Re: [microsound] physical filter

[Kenric McDowell <kenricm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for clearing that up. I get it now: The precise execution of 
musical ideas without dramatic presentation fails to meet the 
expectations of an audience accustomed to theatricality.

My contention is that the physical relationship to an instrument is not 
completely motivated by theatricality and that it does in fact have a 
lot to do with the creation of sonic concepts. These are two assumptions 
that deprive us of an area of potential thought and exploration in music 
making.
The presumed removal of the body from the process of creation is in 
itself a filter.

-km

On Tuesday, November 12, 2002, at 03:01 PM, Bill Ashline wrote:

> No it's not flame bait and it's not what Kim is saying below.  This 
> idea gets spelled out in his interview with CTheory.  The laptop 
> affords an immediacy with musical concepts that one devises that are 
> not limited by the proficiency in motor skills required to play a 
> traditional acoustic instrument.  I think Kim is quite right on this 
> point.  The only major limitation is in the audience's reception of the 
> performative once they've discovered there's very little to see.  When 
> one is conditioned to appreciate adept motor skills displayed in the 
> live performance, this is what Kim calls gestural theatre.  Anthony 
> Braxton called it the "sweat factor."  Either way, it has nothing to do 
> with the creation of sonar concepts or what goes in the performative 
> space.
>
>
>
>

------------------------------