Author: larryb
Date: 2005-07-14 11:53
Tony,
can you address the disconnect between composer and performer? and then the further disconnect between performer-composer and listener?
At a cocktail party, there is no disconnect - the party goers are both composer and performer. In most classical music, however, there is a disconnect, which might confound your theory - maybe.
You seem to assume that period composers and period performers were on the same page, and that might be true in many cases. Mozart, as performer and composer, was able to write for some of the best performers of his day (himself, Stadler, for example). Mozart seems to have written operas with specific singers in mind. We know, however, that Beethoven was continually frustrated by the poor quality of musicianship available for his orchestral works, but that does not seem to have affected his composition.
I think your theory best describes what Gunther Schuller calls the "collective improvosation" of early New Orleans jazz - before it was killed off by the solo genius of Louis Armstrong (later revived in the music of Charlie Mingus). In the case of New Orleans collective ensemble, there is a unity of composer and performer that is generally lacking in "classical" music. As Schuller desribes it, the result of expertly executed collective improvosation is a fluid, rocking quality (perhaps not unlike overhearing a cocktail party) - go listen to King Oliver's Creole Jazz Band recordings (1923) while sipping a gin and tonic (preferably Tanquery) and you'll hear/feel what it means. Of course, a cocktail party, like jazz, is not pure improvisation. Both rely on a balance of improvisation and composed convention, or structure. Not unlike oral formulaic epic poetry of Homer or Beowulf. While most great composer-performers (Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Chopin) could improvise as individuals, it's not clear to me that they had the cultural ability to do so in a collective sense. The missing ingredient is probably the west African musical tradition that drives Jazz.
A further disconnect beyond that of composer - performer, then, involves the listener, and I'm not sure how that fits in to your theory. I think though, that when successful, an alienated/objective listener will achieve great satisfaction and frustration from both the collective and individual aspects of King Oliver's performance. One great challenge is trying to pick out Armstrong's "voice" from the ensemble while not losing sight of the collective feel (surely, Armstrong would have resisted that). The great historical tragedy is that today we risk straining to hear Armstrong's solo on "Chimes Blues" and lose sight of the band's collective brilliance. The death of the collective is our desire to focus on that amazing individual voice.
While it might be enjoyable for the participants, an alienated observer of a cocktail party is not a desirable position. If your theory is true, that may be why the audience for classical music is dying.
I think your cocktail party metaphor is interesting, but it needs some work. Unless you think it is acceptable for classical music to continue on the line of a closed, elitist conversation among its practitioners. Welcome to the party - by invitation only.
Post Edited (2005-07-14 12:17)
|
|
Keepers
