"Opinions on Cage run the whole spectrum between genius and fraud. What's your opinion of him and what he does?"
I think that John Cage was a visionary who was (and still is) light years ahead of his time. For example, he was scratching turntables 50 years before hip-hop made it popular. When it comes to avant-garde art in all it's forms, I have a simple rule: If an artist can draw a horse that looks like a horse, then I'm inclined to give him my attention and consider what he has to say. Too often, an avant-garde artist has no talent and uses the medium to slop paint around and run over it with a truck and hope to be hailed as a genius. Occasionally, the ruse works. Jackson Pollack, Andy Warhol, Marcel Duchamp--------------they, among many others, could draw a horse that looked like a horse. I think they had a statement to make, and I try to understand them. Most, I'm afraid, have no talent whatsoever.
Same with avant-garde music: If an avant-garde musician can play a Mozart sonata and do pretty good with it, then I'm inclined to give him my attention. John Cage could play a Mozart sonata and do pretty good with it. So could Phillip Glass, Terry Riley, Charles Wuorinen, among many others. But most probably just bang around and splice tape and play records backwards and hope to be hailed as a modern genius for our times.
I have a record of 4'33" and I heard it performed one time by an extremely good pianist. At first, the tension is palpable. Soon it become almost unbearable. By the time it's over, nerves are frayed and everybody is pretty much on edge. 4 minutes and 33 seconds is the cut-off----------------------to go much more than that is asking for trouble.
I think it's interesting that over the years the John Cage Estate has brought several lawsuits against composers and even rock bands who incorporate silence in their music. In at least one case, the composer had to pay out a couple hundred thousand dollars for his minute of silence. I'm not sure what to think about that.
David