mar. ’24, a demonstration of process.

a word, that (didn’t start at a word) becomes a line, (which was never a line to begin with) which devolves into representation. a representation thus being the most uninteresting and de-evolved version of the word, which was a representation of something completely else to begin with.

composers love to use ink for the same reason they refuse to dot i’s and opt for capitalizing them instead; on the surface, authority seems a good illusion of control, a control that has been iterated for an entire lifetime as the final recourse of honesty in expression. but the idea of honesty in expression is itself not a means to an end.

honesty to whom? the artist? the artist whose very practice necessitates a parasitism of traditions, rules, and iterative procedures in order to “express” inherent feelings outwards? honesty to a source other than ourself is impossible unless we could somehow account for every individual event or expression that lead up to the creation of something. a work is a theory of how something happens, and theory is incapable of encompassing the full range of inherent possibilities of expression.

/

form is prescribed as an errant offspring of theory, and a bastard child to practice. things that are inevitable are best sensed holistically and intuitively, requiring no explanation or delineation of process. in fact, at face value a theoretical description of the form or content of a piece is only describing a way it can be perceived, which is only useful at the level of considering how something could be done (possibly).

rondo is deceptively a very simple composition, if one reads it as a jazz composition for example. the piece was conceived in one evening, which took about two weeks to fully realize onto paper, and some rehearsals for tweaking electronics. i disagree with maximalist methods of notation to force performers to make decisions, and instead opt for a system that synthesizes the two mentalities that conceived it.

on paper, rondo presents nothing new anent notation. its construction is not germane to how it should be read… on one hand, it fakes being in a classical form, while on the other hand presents information in a way that under the surface requires pure gestural interpretation in order to realize a meaningful rendering.

consider a rather infamous excerpt from john cage’s Concerto for Prepared Piano and Orchestra, for bassoon:

cage writes a passage near technically impossible to realize in the tempo. the result however belies the notation, asking for the entropy of the situation to produce an approximation of the individual capabilities, personalities, and sentiments of the player.

cage succeeds where other composers fail in the same attempt, as other composers over-rely on complexity that exists within a technically achievable outcome based on the score. in fact, i would connect such attempts to the same preoccupation with system (faithfulness-to-system) rather than cage’s preoccupation with result (faithfulness-to-entropy).

(michael finnissy, English Country-Tunes)

now, consider this passage from the bass clarinet part of rondo.

technically achievable, technically reasonable, but the use of graphics implies that the notation should be taken at face-value, and that an expression should be found underneath that pertains only to the player (not me). whether their result aligns with my intention is not a primary consideration… in fact, an addressing of a technical importance has little to do with musical expression. rather, my music constitutes an assemblage of gestures that belie a purpose or syntax. a syntax is instead interpreted, unlike this very paragraph which very clearly, and syntactically expresses my thoughts.

there is nothing inherently wrong with finnissy, boulez, or any other composers’ preoccupation with system as product rather than sound. but there’s also nothing right with it either. the issue i find lies within a similar sentiment of preoccupation… rather than preoccupy itself with representing sound, it preoccupies itself with representing a score, which is never music to begin with.

…