Discussion:
SEM ORCHESTRA PREMIERS 2 MAJOR WORK AT LINCOLN CENTER
P***@aol.com
2002-04-09 22:18:49 UTC
Permalink
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2002 at 8 p.m.
The Orchestra of the S.E.M. Ensemble
Thomas Buckner, Baritone
Petr Kotik, Conductor
Alice Tully Hall, Lincoln Center, New York City

PROGRAM:
Jean-Philippe Rameau - Naïs Overture (1749)
Josef Suk - Meditation on the Choral St. Venceslav (1914)
Somei Satoh - Kyokoku (U.S. premiere) (2001)
Petr Kotik - Music in Two Movements (premiere) (1998-2002)

TICKETS:
$25, $15. 50 % discount for students and seniors & Friends of S.E.M. Ensemble
Alice Tully Hall Box Office: 212/875-5050; CenterCharge 212/721-6500
Patron Tickets: $500 Boxes A; $80 Preferred orchestra seats; $60 Boxes B seats
Patron and Friends of SEM Tickets available through the SEM office only at
718/488-7659

THE ORCHESTRA OF THE S.E.M. ENSEMBLE had its debut in 1992 at Carnegie Hall,
where it gave the first complete performance of Atlas Eclipticalis, by John
Cage, with an 86-piece orchestra and David Tudor as the soloist. It was
formed by Petr Kotik as an extension of the chamber music group S.E.M.
Ensemble. SEM Orchestra now performs regularly in New York, and overseas.
Its April 24th concert will mark the orchestra’s fifth concert at Alice Tully
Hall since 1993. SEM Orchestra has commissioned and premiered numerous
compositions by such composers as Maria de Alvear, Muhal Richard Abrams,
Alvin Lucier, Roscoe Mitchell, Akemi Naito, Phill Niblock, Somei Satoh, Sinan
Savaskan, Martin Smolka, Henry Threadgill and Christian Wolff. Since 1999,
SEM has collaborated with the Janácek Philharmonic Orchestra, from Ostrava,
Czech Republic. The two ensembles have presented music for three orchestras
at the Prague Spring Festival 1999, the Warsaw Autumn 2000 and at the
Philharmonic Hall in Ostrava. They have performed GRUPPEN, by Karlheinz
Stockhausen, MODULES I,II,III, by Earle Brown and new works by Alvin Lucier,
Martin Smolka and Christian Wolff.

PETR KOTIK (b. 1942 in Prague, Czech Republic) has lived in the United States
since 1969. In 1970, he founded the S.E.M. ENSEMBLE, which, in 1992,
expanded into THE ORCHESTRA OF THE S.E.M. ENSEMBLE.
As a composer, Kotik regards himself as self-taught, despite having studied
composition at the Music Academy in Vienna from 1963 to 1966. By 1966, Kotik
had developed his compositional method, based on regulated chance procedures
and visual (graphic) material, transposed into notation, these devices have
remained part of his technique up to the present day. Kotik’s music is
essentially polyphonic which may be due to his disinterest in, and also
lacking of sense of, harmony (similar to John Cage and Christian Wolff).
Throughout the years, Kotik’s compositions often created more confusion then
enthusiasm, as for example, at the 1964 Warsaw Autumn Festival, when, during
the premiere of his MUSIC FOR 3, most of the audience walked out. (“In the
past, no one quite knew what to make of [Kotik’s] music, just as few know tod
ay.” – Kyle Gann, The Village Voice, 1998). Kotik still performs as a
flutist and is becoming increasingly active as conductor, both in the U.S.
and Europe. Among his best-known works are MANY MANY WOMEN (1976-78), based
on a text by Gertrude Stein, EXPLORATIONS IN THE GEOMETRY OF THINKING
(1978-81), based on texts by R. Buckminster Fuller, and his orchestra works
QUIESCENT FORM (1996) and ADAGIO (1997).

Kotik began composing MUSIC IN TWO MOVEMENTS in December 1997, and by
February 1998 the first movement, FRAGMENT, was completed. The second
movement, ASYMMETRIC LANDING, was composed between January 2001 and March
2002. The two movements have been performed previously as separate
works-in-progress. On April 24th, 2002, the entire composition (ca. 55 min.)
will be premiered in its final form.

SOMEI SATOH (b. 1947) has emerged as one of Japan’s most acclaimed composers
of the post-Takemitsu era. Essentially an autodidact, Satoh arrived at
composition through the spiritual practice of Zen Buddhism and Shintoism. In
his compositions, he strives for simplicity by creating music, which
transcends a timelessly static feeling.

Satoh’s earliest compositions, mostly for solo piano, date to the beginning
of 1970s. The techniques he developed during this period were close to those
of the American minimalists of the time. Later, his style reflected greater
complexity and toward the end of 1980s, his works had moved closer to
romantic sensuality. The static element, however, has remained constant
throughout Satoh’s oeuvre. In his most recent works, Satoh’s tempo marking
requires quarter note to be MM 20, leading on occasion to a loss of all sense
of tempo.

KYOKOKU (The Valley), written for baritone and orchestra, is Satoh’s
largest-scale work to date. It was commissioned by Mutable Music for Thomas
Buckner, to whom it is dedicated. Buckner premiered Kyokoku last August at
the Ostrava New Music Days Festival with the Janácek Philharmonic Orchestra,
Petr Kotik, Conductor. The text is an excerpt from the ancient Chinese book
Tao Te Ting, by Lao Tse.

THOMAS BUCKNER, baritone, is one of the world’s foremost new music
performers. His diligent, focused work and his willingness to take risks
have earned him admiration and respect from both musicians and concertgoers
around the globe. Buckner maintains an active performance schedule, and has
toured throughout North America, Europe, Asia and Africa (recently, he
performed with members of the Dogon tribe in Mali, West Africa). For over
two decades, Buckner has commissioned works by emerging as well as
established composers such as Robert Ashley, David Behrman, Jon Gibson, Leroy
Jenkins, Roscoe Mitchell, Annea Lockwood, Alvin Lucier, Pauline Oliveros,
Morton Subotnick, Ushio Torikai and David Wessel. Buckner is also a producer
of new music - in the 1980s, he managed the San Francisco based 1750 Arch
Records, and since the early 1990s he has directed the Interpretations series
at Merkin Concert Hall in New York City. Most recently, he has established a
new CD label “Mutable Music” dedicated to cross-influences of new music,
improvisation and jazz.

