One of the ways I hope to address some of my artistic goals is to move away from using 'conventional' performance spaces, and taking music to where people are... rather than the other way around. Maybe this won't be a hard and fast rule, but it's at least a way to start thinking about how music is perceived and embraced when it's outside the confines of a more traditional concert hall type venue.
I'm planning to start with art galleries, as I've had some fantastic experiences performing in this type of space. I think the way that music and art can reflect, complement, challenge and enhance each other is pretty cool - for audience as much for performer. I'm really looking forward to the "Clocked Out" gig next weekend, at the Judith Wright Centre for Contemporary Arts - in an interview last night one of the members of the Clocked Out duo was talking about how the performance would work. From what I gleaned, it's going to be more of an 'installation' style performance, where the 'audience' is encouraged to move freely during the performance, giving listeners the opportunity to experience the works from whatever perspective they choose. My good friend Julian has also talked about wanting to move ahead with a similar idea for a performance event, with different performers in different rooms, and the audience moving between them as and when they desire.
Along these same lines of thought, I was recently thinking about the different experiences and roles of various people involved in a performance, and discovered a posting to a bulletin board which I'd written some months ago. I'm really glad I found it, as I really think it's worth thinking about why so many audiences may be resistant to 'new music'. Here's the post:
"The way I see it there are 3 levels of interpretation: the composer, the performer, and the audience. The composer spends weeks, months, maybe even years, creating the work. They have an intimate bond with it and a clear vision of what they want to say through their work. The performer gets a few weeks (or months if they're lucky) to delve into the score, usually without any help from the composer, and has to then communicate the ideas to the audience. The audience then has to digest the work in real-time, they only get one chance to hear the music and piece it all together in their minds. Whether they "get it" is beside the point. Whether they are moved in some way (positive or negative) is entirely the point.
The beauty of music is that it is an essentially personal expression. Yes, the composer may have had a specific intention in mind, but it's what each individual gains from the music that really counts. Were they disturbed by it? Excellent! Were they uplifted? Great! Did it make them sad, angry, confused, joyful, reflective? Then we have done our job. "
What are your thoughts?
j*
- random overtones
- Brisbane, Australia
- Random Overtones is a concept devised and directed by flautist and new music specialist Janet McKay. Incorporating several components, such as tuition, workshops, masterclasses and performance projects, the overall aims are to demystify new music, challenge performance conventions, support emerging composers by commissioning new works, and to bring new music to a wider audience. With a performance focus on works by living Australian and American composers, Random Overtones seeks to strengthen cultural and musical bonds between the two countries.
6 comments:
i too enjoy making people sad, angry, confused, joyful and reflective. particularly angry and confused.
i love to give my audience the freedom to interpret and approach my work in their own way. the experience is then a two-way street.
although this leads me most often to recordings, rather than live performance, as with recordings you're giving the listener complete control - where they listen, for how long, who with, etc. i find most 'classical' concerts way too proscriptive, with no clear reasons for doing so besides tradition and ettiquite. (etiquit? how the hell do you spell that word? etaquite? eqticut? ah, fuck!)
etiquette ;-)
thanks for your thoughts, sistah!
i think confused is a great emotion - it almost forces us to figure stuff out and question what's going on, rather than just accept how it is. it's almost a kind of... i dunno... transitionary emotion? it's not as definitive as the others...
i'm really keen to explore these ideas of performance fluidity - i shall keep thinking and post some more on the subject after a bit more pondering.
in terms of recordings, i guess that's another potential issue. are CDs really on the way out? how should performers be aiming to record and distribute their work these days? should we be trying to target digital media exclusively? is it worth the expense to create a CD any more?
hmmm. very interesting comments re recordings vs. performance. i think i always get so much more out of a live performance, and i think part of that IS all that's "proscribed", and maybe even the ettiquette. um, etiquette. just the fact that you have to sit and listen to the WHOLE piece, and you have to listen to the dynamics (you can't just turn it down when it gets uncomfortably loud), and you can see the performers working, and perhaps even screwing up a little. i just love that so much and a cd can't even compare. plus, how are you gonna make people angry through their stereo system? they are just gonna turn you off.
-tara
tara, thanks for your input!
i am totally with you on the whole 'seeing the performers working' thing - just ask julian!! hehehe... this is one of the reasons i find it hard to bond with most electronic/laptop artists, because it's harder to make the connection between the movements you see (if any, they're usually minimal) and the sounds you hear. i'd love to be able to see the laptop screen, for example, so i can make that connection. i think i'd enjoy it a whole lot more!
anyway, that's a rant for another 'overtone' ;-)
back to the concept of audience/performer/venue... maybe it's actually the audiences who need to step up and become more engaged. to 'own' their experience, as it were? maybe audience etiquette has become so stifling (generally speaking) that they can't just get up and step out the door if they feel they need some breathing space, or a break from the intensity, or they're bored with one piece but will go back in for the next? and perhaps it's the layout of so many concert hlls and recital venues that makes it hard for the audience to feel comfortable doing this - they have to shuffle along in front of dozens of knees and handbags (usually belonging to people who will mutter under their breath, tsk tsk a bit, and whisper about why that person didn't just sit on the end of a row), and EVERYONE in that hall knows that one person just left the room.
i've been to several concerts where the audience sat on the floor, cushions, the odd armchair or bench scattered throughout the space, and more or less 'in the round'. tara, remember the feldman concert last year in paddington? and i was at a gig a few nights ago (electronic music, as it happens!) with a similar arrangement of cushions, etc. the audience felt very much at ease, people were able to lie down if they chose to do so, and had the freedom to come and go without causing too much of a scene.
hmmm, i think i'm rambling!!
I like the idea that if the performance and/or piece is good the audience will be quiet anyway .. if they don't enjoy it they should feel free to leave! :-)
i don't think expecting people to stay artificially is good for anyone.
having said that, i've done some projects where putting the audience through some real pain has been the point. although the door has always remained unlocked.
i had an interesting experience at the brisbane powerhouse yesterday - at the performance of reich's "drumming". being in an open-access kind of space, the audience was somewhat fluctuating, coming and going (particularly those at the back and up on the balconies), and chatting freely during the performance. there was one older gentleman beside me who kept glaring up at a couple on the balcony above us who were talking, admittedly rather loudly (as a consequence of the music being particularly loud at that point). but it made me wonder... how do we get around the fact that different people are seeking different things from a performance? obviously the couple on the balcony were after a relaxed, almost 'background' experience of the performance, whilst the guy next to me was after a more reverent musical experience. hmmm...
jules - the door may have been unlocked, but what about the bouncers and guard dogs? ;-)
Post a Comment