In the latest post I defined myself as some kind of conceptual neoestheticist. But I think that both this choice of words and the actual view behind it needs some clarification. I would define neoestheticism as a renewed interest in esthetic values. This does not necessarily mean a renewed interest in some previous esthetic system, as a concept like neoclassicism would imply. Conceptual art could be defined as art were the abstract thought and ideas behind it takes precedence over the esthetic value; or as art were the abstract thought and ideas behind it takes precedence over the craftmanship in making the art. Both these definitions could in a way be in opposition to my supposed integration between conceptualism and estheticism. I would instead define it in less opposing terms. Conceptual estheticism or conceptual neoesteticism is then by my use of it the theory that abstract thought and ideas and esthetic values both are important in the creation of art and music.
Here I publish information of the music I've written. I also blog about my projects and thoughts about music in general.
I am a contemporary classical composer and compose music for classical musicians, but as you can see from my worklist I've also done other things - including live electronics, electroacoustic music (eam) and music for other types of ensembles (e.g. a jazz trio).
My works have been performed globally, including Europe, Asia and North America.