The life and work of JEAN PHILIPPE RAMEAU (1683-1764) could be compared to
that of John Cage. Both composers lived to be 80, both were able to devote
themselves fully to composition after they reached the age of 50, and both
published books that made an impact on music almost equal to that of their
compositions. They both irritated “mainstream” audiences and worked for
most of their lives on a low budget (Voltaire, for example, asked the Paris
Opera to send his fee for collaborating on the opera Le Temple de la Gloire
to Rameau, explaining that “Rameau’s fortune is so inferior to his talents,
that it is fair the fee be entirely his”).

NAIS was commissioned by the Paris Opera to celebrate the Peace Treaty of
Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748, which ended the War of the Austrian succession. (In
London, the treaty was celebrated by Handel’s FIREWORKS MUSIC.) Although the
opera itself is a pastorale, the overture is altogether different. It
depicts an attempt by Titans to storm Olympus. They are successfully
repelled by Jupiter and Neptune (read Louis XV and George II of England) who
use the thunder and lightning to avert the attack.

JOSEF SUK (1874-1935) is the best known of the composers working in Prague at
the turn of the century (Janácek lived and worked in Brno). At the time,
Suk’s career was overshadowed by such figures as Vítezslav Novák and Karel
Kovarovic, whose music is hardly known today. Suk derived most his income
from performing as violinist in the renown, Bohemian String Quartet. From
1922 on, he taught composition at the Prague Conservatory, and became its
Director in 1930.

Initially written for the Bohemian String Quartet, MEDITATION ON THE CHORAL
ST. VENCESLAV was composed in 1914 at the onset of World War I. To avoid
performing the Austrian anthem at the start of each concert, as was expected
during the war, the quartet asked Suk to compose a short piece based on a
national theme. The choice of the St. Venceslav Choral was logical, St.
Venceslav being the patron-saint of the Czech nation. Meditation became very
popular and a few months after its premiere, Suk re-orchestrated it for
string orchestra for concerts by the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra.





-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
christopher shultis
2002-04-10 01:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Thought I should mention that the University of New Mexico Symphony Orchestra under
my direction did the complete Altlas Eclipticalis (all 86 parts) in 1988 as part of
the UNM Composers Symposium where John Cage was the featured guest. I don't know if
ours was the first but it did occur four years prior to the 1992 SEM performance
listed below. The students worked awfully hard so if it was the first I thought
they should be brought to the lists attention!

