F o r N o w : M a n i f e s t o 1.1
First published in ADSRZine (April 2019). Follow this link to view the original, which includes some context and much better formatting, with referencing.
Artist Statement
I believe that an artist should reject the ego and the self as part of the making process (and in life), so as to not let them interfere by imposing concepts such as taste or style upon the work. An artist should reject sentimentality, catharsis, and other ‘expressive’ reasons for making, and by doing so, focus on relating art to non-subjective reality and to the every-day; the banal. I believe in taking the entire spectrum of sound, audible and inaudible, as the basis of music and that music is organised sound. In this I agree with Varèse, Cage, and others, and want sound to be itself, organised by a human, or not. In this making, one should be experimental, always, and document one’s work as much as is practical. An artist’s work is created for the medium, and transcription from one medium to another is not the business of the artist; make something for the other medium that is new to you instead. In this endeavour one must find something to devote oneself to and do it. One must make for the sake of making and find something to do. Reject ignorance and be informed, of the field and of the world.
Manifesto (1.1, April 2019)
| On Aesthetics | ||
|---|---|---|
| Reject the ego and the self | ||
| Cage had the idea (from Zen Buddhism) that notions of style and taste are manifestations of ego. I take the view that this is true, and that we should reject egoistic modes of making and reject notions of the ‘self’. To do otherwise engages with ‘taste’, ‘style’, ‘genre’, and other artificial and unnecessary concepts that have nothing to do with making something new, and instead biases the creator (and listener) to the point of inability to experience newness. | ||
| Reject sentimentality, catharsis, and other ‘expressive’ reasons for making | ||
| People talk of music as this great communicative medium: often this is strongly tied to the ego and the self (self-expression, for example), and what people tend to mean by this is sentimentality, catharsis, and emotions, and the communication of these things to anybody who’ll listen. That is: expressing one’s feelings through some artistic medium in the hope that somebody else listens to it and understands the message, or at least maps their own lived experiences onto the music. The mapping will happen anyway, so why force your own shit down peoples’ throats? At best that is rude, and at worst, it is dogmatic, reminding me of being preached at on street corners. Rather, these things – sentimentality, catharsis, expressive intentions – can be catalysts for art if they must be but if music is communicative, then one must naturally ask what is being communicated, and how? Communication is “the imparting or exchanging of information by speaking, writing, or using some other medium” which seems woefully inadequate to the social, cognitive, and other experiences that music (and art)does offer. Art is not a tool for an artist to ‘communicate’ to the world, like some kind of amplifier, but rather a mode of experiencing the world, which is a very different consideration that has nothing to do with an artist’s sentimentality, catharsis, or other ‘expression’ that relies on the self or the ego. | ||
| Relate art to reality; relate art to the every day | ||
| There is enough wonder in the world without needing to artificially load art up with metaphysical notions. Music in the Classical (and modern popular) context does not reflect reality much at all: it is ordered, systematic, and artificially constructed, rather than emergent. This does not offer any insight into anything other than itself, or the ego of the creator. Instead, it should be related to reality, to the every-day: the complex and the banal, and thus catalyse insight, or not, rather than dictate. | ||
| Be experimental, always | ||
| While this term can be used in almost endless way (the Wikipedia page, for example, describes ‘experimental’ as any kind of music that pushes the boundaries of that idiom/style/ genre), the use here is specific. I find Aaron Cassidy’s description most clarifying: "Virtually every stage of the compositional process, and indeed the compositions themselves and their performances, revolve around an effort to foreground a practice of experimentation – that is, a process that is driven by questions, rather than answers, hypotheses, rather than conclusions." And: "Following from this, a focus on systems and a certain precision in the construction of a work, or, more importantly, carefully controlling the location and extent of human, composerly intervention & decision- making." And: "experiments in the arts seem to negate the possibility of revision, as such." This very much follows in the tradition of Cage, who discusses composition as process (as opposed to music as process), and the removal of the composer’s ego, taste, stylistic tastes, and so forth through the primacy of (non-banal) questions instead of answers or stylistic dogma, defined by the artist or by the lineage and cannon. As Cage has pointed out (and as is echoed by Cassidy), it is desirable that composition (and listening) is a process of discovery, of expanding listening, and to be experimental is to be true and authentic to this ideal. | ||
