[Originally published in EST magazine, 1995. Time has shown my original view to be unfair and if I reviewed it again today I'd be far less critical - it remains an excellent sourcebook and it's a shame the author is deceased and the book out of print].

The world's not short of studies of post-war classical avant-garde music; Thomas Holmes' Electronic and Experimental Music, Andy MacKay's Electronic Music, Michael Nyman's Cage and Beyond, the discographical New Sounds, Tom Johnson's anecdotal The Voice of New Music, and Paul Griffiths' two contributions, Modern Music and A Guide to Electronic Music are just a few. So what can another volume offer?

Well, until Nyman's volume is republished (due this year) [actually republished in 1999], New Perspectives in Music has the advantage, at least, of being in print and readily available, but it has other qualities that set it apart from the others. Perhaps the most important is its refreshing subjectivity. Unlike, say, Griffiths, who has a very traditional concern for analysis of the score, Sutherland is happy to describe music by visual analogy, and happy also to let his unrestrained enthusiasm for the work of composers like Xenakis and Parmegiani infect the reader.

New Perspectives also penetrates topics like sound sculpture, Luigi Russolo's music and the relationship between the musical and artistic avant-gardes with far more thoroughness than most others. The book (thankfully) isn't bogged down in the technological history that dominates most histories of electronic music, nor does it waste undue time on the serialist developments which have achieved mainstream prominence.

If, like me, you've come to the classical avant-garde via more populist forms of electronic and abstract music, then you'll probably find it as useful a sourcebook as I did. It also achieves the rare feat in this field of actually inspiring the reader to seek out the music.

The list of criticisms that can be made of the book is unfortunately longer than the list of its merits. Unlike Holmes' book, you won't find SPK and Stockhausen on the same page here, nor Merzbow and Ilhan Mimaroglu. Sutherland evidently still believes that the dividing line between "serious" and "popular" experimental music has some meaning, and I obviously find this disagreeable.

This extends to other oversights; improvisation outside the classical arena is generally ignored, with only groups like MEV and AMM covered, and most free jazz and free improv music treated as outside the book's boundaries. More visible cross-overs between classical and pop avant-gardes (Eno, Branca, "intelligent" techno, "cosmic" music etc) also make no appearance, fostering the impression that sonic experimentation only occurs in an elite realm available only to a tiny audience.

This also isn't a book to read if you're interested in only the latest developments or any sort of comprehensive approach. Sutherland's musical history focusses only on the big boys (and they are all boys), to the extent that anyone seeking to learn about, say, Pauline Oliveros, had better look elsewhere.

Artists like Trevor Wishart, Steve Moore, John Oswald, Jim O'Rourke, Paul Dolden, Roger Doyle, Phill Niblock, Asmus Tietchens and countless others are conspicuous by their absence, indicative of a lack of interest in both "minor" artists (read: lacking in fame, not talent), and in more recent developments. With the omission of Oswald, it's clear that one of the most important strands of recent musical "progress" might as well not be happening.

Concerns with improvisation, indeterminacy, graphic scores and systems music have preoccupied the classical avant garde throughout this century, and accordingly Sutherland devotes due attention to these various methods of producing music. The other side of the coin, issues concerning the ways music is perceived, or its social function, receive little attention, although it's fair to say that this is a problem with the classical critical establishment as a whole and not just this book.

Other identifiable flaws include a lack of editing (individual chapters' origins as separate magazine articles show up very clearly), and a lack of copy-editing (typos and layout imperfections).

It is, of course, easy to pick fault, and despite its narrow scope, I enjoyed New Perspectives and find it to be a valuable reference material. It's lucid and articulate without being overly dry. If you can live with its limits and the price fits your pocket, it deserves your attention. ( )