Best regards,

Chris Shultis
Post by P***@aol.com
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2002 at 8 p.m.
The Orchestra of the S.E.M. Ensemble
Thomas Buckner, Baritone
Petr Kotik, Conductor
Alice Tully Hall, Lincoln Center, New York City
Jean-Philippe Rameau - Naïs Overture (1749)
Josef Suk - Meditation on the Choral St. Venceslav (1914)
Somei Satoh - Kyokoku (U.S. premiere) (2001)
Petr Kotik - Music in Two Movements (premiere) (1998-2002)
$25, $15. 50 % discount for students and seniors & Friends of S.E.M. Ensemble
Alice Tully Hall Box Office: 212/875-5050; CenterCharge 212/721-6500
Patron Tickets: $500 Boxes A; $80 Preferred orchestra seats; $60 Boxes B seats
Patron and Friends of SEM Tickets available through the SEM office only at
718/488-7659
THE ORCHESTRA OF THE S.E.M. ENSEMBLE had its debut in 1992 at Carnegie Hall,
where it gave the first complete performance of Atlas Eclipticalis, by John
Cage, with an 86-piece orchestra and David Tudor as the soloist. It was
formed by Petr Kotik as an extension of the chamber music group S.E.M.
Ensemble. SEM Orchestra now performs regularly in New York, and overseas.
Its April 24th concert will mark the orchestra’s fifth concert at Alice Tully
Hall since 1993. SEM Orchestra has commissioned and premiered numerous
compositions by such composers as Maria de Alvear, Muhal Richard Abrams,
Alvin Lucier, Roscoe Mitchell, Akemi Naito, Phill Niblock, Somei Satoh, Sinan
Savaskan, Martin Smolka, Henry Threadgill and Christian Wolff. Since 1999,
SEM has collaborated with the Janácek Philharmonic Orchestra, from Ostrava,
Czech Republic. The two ensembles have presented music for three orchestras
at the Prague Spring Festival 1999, the Warsaw Autumn 2000 and at the
Philharmonic Hall in Ostrava. They have performed GRUPPEN, by Karlheinz
Stockhausen, MODULES I,II,III, by Earle Brown and new works by Alvin Lucier,
Martin Smolka and Christian Wolff.
PETR KOTIK (b. 1942 in Prague, Czech Republic) has lived in the United States
since 1969. In 1970, he founded the S.E.M. ENSEMBLE, which, in 1992,
expanded into THE ORCHESTRA OF THE S.E.M. ENSEMBLE.
As a composer, Kotik regards himself as self-taught, despite having studied
composition at the Music Academy in Vienna from 1963 to 1966. By 1966, Kotik
had developed his compositional method, based on regulated chance procedures
and visual (graphic) material, transposed into notation, these devices have
remained part of his technique up to the present day. Kotik’s music is
essentially polyphonic which may be due to his disinterest in, and also
lacking of sense of, harmony (similar to John Cage and Christian Wolff).
Throughout the years, Kotik’s compositions often created more confusion then
enthusiasm, as for example, at the 1964 Warsaw Autumn Festival, when, during
the premiere of his MUSIC FOR 3, most of the audience walked out. (“In the
past, no one quite knew what to make of [Kotik’s] music, just as few know tod
ay.” – Kyle Gann, The Village Voice, 1998). Kotik still performs as a
flutist and is becoming increasingly active as conductor, both in the U.S.
and Europe. Among his best-known works are MANY MANY WOMEN (1976-78), based
on a text by Gertrude Stein, EXPLORATIONS IN THE GEOMETRY OF THINKING
(1978-81), based on texts by R. Buckminster Fuller, and his orchestra works
QUIESCENT FORM (1996) and ADAGIO (1997).
Kotik began composing MUSIC IN TWO MOVEMENTS in December 1997, and by
February 1998 the first movement, FRAGMENT, was completed. The second
movement, ASYMMETRIC LANDING, was composed between January 2001 and March
2002. The two movements have been performed previously as separate
works-in-progress. On April 24th, 2002, the entire composition (ca. 55 min.)
will be premiered in its final form.
SOMEI SATOH (b. 1947) has emerged as one of Japan’s most acclaimed composers
of the post-Takemitsu era. Essentially an autodidact, Satoh arrived at
composition through the spiritual practice of Zen Buddhism and Shintoism. In
his compositions, he strives for simplicity by creating music, which
transcends a timelessly static feeling.
Satoh’s earliest compositions, mostly for solo piano, date to the beginning
of 1970s. The techniques he developed during this period were close to those
of the American minimalists of the time. Later, his style reflected greater
complexity and toward the end of 1980s, his works had moved closer to
romantic sensuality. The static element, however, has remained constant
throughout Satoh’s oeuvre. In his most recent works, Satoh’s tempo marking
requires quarter note to be MM 20, leading on occasion to a loss of all sense
of tempo.
KYOKOKU (The Valley), written for baritone and orchestra, is Satoh’s
largest-scale work to date. It was commissioned by Mutable Music for Thomas
Buckner, to whom it is dedicated. Buckner premiered Kyokoku last August at
the Ostrava New Music Days Festival with the Janácek Philharmonic Orchestra,
Petr Kotik, Conductor. The text is an excerpt from the ancient Chinese book
Tao Te Ting, by Lao Tse.
THOMAS BUCKNER, baritone, is one of the world’s foremost new music
performers. His diligent, focused work and his willingness to take risks
have earned him admiration and respect from both musicians and concertgoers
around the globe. Buckner maintains an active performance schedule, and has
toured throughout North America, Europe, Asia and Africa (recently, he
performed with members of the Dogon tribe in Mali, West Africa). For over
two decades, Buckner has commissioned works by emerging as well as
established composers such as Robert Ashley, David Behrman, Jon Gibson, Leroy
Jenkins, Roscoe Mitchell, Annea Lockwood, Alvin Lucier, Pauline Oliveros,
Morton Subotnick, Ushio Torikai and David Wessel. Buckner is also a producer
of new music - in the 1980s, he managed the San Francisco based 1750 Arch
Records, and since the early 1990s he has directed the Interpretations series
at Merkin Concert Hall in New York City. Most recently, he has established a
new CD label “Mutable Music” dedicated to cross-influences of new music,
improvisation and jazz.
The life and work of JEAN PHILIPPE RAMEAU (1683-1764) could be compared to
that of John Cage. Both composers lived to be 80, both were able to devote
themselves fully to composition after they reached the age of 50, and both
published books that made an impact on music almost equal to that of their
compositions. They both irritated “mainstream” audiences and worked for
most of their lives on a low budget (Voltaire, for example, asked the Paris
Opera to send his fee for collaborating on the opera Le Temple de la Gloire
to Rameau, explaining that “Rameau’s fortune is so inferior to his talents,
that it is fair the fee be entirely his”).
NAIS was commissioned by the Paris Opera to celebrate the Peace Treaty of
Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748, which ended the War of the Austrian succession. (In
London, the treaty was celebrated by Handel’s FIREWORKS MUSIC.) Although the
opera itself is a pastorale, the overture is altogether different. It
depicts an attempt by Titans to storm Olympus. They are successfully
repelled by Jupiter and Neptune (read Louis XV and George II of England) who
use the thunder and lightning to avert the attack.
JOSEF SUK (1874-1935) is the best known of the composers working in Prague at
the turn of the century (Janácek lived and worked in Brno). At the time,
Suk’s career was overshadowed by such figures as Vítezslav Novák and Karel
Kovarovic, whose music is hardly known today. Suk derived most his income
from performing as violinist in the renown, Bohemian String Quartet. From
1922 on, he taught composition at the Prague Conservatory, and became its
Director in 1930.
Initially written for the Bohemian String Quartet, MEDITATION ON THE CHORAL
ST. VENCESLAV was composed in 1914 at the onset of World War I. To avoid
performing the Austrian anthem at the start of each concert, as was expected
during the war, the quartet asked Suk to compose a short piece based on a
national theme. The choice of the St. Venceslav Choral was logical, St.
Venceslav being the patron-saint of the Czech nation. Meditation became very
popular and a few months after its premiere, Suk re-orchestrated it for
string orchestra for concerts by the Czech Philharmonic Orchestra.
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Christopher Shultis
2002-04-11 13:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Re: Atlas Eclipticalis

I rehearsed each part with each individual musician and so I am certain
that, while all the pages were performed, not all the notes were
performed. I gave the performers the choice of what to play, following the
parts instructions. I wouldn't say that the performance was too fast but
that's solely my personal opinion. I liked the way it sounded and,
besides, I don't think I could have physically been the "chronometer" for
any longer. My arms were exhausted afterward!

I know about the CD and yes our library does have it. If you mean by
complete performance that everything was played as you mention below,
than you are correct. We did not play all the notes. We instead used all
the instrumental parts and performed all the pages following Cage's
performance instructions.

