Good points, Skip, and I don't disagree. What I'm stressing--and I can see now where some clarification is in order--is that if a musician spends a period of time immersed in the study of musical elements, which are common to all musics, isolated from the dictates of styles and traditions, then he or she can apply the skills gained from that study in whatever musical sphere he or she intends to deal. One can then choose traditions and styles, but not be hamstrung by them. One can allow the musical circumstances of his environment (time, place) to inform his sound, but the expression comes from within (one's own sound) and frees the player from lickocentrism. It frees the player from resorting to what Roscoe Mitchell calls "pushing your groove buttons" or what Leo Smith calls "frozen information." Bob --On Wednesday, July 02, 2003 9:37 AM -0700 skip Heller <velaires@earthlink.net> wrote:
on 7/2/03 6:55 AM, bsweet@umich.edu at bsweet@umich.edu wrote:
Karl Berger, who, along with Ornette Coleman, founded the Creative Music Studio, sought to convey to musicians that they can--and must--develop a connection with, a mastery over, an intimacy with, or--if you can stand it--a relationship with the elements of music that have nothing to do with traditions or styles.
I've always disagreed with this practice in art, because, in my heart of heart, I've always thought history is one of the essential and most beautiful elements of craft.
Live and breath rhythm and tuning. Develop the skills that put you in command of those elements. Disregard jazz, rock, classical, avant garde, blues, etc. What do you as a musician have left?
No background that shaped my world view, no association via music to the world in which I grew up and hopefully continue to grow.
The music of you.
The music of me is as much a product of the external forces as it is whatever is inside me. I believe in social music and expression as communication. My creativity would be less rich without everything good I ever heard to inform my intuition and lead my judgement about what to include and what to discard.
You can then take your mastery over the elements common to all music and do what you want with them; play jazz if you want to, don't play jazz if you don't want to; be whoever you are. Be John Zorn, or be Joe Blow. You can call what you play "the music of me," or you can call it creative music.
Whoever I am has everything to do with the world that has shaped me -- and music is the hugest part of that world.
best -- sh
on 7/2/03 10:34 AM, bsweet@umich.edu at bsweet@umich.edu wrote:
Good points, Skip, and I don't disagree. What I'm stressing--and I can see now where some clarification is in order--is that if a musician spends a period of time immersed in the study of musical elements, which are common to all musics, isolated from the dictates of styles and traditions, then he or she can apply the skills gained from that study in whatever musical sphere he or she intends to deal. One can then choose traditions and styles, but not be hamstrung by them. One can allow the musical circumstances of his environment (time, place) to inform his sound, but the expression comes from within (one's own sound) and frees the player from lickocentrism. It frees the player from resorting to what Roscoe Mitchell calls "pushing your groove buttons" or what Leo Smith calls "frozen information."
Bob
I find something inorganic in the idea of approaching the elements of something while disregarding various combinations of those elements. Where in nature is that possible? By the time any player is in a position to make those kinds of musical choices, he/she already has a history with the music we've played or heard. There are times when it is exactly the right choice to push the groove buttons or play the guaranteed licks -- the audience needs it, and it makes it easier for them to relate to the music (a familar hook shall guideth the way). That sort of frozen information is almost common language between the audience and the players. And the last time we tried to synthesize a new language to displace the old one, it failed. Or is there a colony of Esparanto speakers I missed? The Esparanto thing is kind of indiciative as to why I don't cotton to so much of what is called "free music", "creative music", "fire music" or whatever while I do give it up to Cecil Taylor. A lot of guys -- who I won't name -- got into a vibe of trying to show up with some stuff and represent it as the new language of their musical community. But it had not evolved over time the way real language had evolved from combinations of earlier -- imported -- languages and colloquial speech. A Player indicitive of this for me would be Jimi Hendrix. skip h
participants (2)
-
bsweet＠umich.edu -
skip Heller