- Part of 'A topology of musical encounter' (summary) -
The essential understanding of musical encounter brings up the urgent issues around the role of the composer in the musical collaboration of the future. The old-fashioned notion of the composer who delivers masterpieces completed in detail on paper is not an appropriate profile anymore.
First of all the questions whether music is notated in a score or not has become truly irrelevant for the musical collaboration. A notated score could be a tool to use in some cases, but the composer should have a range of skills to his disposal how to communicate musical ideas not only through paper. Myself I have written many scores as a result of the working process, because I have an interest to conserve the musical outcome for future documentation. Beforehand I might have used only written fragments, sketches mainly for my own overview, or all together no written ideas. This doesn’t mean I have less clear of a musical idea or intention within a project. I judge according to the situation which working method with the musicians will enhance the birth of this idea in the best possible way. I suspect there is still a distrust in the more conservative areas of music-life about letting go of this traditional and unique craft that the composer has to his disposal. But one shouldn’t think that these qualities of the composer play less of a role when working on another basis, on the contrary. It requires an extra effort to be able to judge the right position within new and complex musical situations, and furthermore put all the necessary musical skills at work in this new context.
I believe the position the composer finds himself in is extended with the awareness of the responsibilities of the musical mediator. Not only the authority over the musical structure, but also the necessity of facilitating and mediating musical encounter are equally important aspects of leadership in a musical process. In fact the mediation of an encounter is an essential part of the compositional choices, as well the actual composing of musical ideas is now dependent on the way one can mediate the creative process. In the one case the composer might be able to work out musical ideas in detail and therewith contributing to the creative process. In another case this could work counterproductive, and a more remote role from the actual working process could help to improve the musical result, and even lead to a larger musical presence in the final sounding result, than futile attempts being in the lead continuously. In the case of our laboratory of musical encounter, it will depend highly on the musicians coming together what position the composer should take.
The composer and the mediator can be one and the same person and their tasks overlap artistically. To avoid unclarity of responsibilities we should be equally aware of the differences between them. The mediator is essentially an objective analyst of the musical situation, from where he evolves into a facilitator and coach of the musical encounter. But the composer has to engage in the process of creation and his role shouldn’t be more objective than those of other participants. Therefore it is another aspect of the mediator to find out what kind of musical personality should guide what kind of musical process. The composer has to fit the encounter, and should be connected carefully to the performing musicians on the same personal basis forming the collective dimension. Although I am the main mediator of the encounters within the laboratory, I am aware of the personal musical reality I carry. So it has become obvious for me that in many cases I should give the space for others to execute the musical process as a composer. In that respect I am happy to acknowledge that I am initiating a process that is not limited to my personal sphere, but inviting to anybody who suits the situation, and can carry the musical responsibility.
To continue reading choose your next page below..
No comments:
Post a Comment