Best regards,
chris shultis
Dear Chris Shultis,
If you did One hour version, it seems very very fast for a group of 86
musicians performing all 4 pages. Did you perform all the pages?
The "complete performance" remark by The Orchestra of the S.E.M. Ensemble
referred to the fact that all the pages, all the notes were performed, not
just the fact that there were all the instruments (3 sets of 4 timpani, 9
percussion setups, 3 tubas, etc., etc.). John Cage, as well as C.F.Peters
were not aware of any previous attempts to do so, that is why we believe that
the Carnegie Hall was the first time it was done.
Our performance was 2 hours long and it seemed too fast, so David Tudor
suggested 2 and half hours for the next one which we did in Berlin in May
1993. This performance was recorded and is available from Asphodel records
(San Francisco). Incidentally, the Asphodel release is a 4-Cd set with Atlas
and it also includes 103, performed by the Janacek Philharmonic Orchestra. I
would think that your Music Department should have a copy.
Yours,
Petr Kotik
Christopher Shultis ***@unm.edu
University of New Mexico Department of Music

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
P***@aol.com
2002-04-11 18:54:05 UTC
Permalink
Dear chris shultis

I am somewhat confused about your statement: "I gave the performers the
choice of what to play, following the parts instructions. "

There are no possibilities for the performers (n the orchestra) to chose what
music they want to play. In fact, believe that the notation of Atlas is as
exact a Mozart symphony.

Yours,

Petr Kotik
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
christopher shultis
2002-04-12 00:21:18 UTC
Permalink
Dear Petr Kotik,

Sorry for the delay but 14 years is a long time and I had to consult the score. I
read "a performance may be at any point between minimum activity (silence) and
maximum activity (what's written)" to mean that a performer can choose to play or
not play what's written inside the parameters of the pre-determined timing of the
piece. Obviously the performer would have to play, if they chose to play
anything, what's in the system according to the conductor's dividing of the piece
into the O", 15", 30" 45" etc.

Since my work on this piece predates my activities as a scholar I should point
out that I did not study Atlas Eclipticalis except as a conductor preparing the
score for performance. The above is therefore how I interpreted it at the time.
On the other hand, I'm not seeing any reason why what we did doesn't actually fit
within what the instructions tell the performers to do. So I'd be very curious to
know if you interpret Cage's remarks (as quoted from the score) differently than
how I did for our 1988 performance.

I look forward to your reply and hope this is of interest to the general list. If
not, just let me know and Mr. Kotik and I can continue this conversation
privately.

chris shultis
Post by P***@aol.com
Dear chris shultis
I am somewhat confused about your statement: "I gave the performers the
choice of what to play, following the parts instructions. "
There are no possibilities for the performers (n the orchestra) to chose what
music they want to play. In fact, believe that the notation of Atlas is as
exact a Mozart symphony.
Yours,
Petr Kotik
Rob Haskins
2002-04-12 01:45:29 UTC
Permalink
I'm fascinated by this exchange and I want it
to be continued here or copied on it.

--- christopher shultis <***@unm.edu> wrote:
[much deleted]
Post by christopher shultis
I look forward to your reply and hope this is of interest to the general list. If
not, just let me know and Mr. Kotik and I can continue this
conversation
privately.
chris shultis
=====
Rob Haskins Eastman School of Music
***@yahoo.com

"Heroism doesn't consist in brilliantly combatting
someone else. . . . What is heroic is _to
accept the situation in which you find yourself._"
-- John Cage

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Caleb T. Deupree
2002-04-12 11:33:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Haskins
I'm fascinated by this exchange and I want it
to be continued here or copied on it.
Seconded. As an amateur pianist interested in Cage's music, this entire
exchange about the validity of the score is as engrossing as a good mystery.

If the oral tradition differs so radically from the published score,
perhaps one of the professors on this list should encourage a grad student
seeking a thesis subject to document this oral tradition while the
recipients thereof are still around.
--

Caleb Deupree
***@erinet.com
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Cornelius Dufallo
2002-04-12 16:28:03 UTC
Permalink
Regarding the comment of Caleb Deupree:

I agree -- we must try to document the performance
practice. Many who knew Cage describe how picky he
actually was about the performance of his works. The
confusing thing is that his own writings and
descriptions of why he wrote the way he did do not
seem to match this attitude.

There is an article titled "Performance practice in
the indeterminate works of John Cage" in the
Performance Practice Review Vol. 7 Issue 2 Fall 1994.
The article is written by Judy Lochhead.

I have not yet read it, but I thought I would mention
it, because it pertains to the discussion.

Has anyone read this article? Is it helpful?

Cornelius Dufallo
Post by Caleb T. Deupree
Post by Rob Haskins
I'm fascinated by this exchange and I want it
to be continued here or copied on it.
Seconded. As an amateur pianist interested in
Cage's music, this entire
exchange about the validity of the score is as
engrossing as a good mystery.
If the oral tradition differs so radically from the
published score,
perhaps one of the professors on this list should
encourage a grad student
seeking a thesis subject to document this oral
tradition while the
recipients thereof are still around.
--
Caleb Deupree
-
http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
text "info silence" ]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Andrew Culver
2002-04-12 00:27:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by christopher shultis
Dear Petr Kotik,
Sorry for the delay but 14 years is a long time and I had to consult the
score. I read "a performance may be at any point between minimum activity
(silence) and maximum activity (what's written)" to mean that a performer
can choose to play or not play what's written inside the parameters of the
pre-determined timing of the piece. Obviously the performer would have to
play, if they chose to play anything, what's in the system according to
the conductor's dividing of the piece into the O", 15", 30" 45" etc.
Since my work on this piece predates my activities as a scholar I should
point out that I did not study Atlas Eclipticalis except as a conductor
preparing the score for performance. The above is therefore how I
interpreted it at the time. On the other hand, I'm not seeing any reason
why what we did doesn't actually fit within what the instructions tell the
performers to do. So I'd be very curious to know if you interpret Cage's
remarks (as quoted from the score) differently than how I did for our 1988
performance.
I look forward to your reply and hope this is of interest to the general
list. If not, just let me know and Mr. Kotik and I can continue this
conversation privately.
chris shultis
Post by P***@aol.com
Dear chris shultis
I am somewhat confused about your statement: "I gave the performers the
choice of what to play, following the parts instructions. "
There are no possibilities for the performers (n the orchestra) to chose what
music they want to play. In fact, believe that the notation of Atlas is as
exact a Mozart symphony.
Yours,
Petr Kotik
Andrew Culver
754 Willowbrook Road
Clinton Corners, NY 12514 US
Vox: 845-266-3409
www.anarchicharmony.org
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Christopher Shultis
2002-04-12 00:58:45 UTC
Permalink
Didn't receive a message Andrew. Did you intend to send something?

