bach's music "Second Hand" when his harpsichord concerto was used during a scene from the movie "Tomb Raider" where Lara Croft was gracefully swinging on the chandeliers. His music was very graceful and served to enhance the scene in a very memorable way. You commit the intentional fallacy by stating the above and I therefore disagree. I disagree because even though Adam's music was already composed before inclusion, it does not mean that a score of such quality could not have been written for the game. I've heard plenty a game score capable of eliciting similar degrees of complexity, elegance, and emotive impact and take them with the same degree of seriousness I take Mr. Adam's music. Just take a listen to scores from game composers Yoko Kanno, Hitoshi Sakimoto, Nobuo Uematsu, Masashi Hamauzu, Jeremy Soule, and many other game composers, and you'll see how far game audio has come. This notion of things being "Second Hand" implies "Intent" on behalf of the composer. This is a mistake. Composers should be open to their works having affinity with many different spheres of communication and expression. This affinity compliments the end product of any medium as part of "First Hand" developmental mechanics; the intent to produce quality product. Without sound, games become aesthetically handicapped.


 * "Do you think Glass consider the use of Einstein in a Pepsi commercial to be high art? No, he saw it as a way to fund his studio for a year.  (How do I know?  He said so in a lecture at SUNY Buffalo a couple years back.)"

And you think that just because he said so that it should be accepted as objective fact? No. There are people out there who take what he did as high art, and I'm willing to accept that. I am of the school of thought that post-modernists should be allowed to consider a dot that I draw on a canvas of paint, high art, or a work by John Cage where he sits in front of a piano for a couple of minutes without doing anything high art. I don't personally consider it so, but I will not remove entries where my personal feelings get in the way of respecting that others see significance in things that for some reason my lived conscious experience has not led me to do so, unlike you. Maybe I should remove John Adam's entry on film music... Nah, I'm not that full of myself. This is Wikipedia sir, and so long as I'm stating facts with purpose, you will keep seeing my entry. If you don't like it, you have every right to ignore it. There is alot of "art" out there that has no lasting value for me, and that's ok! It is art to someone else, and that's great! I have an issue with the whole idea of art anyways; the acceptance of creations into it's circle are often times the result of cultural influences that can shift for and against those creations at any given moment via factors that no one on this planet is yet capable of explaining elegantly. There is no E=MC2 in artistic viability. I am therefore an art atheist.


 * "Do you have any verifiable, sourced evidence that Adams, (1) wrote any new music or had any part in the use of preexisting music beyond simply approving its use, (2) donated that music for free (3) because he considers video games as high art, and that he (4) considers this a major step in his career? Do you really believe this warrants as much screen time as winning the Pulitzer Prize or being named the BBC Symphony Orchestra's Artist in Association?  No, this is important to you, and you're projecting that it must therefore be important to Adams or to most readers.  If it is, simply find a reliable source that says this.  Find the interviews or published article that discuss the significance.  It really is just that easy to get this information included."

I have way too many issues with this string of comments. I really think it is a case of lost in translation between people from two different cultures. I can easily ask you to go through this entire planet asking everybody if they care about my entry. I guarantee you that it will not be significant to just myself. You are projecting that it is only important to me because you are a biased individual. It's quite obvious to me. I'm not that much of an ass to request that from you and I know you won't do it, therefore mentioning this following line is moot: "No, this is important to you, and you're projecting that it must therefore be important to Adams or to most readers." So long as you have no conclusive evidence for this, I see it as nothing more than passive aggression on your part. Let's avoid the PA please. I really do mean well and have genuine concerns.

Eliot Carter won the Pulitzer, and the man has people who don't think he deserved it, including Dr. Justin Dello Joio from NYU. A pulitzer means nothing to some people. I'm one of them.

I have to go, will be back later to address your numbered comments. In order to avoid sidetracking, please wait to respond until I return, I would gladly do the same for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.175.66 (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No, please just stop. This isn't supposed to be a chat page.  My concerns and the questions I asked are all explicitly based on key Wikipedia principles, which include WP:V, WP:N, WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:BLP and WP:NOT.  I did not ask you haphazard information just to make you jump through hoops; I did it specifically to give you an idea of what the threshold for inclusion is.  Something being true and "interesting" to you is not basis for inclusion in Wikipedia. Pontificating about how well the music fits is not encyclopedic.  The last thing that should ever included in an article on John Adams is a Wikipedia editor's opinion of his work or of its importance within a field.  Stick to the facts.  Find professional, published, reliable sources that says what you're trying to say, then add it, and limit it to Adams' personal involvement with the project, not the world of video game music, or how other composers work with video games, etc. (see Coatrack).
 * The last thing I will say on the matter is this: "Mr. Adams has contributed to demonstrating how well art can work within the world of gaming, a world that seems looked down upon by persons like yourself." is the perfect encapsulation of your lack of objectivity on this matter. First, you have not shown how Adams has contributed at all.  What effort did he personally make in this?  Second, you haven't shown that the use of Adams' music was revolutionary at all - who besides you says it is?  Find a source and include it.  Art and art music has been used in video games for years.  Finally, please don't ascribe beliefs to me or to anybody else without any supporting evidence.  I never denigrated gaming or game music, and you have no idea whatsoever what my opinion on the matter is.  This is, again, just a projection you're making because I'm disagreeing with you on one point.  Your accusation of vandalism is also way, way out of line, and I suggest you read the vandalism guideline before you make such an allegation again.  It was my responsibility to remove those additions; you should not have, and should not re-add them without a reliable source.
 * Normal procedure from here would be to request a third party opinion, but one was already given above. If you still insist on escalating this, you can make a Request for Comment, but I can guarantee you that most editors will say the same thing, and will agree that, barring any kind of reliable sources stating otherwise, the one-line inclusion currently in the article is sufficient, and possibly even extraneous. Torc2 (talk) 19:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, somebody added that John Adam's music was featured in the game Civilization 4. That was not me just for the record. Are you going to delete that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.175.66 (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it was you.. Thanks! That's a cool fact =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.175.66 (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note, WP:Coatrack is no more than a controversial essay, as the essay template at the top of WP:Coatrack states: "Heed them or not at your own discretion." On the other hand, Content forking, a content guideline, states: "Since what qualifies as a "POV fork" is itself based on a POV judgement, do not refer to forks as "POV" except in extreme cases of persistent disruptive editing." This rule nulifies WP:Coatrack. travb (talk) 17:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I would say perhaps we should mention Civ IV, since it uses a huge selection of his compositions for its soundtrack: Christian Zeal and Activity Common Tones in Simple Time Grand Pianola Music: Part IA Grand Pianola Music: Part IB Harmonielehre: Part I Harmonielehre: Part II. The Anfortas Wound Harmonielehre: Part III. Meister Eckhardt and Quackie Shaker Loops: I. Shaking And Trembling Shaker Loops: II. Hymning Slews Shaker Loops: III. Loops And Verses The Chairman Dances: Foxtrot for Orchestra The People Are The Heroes Now (from Nixon in China) Two Fanfares: Tromba Lontana Violin Concerto: II. Chaconne: Body Through Which The Dream Flows 216.167.172.40 (talk) 20:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Tanglewood
Did John Adams attend Tanglewood? If so, when? Badagnani (talk) 07:29, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Degrees
Some sources state that he got his B.A. in 1969 (not 1971) and his M.A. in 1971 (not 1972).


 * What sources? --S.dedalus (talk) 04:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this is one of them, but it appears that it's not our John C. Adams, but a different John C. Adams who studied composition at Harvard during the same exact years. How confusing. Badagnani (talk) 03:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)