by Greg Segal

Improvisation in different styles generally proceeds towards different but similar goals- with the common goal of artistic freedom and celebration of chance being at the root in most cases. Jazz improvisation seems to center around technique and theory being put to the test under fire; classical avant-garde improvisation is often engaged in a similar but wider exploration in which theory and sonic structural boundaries are expanded in search of more answers to the question, "What is music?" (Some of the more progressive jazz and rock appear to be equally concerned with this question.)

(If I appear to be hedging in the above paragraph- seems, appears, etc.- it's because analysis can only go so far with art and there are at least as many answers and as many questions as there are artists. Analysis of the arts can never escape being general and presumptive. So I will at least try to let the language show that.)

Beyond Form: Improvisation as an element

On a more subtle level, improvisation is spread throughout all forms, if seen as a matter of degree. Working towards structure from total free improvisation we can take a few examples and see: improvisation within a simple framework- head, improv, and tail; improvisation only in the context of solos, with the rest of the piece carefully constructed; and finally, improvisation on the smallest degree- the difference between performances of fully composed pieces. The most competent musician will of course never be able to play the same piece in exactly the same way regardless of effort to do so. There are too many variables- intonation, attack, vibrato, and all the things which physically affect a performer's skill with these. So is this actually improvisation? Yes, insofar as any performer must adapt to physical and mental conditions in order to perform, and those conditions can never be the same twice. In this way every performer must interact with the moment- regardless of how pre-structured a piece is- in order to play well. And that is the essence of improvisation. So what we are dealing with here is actually a root element that can be elevated, evolving into many forms and used in virtually every context.

The Controlled Accident

You can see how this  ties in well with music. First, most players  have experienced those moments on stage where it is vital to turn a mistake in one's favor- the controlled accident in spades. However, a great many people raised in our culture will fail to see the beauty in this. I think that has to do with cultural conditioning- mistakes aren't OK, they aren't something that happens to everyone. Performers are supposed to be infallible, damn it! So, there's no gentle sense of humor that allows one to marvel at the recovery. The players I've met over the years seem to fall into two camps- those who get this and those who don't. The ones who don't seem to have a lot in common with religious fundamentalists and tend to be more restricted (and restrictive) in other areas of their life as well. There is no separating personality from art! (Or any other human activity for that matter.) The clash is usually one of form vs. feeling. It's my opinion that in the highest art there is no clash between these two, but instead an integration. Almost everyone will agree with this but almost no one agrees on the ratio!

Improvisation in Life

Well, you can't get around it, can you? The bottom line here is that you can't plan everything. Most people recognize this and try to structure their lives to exclude as much of the random as they can. This does not prepare them for when random things do occur- as they inevitably will. It would be better to do much the same thing- keep things reasonably well controlled- but with an acknowledgment of the random, backed up with some kind of training for dealing with it. This doesn't mean training so that you can try to get everything strictly nailed down- do that and joy, which is spontaneous, all but disappears. Whatever training is used should include a view of the random as enjoyable, and direct people towards an acceptance of its beauty. For the most part its'  negative aspects get the publicity, and it is treated with fear and distrust. This is a societal, cultural prejudice. While it is not entirely without basis, it is not, in my opinion, the healthiest approach to a very basic fact of life.

Everyone should be encouraged in the opportunity of developing the capacity for celebrating the positive aspects of randomness, as well as taught to fear its dark, unknown and dangerous aspect. Improvised music is a pretty benign means of learning that. It's a good way to safely explore the full range of possibilities for interaction with the random. At its most dangerous it is only as harmful as the idea of freedom. ~