Hope all is well with you,
chris

Christopher Shultis ***@unm.edu
University of New Mexico Department of Music

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
P***@aol.com
2002-04-12 00:20:14 UTC
Permalink
Dear chris shultis.

I appreciate your interest and will try to answer you in a short way (and I
apologize) - I am extremely busy, preparing for major concerts here in New
York in April and in Europe in May. If you are planning to come to New York
- perhaps in the summer, we can go into all this in a more detailed way.

1. The remark "a performer can choose to play or not play" is a standard
remark in practically all Cage's scores from the period and has to be
understood in the context of its time and situation in which it was written.

2. To make such choices, a performer has to be very very advanced in the
performance practice of JC music. Cage himself referred to these remarks as
being for someone attaining a "Third level of proficiency" (David Tudor, for
example). With other words, it you devote yourself to performing Cage for
20, 30 years, you may be able to advance to this "Third level of proficiency"
(as Cage used to say). Meanwhile, one should follow the score without a
slightest deviation.

3. This situation is nothing unusual and is true with most
composer/performers. Mozart often improvised when performing his piano solos,
so did Lizst, Chopin, or Rachmaninov. Rachmaninov was known to deviate from
his written music when performing as soloists with orchestra. That does not
mean that anyone can could have come and do the same thing.

4. All Cages compositions written between 1952(or3) until late 60s were
written either directly for David Tudor, of with Tudor in mind. There are a
lot of problems with the (often cryptic) introductory notes and also
occasionally with the notation itself (Tudor never used Cage’s notation). An
incomplete notation (and instruction) is the case with EVERY MUSIC EVER
COMPOSED.

5. It is not possible to write down music in an exact manner. If it would be
possible, then we would not need music schools, You could just get the sheet
music and some manuals how to decipher it. It would be silly (to put it
mildly) to perform Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Chopin etc. etc. without any
stylistic and musical knowledge (knowledge about each particular composer).
Imagine performing a piece by Chopin by literally following the score (even
with all the tempo changes as indicated). How horrible!!

5. Cage is no exception. To perform it, one has to know much much more than
the notation indicates and instructions ask for.

Yours,

Petr Kotik
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Clemens Gresser
2002-04-12 14:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Good morning,

I wonder about some things in this discussion.

Firstly, I find it interesting to discuss issues of an "authentic
performance practice" with Cage, but is it really possible to use the terms "complete
performance". This seems to be so contrary to what Cage expressed re silence
and letting life/the environment interfere with his music.

Secondly, and more specifically: if I understand Peter Kotik, he is saying
that
a) Cage's music is not open to do "whatever you like".
b) you have to have enough experience to "really" perform Cage (as with many
other composers).
c) his notations, as with other composers, _need_ knowledge and training (->
better go to study them at an academic level).

If that is what he is saying, I have the following ideas:

re a) I completely agree with Petr Kotik, but I am not sure that Chris
Shultis' performance is not valuable, and legitimate (not playing _all_ the notes
doesn't mean to me that this piece is not performed properly; different issue
for the number pieces or Europeras 1 & 2 - their orchestral parts). I
believe that one should not just judge performances on the length of the
performance, but actually listen to what the performers did within that time.

re b) As I am not at home at the moment, I don't have access to my
materials... But there is an issue with Cage about favouring
NON-knowledging, which does not mean approaching a piece with _no_ knowledge, but is somehow
more emphasising the attitude of being "disciplined" (being devoted to what
you do at the time, when you are doing it) and open to experience _new_
things and enjoying them; he seems to prefer this attitude instead of a
"knowledge-burdened" musician. And: It is always possible that one does things
repeatedly wrong. I therefore believe that stating that students cannot perform x or
y because they either don't have the performance experience or knowledge (due
to lack of age), is a bit
dangerous. Overall, how could one gain this practice, if one would not be
allowed to perform any difficult Cage piece? This does not mean that one
should not have studied the material in detail.

re c) maybe I am reading this wrong, but I got the feeling that Petr Kotik
is also saying that improvisation in (say) Mozart's piano concertos is
comparable to Cage's compositions which leaves decisions to the performer. I agree
that Cage is not special in the _generic_ approach of leaving space for the
performer, but surely - taking the Concert for Piano and Orchestra for
example - the score _allows_ the soloist to play _all_ pages or only a selection of
them; whether Cage or Tudor would have prefered x or y, is not a matter of
reading the score.

This leads me to the issue of oral tradition versus the
"I-only-study-the-score"-idea. I believe that a composer must specify everyhting which is
essential to him/her, or s/he (or anybody else) should not complain about the
execution of the notation. So if Cage wanted to tell people that they may be
flexible with what they play, but wanted to avoid
performances of his music where a musician plays only 5-10 pages, then he
should have added "play at least x pages". I have a thesis that Cage wrote
increasingly more detailed instructions in the 1950s and 1960s, because he knew
that performers would not always be able to see his point without more
instructions (once I am back home, I can back this up with some more examples).
However, in the later pieces, like the number pieces, Cage's instructions can be
very short - because he knew that he had explained things about "this series"
of works beforehand (to Rob: please correct me if I am wrong :-)). Then it
is definitely the performer's duty to inform himself.

Hope that this was more than a ramble, but got to go back to work. :-)
Regards,
--
Clemens

***@gmx.net
http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/

** Cage study day (21/9/2002) **
** More info at http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/cage2002.html **

GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
P***@aol.com
2002-04-12 19:52:35 UTC
Permalink
Dear Clemens Gresser.