| On Medium and Craft | ||
| Take all sound as the basis of music; let sound be itself | Take all sound as the basis of music; let sound be itself | |
| Drawing upon Varèse, Cage, Oliveros, and others, this approach to music-making is one of an expanded field of material that encompasses all sound from the microscopic to the macroscopic. It is possible through technology to do things that were impossible for that generation, and even the generation that came after them. It is possible, and has been for some time, through technology, to manipulate sound at the sub- sample level; at inaudible amplitudes, and/or with periods too slow or too fast for hearing. Further, any signal or data of any kind can be turned into sound, and source of activity turned into music. As Cage and others observed, the only silence, subjectively, is death. Objectively, there is none. Let listening be listening to sound, for its sound’s own sake. Let sound be itself, free from the baggage of the extra-musical, the psychological, and so on. | Drawing upon Varèse, Cage, Oliveros, and others, this approach to music-making is one of an expanded field of material that encompasses all sound from the microscopic to the macroscopic. It is possible through technology to do things that were impossible for that generation, and even the generation that came after them. It is possible, and has been for some time, through technology, to manipulate sound at the sub- sample level; at inaudible amplitudes, and/or with periods too slow or too fast for hearing. Further, any signal or data of any kind can be turned into sound, and source of activity turned into music. As Cage and others observed, the only silence, subjectively, is death. Objectively, there is none. Let listening be listening to sound, for its sound’s own sake. Let sound be itself, free from the baggage of the extra-musical, the psychological, and so on. | |
| On Working and Methodology | ||
| Create for the medium | Create for the medium | |
| A piece of music for the concert hall’s medium is the soloist or ensemble, in whatever physical space. This is live music, for live, social experiencing. Not for recording in some other medium and listening in isolation. A piece of music for a recorded medium is, equally, for that medium, and need not be listened to ‘live’. There is, at the present time, excessive recordings of music in the world, which diminishes the value of all music. By making a stand on the medium, I hope, in some small way, to increase the value of liveness and focus on the nature of these various mediums. This is at odds with most of my life so far, as I have sought recordings for live works and live performances for fixed works. | A piece of music for the concert hall’s medium is the soloist or ensemble, in whatever physical space. This is live music, for live, social experiencing. Not for recording in some other medium and listening in isolation. A piece of music for a recorded medium is, equally, for that medium, and need not be listened to ‘live’. There is, at the present time, excessive recordings of music in the world, which diminishes the value of all music. By making a stand on the medium, I hope, in some small way, to increase the value of liveness and focus on the nature of these various mediums. This is at odds with most of my life so far, as I have sought recordings for live works and live performances for fixed works. | |
| Reject ignorance | ||
| An artist should not be ignorant about the world, about the medium(s) of the artform, and about history and society and politics. That does not mean that these things ought to influence the making and apply baggage to sound, but in rejecting ignorance one must be aware of what exists in order to trust what one is doing. | ||
| Make for the sake of making; find something to do | ||
| There is really no excuse to not do creative things. One needn’t be limited to a narrow view of their practice, or of creativity. A rhetorical question might be: what is the difference between composing a sonata and composing this text? Good practice is to attempt to answer a rhetorical question lest it reveal faulty logic, and so: there is no difference. Both activities are composing, though the methods – or materials – may be different. It is easy to make excuses not to make; there is no time, there is no money, there is no x, I don’t feel inspired, I have nothing to say. To paraphrase and recontextualise Cage: I have nothing to say, so say it. | ||
| Document as often as is practical | ||
| Document your work in any format as much as possible. For your own sake, if nobody else’s. This allows you to understand your processes, and to minimise the impact of posthumous study and romanticisation. | ||
| Find something to devote yourself to and devote yourself to it | ||
| It is good practice to devote oneself to things. Informally, I am told that the number of things to be (seriously) devoted to in life is approximately four, and that these act as psychological anchors for a person. By devoting oneself to a thing, one prioritises that working and will find joy in the process as much, or more, than the outcome. |