I didn't attend this performance (or collaborate on it) so it is curious to note the difference between this version and the original, which was choreographed and danced by Miyuki Kobayashi. Allyson emphasizes a very lyrical, dramatic (sometimes almost Javanese?) aspect of the music and the result is quite beautiful to watch. But this is drastically different than the way the piece was initially conceived with Miyuki. I remember that her thing was to really explore the space around and between the musicians as well as the boundaries of the hall (the walls, doors, and the floor), activating the performance space as a musical time-space.
Indeed, when I wrote the piece I was thinking of a connection between time and distance - how in the anticipation of waiting for something to happen, an interval of time can be perceived as a kind of space, an actual lack of proximity or even a distinct separation. There is something of that embedded in the design of the music, which follows a melody line broken up in space between the three flautists - not hocketed per se, but more like a continuous overlapping, anticipating and delaying, all attempting to confuse and blend the performance space with musical time. So the music was composed not so much as a backdrop to the dance as it was intended to exist in a spatial relationship with it. My program notes, which are partially reproduced at the actual YouTube link, go into more detail about this idea.
I don't think this spatial aspect of the music comes across in the video as much as it would have in the actual space. But I don't get so hung up about all that, mostly because I'm fascinated by the way this performance becomes really another thing altogether on the video screen. The camera work has a lot to do with that - it has its own dance going on as it follows Allyson's movements, sometimes zooming in on faces in the audience and out again... and rather than my original idea of writing music to activate a still space, here the musicians become a very still element that anchors a very active space.
(I was just talking to Nate Hubbard about how YouTube is changing the way artists conceive of their audience. Case in point, Nate and I played a gig recently where less than a handful of people were actually present in the hall. Ordinarily this would be very disappointing... but the performance was being filmed and recorded, and during the performance we all knew it was eventually going to end up on the internet. Sure enough, now the excerpts are posted here, here, and here. So far the three clips have 215 views between them - not so good by YouTube standards but for an improvised music show 215 listeners would have been quite the success story. And this "extended audience" will of course get gradually bigger and bigger. So my question is, how does/should/will all of this affect the psychology of a performer, or the actual dynamics of a live performance? With audiences for new music arguably on the decline at the same time that artists are more and more capable of potentially unlimited self-dissemination of video and other electronic media, will live performances become more like recording sessions, where the music doesn't actually become itself, doesn't fulfill it's cultural function until after it is performed?)
Posts
1 comments:
This is a very interesting question. It reminds me of a documentary I watched some years ago on the history of recording. A lot of performers were, not so much worried about it, but understood, that, especially as the technology came about to splice etc... that this would change the live performance aspect forever. Now the audience could get "perfect" performances on Record, 8-Track, Tape and now CD, and so that is what the audience came to expect. But on the up-side, it opened another avenue of musical expression, using that splicing ability to create those tape pieces and add sounds that normally would never have existed otherwise. This is of course different because a video on youtube is not necessarily "perfect", but I think it has some parallel implications that are of the same magnitude.
There are several things that can happen with youtube. First and foremost is a positive one, an extended audience, and not only that, maybe a lot of people that would never have even remotely attended or listened to whatever it is that is on there, that is definitely a positive, bringing new people to the genre. One big negative is the aspect of bootlegs. But that all depends on how hung up people get on that kind of stuff. But another very positive aspect is that it does, as you say, open up an interesting avenue of possibilities. What if your flute piece becomes a piece for 3 flutes, 1 dancer and a cameraman. So then the movement of the camera is built into the piece, perhaps painstakingly choreographed like a director getting their "shot" or perhaps all improvised in the moment. Either way, it adds another dimension. I think it would be interesting to see that avenue explored. so then the composer has an opportunity to also be a director of sorts, and has a certain amount of control (if they wish to have it) over exactly what this new audience will see, and how they will see it. Camera angles, zoom shots etc... Definitely an interesting idea that could produce some really fascinating art.
Post a Comment