1. Certainly, Cage's music IS NOT OPEN TO DO ANYTHING ONE WANTS! To even
suggest something like that is odd. No-one's music is open to this kind of "I
do what I want" manipulation. Cage's work is first and foremost about
discipline - not a wishy-washy do what ever you want. (Once Cage defined
discipline in this way: "you don't do what you want but anything goes")

2. Every performance is authentic. The question is authentic to what?

3. Every composer's music requires a certain performance practice. This
practice (knowledge) is transmitted from generation to generation and it
starts (or goes back to) the composer him/her-sef. The way we perform Mozart
is based on Mozart's performances, so it is with Chopin, all the rest. When
this chain is interrupted, it is virtually impossible to recreate it (with
certainty). In case of Cage, it goes to Dutor and Cage and those who have
been associated with them.


Yours,

Petr Kotik

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Rob Haskins
2002-04-12 23:50:43 UTC
Permalink
I'm not entirely in agreement with Point 3. Who would base
a performance of Stravinsky on, say, Stravinsky's
recordings? Or Robert Craft's? "Performance practice"
is ephemeral even when the "chain" back to primary performances
is unbroken. I think we learn something about music when
we hear new and interesting interpretations. I would
agree, however, that there are some problems to be faced
in formulating "new and interesting" performances of
Cage that are not faced with, say, Bach, Mozart, or Chopin.
Tudor, Cage, etc. are starting points only.

Rob
Post by P***@aol.com
3. Every composer's music requires a certain performance practice.
This
practice (knowledge) is transmitted from generation to generation and it
starts (or goes back to) the composer him/her-sef. The way we
perform Mozart
is based on Mozart's performances, so it is with Chopin, all the rest. When
this chain is interrupted, it is virtually impossible to recreate it (with
certainty). In case of Cage, it goes to Dutor and Cage and those who have
been associated with them.
=====
Rob Haskins Eastman School of Music
***@yahoo.com

"Heroism doesn't consist in brilliantly combatting
someone else. . . . What is heroic is _to
accept the situation in which you find yourself._"
-- John Cage

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
John Whiting
2002-04-13 06:55:37 UTC
Permalink
. . . Who would base
a performance of Stravinsky on, say, Stravinsky's
recordings? Or Robert Craft's? "Performance practice"
is ephemeral even when the "chain" back to primary performances
is unbroken. I think we learn something about music when
we hear new and interesting interpretations.
This is what keeps any craft or art from ossifying into Beckmesser
conformity. In another forum, quite unrelated to music, an otherwise
intelligent correspondent stoutly maintained that, if we had recordings
of Beethoven and Mozart performing their own work, any further
performances would be superfluous.

Authenticity lies, not in slavish imitation, but in fertile imagination
applied with conscientious effort and governed by profound respect.
--
John Whiting

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thirty Paris Bistros reviewed at
http://www.whitings-writings.com
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
jon b
2002-04-14 13:10:45 UTC
Permalink
The Performer Is Dead;
Long Live The Performer..

I wonder if that person feels if we had a
recording of Shakespeare reading his own works, no
other dramatic performance would be relevant.
...And occasionally a profound 'disrespect' ...
Post by John Whiting
In another forum, quite unrelated to
music, an otherwise
intelligent correspondent stoutly maintained that,
if we had recordings
of Beethoven and Mozart performing their own work,
any further
performances would be superfluous.
Authenticity lies, not in slavish imitation, but in
fertile imagination
applied with conscientious effort and governed by
profound respect.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Mark Kolmar
2002-04-13 00:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by P***@aol.com
1. Certainly, Cage's music IS NOT OPEN TO DO ANYTHING ONE WANTS! To even
suggest something like that is odd. No-one's music is open to this kind of "I
do what I want" manipulation. Cage's work is first and foremost about
discipline - not a wishy-washy do what ever you want. (Once Cage defined
discipline in this way: "you don't do what you want but anything goes")
Nobody was suggesting that Cage's music permits the performers to do
whatever they want. The original point has to do with how to avoid the
layman's misunderstanding of Cage's methods, as in a hypothetical exchange
like:

"In this piece, the performers make certain choices about which sounds to
play (or not to play), and when to play these sounds."

"So they can do pretty much whatever they want?"

"No. The parts are notated thoroughly, but the performers must make
choices within this framework."

"So the performers improvise?"

"No. The pitches are notated exactly, and the performers must make
decisions about when to play these sounds."

"Then they can play the notes any time they want to?"

"No. Each performer must play the notes specified in their part within
the specified brackets of time."

"But within that time bracket, do they play the note any time they want?"

"No..."

"So they listen to each other and react like in jazz?"

"No..."
Post by P***@aol.com
3. Every composer's music requires a certain performance practice. This
practice (knowledge) is transmitted from generation to generation and it
starts (or goes back to) the composer him/her-sef. The way we perform Mozart
is based on Mozart's performances, so it is with Chopin, all the rest. When
this chain is interrupted, it is virtually impossible to recreate it (with
certainty). In case of Cage, it goes to Dutor and Cage and those who have
been associated with them.
As you say, something is missing from the notation. Even when one
understands the mechanics of the notation, one requires another level of
understanding to be able to fill in what is missing. I do not think that
is in dispute. Much as one cannot read English text phonetically and
expect to pronounce the words correctly. It requires additional
information that is missing from the text, but information that is
certainly available for anyone to discover.

Since we are discussing performance practice for the music of John Cage, I
know Petr Kotik has been criticized for some of his choices in the
performance of _103_. Specifically, if I have the story about right, it
was necessary as a practical matter to create individual, fully notated
parts -- whereas the original score permits a level of freedom and
requires a certain type of responsibility and understanding that the
individual players of the orchestra were unable to meet.

As performers and performance practice continues to evolve, and as players
gain a deeper understanding of the aesthetic goals of composers such as
Cage, we may expect a large group of individual members of an orchestra
finally to be able to perform such a work according to Cage's
instructions. Meanwhile, I can understand why such a workaround was
necessary.

