"In art there are only fast or slow developments. Essentially it is a matter of evolution, not revolution"
About this Quote
Bartok’s line is a cool rebuke to the romance of the artistic “breakthrough.” Coming from a composer routinely labeled a modernist firebrand, it’s almost mischievously deflationary: the man who helped redraw 20th-century music insists he wasn’t detonating tradition, just speeding up (or slowing down) its metabolism. The punch is in the binary: fast or slow. No third option where art springs immaculate from nowhere.
The intent is partly protective. Bartok is arguing for continuity at a moment when “revolution” was a buzzword in both politics and culture, and when audiences were primed to treat new music as a hostile regime change. By framing change as evolution, he recasts dissonance, rhythmic violence, and unfamiliar forms as the next stage of a living system, not an assault on listeners. It’s persuasion disguised as aesthetics.
The subtext is also autobiographical. Bartok’s real innovation wasn’t a rejection of the past but a rerouting of it: his fieldwork collecting folk music becomes raw material for new harmonies and structures, making “progress” look less like a manifesto and more like inheritance put under pressure. Even his hardest-edged pieces feel like they have ancestry.
Context matters: in the early 1900s, “revolutionary” art often traveled with ideological swagger. Bartok’s skepticism reads as a refusal of branding. He’s telling us that art’s most radical moves usually arrive wearing the clothes of patient accumulation, and the loudest “new” thing is often just an old thing finally pushed far enough to sound unfamiliar.
The intent is partly protective. Bartok is arguing for continuity at a moment when “revolution” was a buzzword in both politics and culture, and when audiences were primed to treat new music as a hostile regime change. By framing change as evolution, he recasts dissonance, rhythmic violence, and unfamiliar forms as the next stage of a living system, not an assault on listeners. It’s persuasion disguised as aesthetics.
The subtext is also autobiographical. Bartok’s real innovation wasn’t a rejection of the past but a rerouting of it: his fieldwork collecting folk music becomes raw material for new harmonies and structures, making “progress” look less like a manifesto and more like inheritance put under pressure. Even his hardest-edged pieces feel like they have ancestry.
Context matters: in the early 1900s, “revolutionary” art often traveled with ideological swagger. Bartok’s skepticism reads as a refusal of branding. He’s telling us that art’s most radical moves usually arrive wearing the clothes of patient accumulation, and the loudest “new” thing is often just an old thing finally pushed far enough to sound unfamiliar.
Quote Details
| Topic | Art |
|---|
More Quotes by Bela
Add to List
