LMJ Web Abstracts

© 1999 ISAST LMJ WEB ABSTRACTS LEONARDO MUSIC JOURNAL, Vol. 9, pp. 121–122, 1999 121 LMJ Web Abstracts The following abstracts are from papers that were solicited by Leonardo Music Journal Editor-in-Chief Nicolas Collins but submitted too late for publication. Each of these articles is accessible in its entirety on-line via the LMJ website at . OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF THE CREATIVE PROCESS IN THE COMPOSITION AND PERFORMANCE OF ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC Peter Manning, Department of Music, University of Durham, Palace Green, Durham, DH1 3RL, U.K. E-mail: . The evolution of electroacoustic music has been significantly shaped by the functional characteristics of the technologies used to produce it. These external influences materially affect the working environments of those who work in this medium and in turn raise important questions about the ownership and control of the creative process—particularly the extent to which such ownership and control must be shared between composers and technology developers. The author examines these issues from an historical perspective, highlighting the significance of features directly attributable to the evolution of the technology itself; during that evolution , the increasing power and operational versatility afforded composers has generally been associated with growing levels of complexity in the technology’s musical application. The imaginative use of variable speed tape recorders to loop and process sounds, and the extensive application of laboratory test gear to generate electronic material in the early pioneering days of electroacoustic music both provide important examples of musicians taking command of their own destinies through the exploitation of audio tools not specifically engineered for such purposes. With the development of custom-designed equipment and the advent of a commercial manufacturing sector during the 1960s, technology ceased to be an essentially passive agent and became a highly proactive and influential force in the development of the electroacoustic medium. The author also examines the nature and significance of the partnerships between artists and technologists in the context of ownership and control, leading to his proposition that the development of a mass culture in terms of generally available technical resources has not wholly benefitted the creative process. Whereas an initial assessment may point to the greater accessibility that has been achieved for all those who seek to exploit the medium, a number of important objectives have not yet been fully delivered. Sophisticated and versatile system designs have often come at the expense of artists having direct contact with key processes that lie at the heart of the underlying technology ; the author pays particular attention to the effects of this disengagement upon the creative process. The opportunities to work with sound within the electroacoustic medium have no precise parallels to conventional music-making, where creative discourse continues to be expressed in terms of sound-producing agents whose physical design and functional characteristics have changed very little for several centuries. The electroacoustic composer has to contend not only with the challenges of directly generating and modifying sound material, but also with the constant change in the functional characteristics of the technology itself. Interdisciplinary partnerships between artists and technologists raise fundamental questions of empowerment , which the author evaluates within the broader tradition of music composition and performance. DE-COMPOSING OPERA/ RE-COMPOSING LISTENING: JOHN CAGE’S EUROPERAS David Ryan, 26 Adelina Yard, 20-22 Adelina Grove, Whitechapel, London E1 3AD, U.K. The author examines John Cage’s Europeras in the light of his practice and the critical context of his work. In doing this, he addresses several key issues: the question of tradition and Cage’s attitude to European traditions in particular , the use of chance operations within the broader framework of the Europeras and the specificity of listening in Cage’s work in conjunction with the figuring of what we might call a “non-intentional” expressivity. The author argues that Cage was ultimately much more complicit with the relics of tradition than previously thought. Contrary to Heinz-Klaus Metzger’s view of the Europeras, as a kind of Hegelian “sublation ”—and therefore the symbolic death of opera as medium and practice —the author examines how the Europeras, taken as a whole, form a movement toward an increased empathy with the found materials of opera as a genre...