For more details, I refer you to James Pritchett's article at:

http://www.music.princeton.edu/~jwp/texts/Atlas103.html

While I do not mean to "call out" Mr. Kotik on this point, I believe it is
worthwhile in the context of this discussion to offer a specific example
in which he found it necessary to diverge from Cage's instructions for
performance, in order to achieve a result Cage intended.

Actually, I would be very interested to discuss this matter further. For
instance, the recordings I have heard of _Fifty-Eight_ and _Sixty-Eight_
are beautiful to me. Were the performers able to avoid the problems that
made it necessary to take a different approach for _103_? If so, is it
perhaps primarily because of the smaller number of players? If not, what
types of lazy habits, and so on, among modern players are problematic in
performances of these works? In what ways could the performances be
improved by players in the future?

--Mark

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Joseph Zitt
2002-04-13 01:19:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Kolmar
Actually, I would be very interested to discuss this matter further. For
instance, the recordings I have heard of _Fifty-Eight_ and _Sixty-Eight_
are beautiful to me. Were the performers able to avoid the problems that
made it necessary to take a different approach for _103_? If so, is it
perhaps primarily because of the smaller number of players? If not, what
types of lazy habits, and so on, among modern players are problematic in
performances of these works? In what ways could the performances be
improved by players in the future?
I'm pretty sure that we have people here who were directly involved
in the Mode recording of 1O1. Were the musicians able to handle the
issues in that performance?

I'm currently working with an amateur orchestra (about 15-25 people,
depending on the night) in doing structured improvisation, and discovering
interesting difficulties and resistances. But they're gradually coming
around :-)

(And, BTW, I'm really enjoying this conversation.)
--
| ***@metatronpress.com http://www.josephzitt.com/ |
| http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/ http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt/ |
| == New book: Surprise Me with Beauty: the Music of Human Systems == |
| Comma / Gray Code Silence: the John Cage Discussion List |

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Clemens Gresser
2002-04-13 00:44:42 UTC
Permalink
Thanks to Mark Kolmar for some very interesting lines, to which I am
completly in agreement.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 Mark Kolmar wrote:

[re 103/number pieces in general]
Post by Mark Kolmar
whereas the original score permits a level of freedom and
requires a certain type of responsibility and understanding that the
individual players of the orchestra were unable to meet.
This is indeed sad. I heard a wonderful performance of one of the number
piece for orchestra (cannot recall which one) at the Frankfurt Feste in 1992.
Wheras I don't know how they actually did it, I believe that it sounded very
nice (loads of sparse texture/some silences).

[...]
Post by Mark Kolmar
Actually, I would be very interested to discuss this matter further. For
instance, the recordings I have heard of _Fifty-Eight_ and _Sixty-Eight_
are beautiful to me. Were the performers able to avoid the problems that
made it necessary to take a different approach for _103_? If so, is it
perhaps primarily because of the smaller number of players?
Do you mean: Fewer people can more easily achieve to play a piece which
offer loads of liberties? I would hope that this is not generally true. I wonder
whether it is a matter of which performers you have there. Some
professional, classical trained musicians want to do their job, but not be
creative; others might consider such "liberal" music a joke...
Post by Mark Kolmar
If not, what
types of lazy habits, and so on, among modern players are problematic in
performances of these works?
Well, at least the lazy ones should be happy that they don't have to
rehearse virtuousic runs! :-) Maybe it is just a problem to have to make
decisions on your own, which is always more difficult if you want to achieve
good results and if you really care about what you do. Maybe the
indeterminacy of such works seems senseless? Maybe we should interview members of big
ensembles/orchestras who have played these pieces/play them? (a new research
project? :-))
Post by Mark Kolmar
In what ways could the performances be
improved by players in the future?
I guess that Cage has himself given an example of this. There are several
performances I know of, where he actually joined the performers for the
(final) rehearsals. Then he was there to deal with questions. As Davis Russell
(?) has stated in an interview with JC and ? (recollection of this statement
from the top of my head): 'John explained them what a haiku was, and how he had
set out the score ["Score. 40 drawinds..."] ... Next time I could do that
myself.'

If one cannot expect every performer of a big ensemble to think about issues
of indeterminate performances, maybe the conductor or someone else can help.
But I would hope that "helping" and commanding people (what to do exactly
for each moment of the performance) would be two different actions, of which I
prefer the former.

Regards,
--
Clemens

***@gmx.net
http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/

** Cage study day (21/9/2002) **
** More info at http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/cage2002.html **

GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Rob Haskins
2002-04-13 14:25:01 UTC
Permalink
This message harks back to a previous one from
Clemens and offers a recollection of a some
recent ensemble performances of number pieces
that I have seen or participated in.

First, RE performance notes in these works:
Clemens suggested that the later ones are
shorter but that previous remarks from earlier
ones should be taken into account, Cage
thinking that performers would have been
familiar with earlier works in the series.
I agree, but I have no documentary evidence
to support it, yet--Glenn Freeman thinks
that the performance notes for each one
is unique. Nevertheless, some particulars
about the Number Pieces change a bit once
the series is underway: notably, Cage stops writing
in dynamic markings and, in several
places, suggests that the pieces should
generally be quiet with occasional and
unpredictable short loud notes. _Musicage_
documents some of this and I really can't
recommend it too highly (it repays close
rereading).

I did _Fourteen_ in February 1999 and
got lots of good advice from Stephen
Drury about it: he suggested I meet
individually with each performer, explain
the notation, answer questions, and
then do two rehearsals. That's exactly
what I did, and the results were quite
good--though I should say I got some
of Eastman's best players together
for that performance.

And recently _Seven_ and _Five2_ were
done at Eastman by the new music
ensemble Musica Nova, conducted by
Brad Lubman--in that performance,
I found a lot of it too loud, to
the point that the loudnesses seemed
to have a "gestural" quality that
called attention to itself. I
know that Seven has dynamic markings,
but I don't believe the other one
did--yet there may be nothing, really,
in the performance notes to suggest
that such a performance may not be
possible.

I don't have any conclusions to draw
from these experiences, yet, but it
seems that many of us are thinking
about them. And it's particularly
interesting that some performers with
longstanding connections to Cage's
music--Petr Kotik and John Kennedy,
for instance--present somewhat differing
opinions. I find myself more in sympathy
with Kennedy.

