This
comprehensive work is amazingly thorough and exhaustive.. tremendously
interesting and readable, though scholarly, researched, footnoted
and all the rest. Best idea for me is simply excerpt a few paragraphs to
give the reader a taste of the content and it's readability.. here
goes...
The big question often asked
by those about to try free improvisation for the first time is,
"What do I play?" or from the audience's perspective, "What do you do
when you free improvise?"
The easy answer, of course, is "Do anything!" And along with
this usually goes the maxim,
"You can't make a mistake in free improvisation." As explained
earlier, however, these comments are more mythical than true.
Let's say three musicians who
have never improvised before and who normally read music
(and can play well) sit down and free improvise. What happens?
Almost invariably, after trying to "sound like" free improvisation (and
failing), the musicians will call on what they know how to play already,
be it "licks" or quotations from "the literature".
Actually, they don't have a clue as to what to do. This happens
because they are under the misconception that free improvisers make
the music. Therefore, they each feel personally responsible to
make something happen, yet nothing happens as a group, nothing
congeals. The music sounds either chaotic/random or collage-like.
There is little or no interaction among the players.
In truth, free
improvisation is not made, ut us allowed to make itself.
The free improviser allows INFLUENCES to work, allows the music to form
itself through his/her body and mind, and just as importantly, the group
mind. But what necessarily goes along with this is a certain kind
of intense concentration on the music as it happens (as well as
some level of technical proficiency). What the three novice
improvisers (in spite of their technical proficiency) are failing to do
is simply to listen. Each one is so focused on what she/he is
responsible for individually that there is little or no attention to
the potential music, itself. As elementary as this seems, it is
perhaps the greatest hurdle, initially, in learning to free improvise.
.....
In that period of silence just before
a performance begins, the free improviser should ideally have nothing
in mind, the first sound being entirely impulsive. The instant the sound
is heard, the music begins; everything from here on is responsive,
whether consciously or subconsciously. And being a performance,
the response is necessarily spontaneous. The Intelligent Body goes
to work, not only generating sound, but generating musical ideas as
well, ideas which capture the attention of the Intellect....
.....
Music, itself is fleeting--it's here,
it's gone. The next time is different, never the same.
Change is the dynamic basis of music, of cours: it is a temporal art
articulated through change over time moment by moment.. And, of course,
change functions historically, period by period, cycle by
cycle.....Change, after all, is the succor of creativity.
Nunn forages topics such as the Complex
Nature of Processes,
Confounding Principles of
Complexity, the Voice of New Music, the Voice of
Improvised Music, Networking, Experimental/Original Instruments in Free
Improvisation, Education
and Group Exercises.. Discussions, Examples, Live
Performance vs. Recording, Producing, Contextualization,
Projection, Flow
Perception, Impressions, Influences and Processes, and Critical
Listening, to be
brief. While the designations may seem arbitrary and personalized
(as opposed to
"scientific"), he's hitting close to a workable frame of reference for
an area
notoriously troublesome for those relying on logic to interpret the
ineffable, or for
those who glibly believe that free improvisation is somehow completely
beyond
logic. In fact, this is thorough enough that I could flunk a test
on it.
-Davey Williams
. |
|