Rob

=====
Rob Haskins Eastman School of Music
***@yahoo.com

"Heroism doesn't consist in brilliantly combatting
someone else. . . . What is heroic is _to
accept the situation in which you find yourself._"
-- John Cage

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Mark Kolmar
2002-04-13 18:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clemens Gresser
Post by Mark Kolmar
Actually, I would be very interested to discuss this matter further. For
instance, the recordings I have heard of _Fifty-Eight_ and _Sixty-Eight_
are beautiful to me. Were the performers able to avoid the problems that
made it necessary to take a different approach for _103_? If so, is it
perhaps primarily because of the smaller number of players?
Do you mean: Fewer people can more easily achieve to play a piece which
offer loads of liberties? I would hope that this is not generally true. I wonder
whether it is a matter of which performers you have there. Some
professional, classical trained musicians want to do their job, but not be
creative; others might consider such "liberal" music a joke...
It must be easier to find 58 or 68 like-minded or at least sympathetic
players than 103. On this list we read many accounts of people who direct
performances of smaller-scale works, who run into some difficulties in the
interpretation of the score or with players who don't quite "get it". In
a much larger ensemble, the hazards multiply.

I studied as an undergrad at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
from 1985-89. Cage had spent time there in prior years, and was regarded
with great respect in some circles and with complete derision in others.
I participated in the circles sympathetic with Cage, and learned a great
deal from people with direct and once-removed links from those times.

The other scenes included the formalism crowd (indifferent to Cage at
best), the electroacoustic studios (with an affinity), and those who
secretly believe the late Beethoven string quartets were the end of real
music....
Post by Clemens Gresser
Post by Mark Kolmar
If not, what
types of lazy habits, and so on, among modern players are problematic in
performances of these works?
Well, at least the lazy ones should be happy that they don't have to
rehearse virtuousic runs! :-) Maybe it is just a problem to have to make
decisions on your own, which is always more difficult if you want to achieve
good results and if you really care about what you do. Maybe the
indeterminacy of such works seems senseless?
...So we find a few of the players would really rather play Webern and
Boulez, or perhaps Handel. Maybe we ask a player to choose three pitches
in certain registers, with given durations in a given time bracket, and
she outlines a CMaj chord. That chord is permissible, but an example of
what I'd consider a lazy habit. Perhaps a few of the players work mainly
with fourths, fifths, and tritones. Maybe the player should not
consciously avoid the possibility, but we have to be aware that
possibility is not nearly as likely as in Handel. Those patterns are not
meant to be perceived as a central organization strategy. Among a large
group of players, it is likely a few of them will introduce those patterns
of tradition and muscle-memory. Without traditional forms or modern
formalism to guide them, some extremely talented players can have trouble
with such demands of intuition.

The issues in _Fifty-Eight_, _Sixty-Eight_, and _103_ have more to do with
attack points rather than choice of pitch (as I understand it, without
having seen the scores -- not remembering them in any case).

--Mark

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Clemens Gresser
2002-04-13 00:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Dear Petr Kotik,
Post by P***@aol.com
1. Certainly, Cage's music IS NOT OPEN TO DO ANYTHING ONE WANTS! To even
suggest something like that is odd. No-one's music is open to this kind of
"I do what I want" manipulation. Cage's work is first and foremost about
discipline - not a wishy-washy do what ever you want. (Once Cage defined
discipline in this way: "you don't do what you want but anything goes")
I am _still_ agreeing with you. As Mark Kolmer has pointed out, nobody has
so far stated the opposite of what you felt was necessary to put in capital
letters.
Post by P***@aol.com
2. Every performance is authentic. The question is authentic to what?
I agree with you that this term is problematic; hence I put it in quotation
marks. I once followed a very good discussion between musicologists,
performers and composers (some of the people on the panel could claim to be at least
two of those categories). The most impressive statement was that Dr. Eric
Fiedler said that there is no such thing as "authentic" performance practice,
but rather a "historical inspired" performance practice (or as he said in
German "historisierend" which is probably more like "historising"). I don't have
anything against such an approach to performance in general, but for many
compositions of Cage I don't find it very interesting (I completly agree with Rob
on this one); for a lot of pieces it
is even counterproductive to Cage's idea of indeterminacy in performance to
try to "repeat" his performance.
Post by P***@aol.com
3. Every composer's music requires a certain performance practice. This
practice (knowledge) is transmitted from generation to generation and it
starts (or goes back to) the composer him/her-sef. The way we perform
Mozart is based on Mozart's performances, so it is with Chopin, all the
rest. When this chain is interrupted, it is virtually impossible to
recreate it (with certainty). In case of Cage, it goes to Dutor and Cage
and those who have been associated with them.
This paragraph does seem to be justified for an age when there were no
recordings, no video and no modern musicology. If we do talk about Mozart, Chopin
or Beethoven, I agree - but Cage does not seem to belong in this category for
me. Not least, because he himself has indeed talked about how his music
should be performed. That's also part of my work on and interest in him.

Regards,
Clemens Gresser
--
Clemens

***@gmx.net
http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/

** Cage study day (21/9/2002) **
** More info at http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cgresser/cage2002.html **

GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
t-online
2002-04-14 09:51:09 UTC
Permalink
Petr Kotik wrote: The way we perform Mozart is based on Mozart's performances,
so it is with Chopin, all the rest.
This idea is very problematic. How do you know how a Mozart performance
sounds or how Chopin played his music?

I think the "referenz" for any interpretation (version) of a piece of music
set as a notation (text) is a "Konvention", is a "interpretation of the
text". The basis of this "interpretation" is a "diskurs". The first thing is
the "text" not what we think the composer would have done.

***@t-online.de

-
[Searchable Silence archives: http://newalbion.com/artists/cagej/silence/]
[How to join, unsubscribe, etc: http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt/Cage/]
[ or email ***@metatronpress.com with the text "info silence" ]
Loading...