The first event in the project took place here in Maastricht on Sunday night. A link to the audio recording can be found here.
The event raised more questions than it answered. I began by discussing the question of the lecture format, and its relationship to determination. Cage was opposed to determinate structures, which he called "inhuman." Determinism in his sense meant anything that was not open to "no matter what eventuality," that is, anything that demanded a movement from point a to point be in a specific pattern. The lecture I was focusing on, "Indeterminacy," from "Composition as Process," begins with the grammatically ambiguous phrase, "This is a lecture on composition which is indeterminate with respect to its performance," that is, again, that the composition does not demand a teleology, but rather lets itself unfold through chance. (This is not, as I will be discussing in the future, simply haphazard, but is a very precise practice for Cage. See the anonymously published thoughts on precision in this issue of Machete for a theoretical exposition, which is close to but not entirely the same as Cage's practice.)
If we look closely at this sentence which begins Cage's lecture, we notice a grammatical ambiguity. Does the "which" modify the lecture, or other "composition(s)"? In other words, is Cage's lecture itself indeterminate, or is he discussing other indeterminate compositions? It becomes clear once we start reading that the latter is the case, but it is also clear from a note that Cage wants to critique himself for the lecture itself not being indeterminate. A note before the lecture reads, "The excessively small type [indeed it is! (see link to Cage's articles below)] in the following pages is an attempt to emphasize the intentionally pontifical character of this lecture . But it is exactly such determining sovereign figures as the Pope, the dictator and the composer that Cage is trying to free us from with indeterminacy. The lecture as a determinate event therefore goes against this very aim.
After beginning my lecture with these thoughts, I asked to audience to feel free to interrupt me, or ask questions, or engage in some dialogue. But I also noted Cage's own problem - that I was still trying to impart some specific information. And, like lecture at this moment in his career, my lecture remained pontifical. Later on, Cage would give less specific lectures and rely mostly on assemblages of quotes or anecdotes rather than specific information. The How to Get Started project (see below) is also about such concerns. I am still looking for my own method here, and this talk remained pontifical.
The other attempt I made was to speak from notes, and not from a pre-written paper. I worry that in so doing I may have not fully explained certain terms. What has been nice in the past few days is the opportunity to have conversations with people after the lecture, where we have discussed quite a bit about precision, compassion, critique, transparency, and the subject. Thoughts on these topics will follow on the blog over the next few days. And, in a nice way, this slightly abstract first lecture, conjoined with the blog, will allow for a kind of unfolding of ideas for which the first audio recording is just the beginning.
One anecdote:
I met a psychoanalyst yesterday who told me I should do less. At least one day a week to do nothing, he said. I asked him if writing about people who wrote about doing nothing (Cage, Suzuki) counted? He laughed.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Arrival
Still without a method for anonymity, I will be using pronouns for now. Why anonymity? Cage writes in A Year from Monday:
"I have attempted briefly here to set forth a view of the arts which does not separate them from the rest of life, but rather confuses the difference between Art and Life, just as it diminishes the distinctions between space and time. Many of the ideas involved come from the Orient, particularly China and Japan. However, what with the printing press, the airplane, telegraphy, and nowadays Telstar, the distinctions between Occident and Orient are fast disappearing. We live in one world. Likewise the distinctions between self and other are being forgotten. Throughout the world people cooperate to effect an action. Hearing of anonymity, one can imagine the absence of competition."
Cage walks this constant line between a certain hoaky-ness and a clarity and depth of thought, and its sometimes hard to reconcile them. (Watch him on youtube here, for example.) But much of what I am interested in in this project is to take this idea of anonymity seriously. If you watch the youtube clip, it appears at first very random what he is doing. But it is important throughout to remember that Cage choose everything he did very specifically, to create what he called "no matter what eventuality," a way of freeing up the performance from determination and power. This will be a major focus of my talk tomorrow, which I will upload via sound cloud. I will discuss anonymity, its relationship to Silence, and to new media, throughout this blog, in my talks, and in the articles written for Machete.
Two anecdotes for now.
1. Very jet lagged, I heard a talk yesterday on "Where are the animals? Animality and relationality", which turned out to be about happiness. Insisting that happiness in English was too hoaky a word, the speaker used the German, glucklich. He argued that any search to become happy was bound to fail, since happiness was not the possession of any individual. Happiness is always exterior. I asked him after the talk if it was exterior, then where was it. Social democracy, he said. I started to reply but someone interrupted. My reply would have been that a distinction between happiness and social democracy is absolutely necessary. But thinking about it more, the two languages seem the more important point. The friend I am visiting here had a show once entitled, "Yes yes I am happy, aber glucklich ich bin nicht". That seems the crucial point - I am happy in the English sense of personal possession, but the glucklick of social justice is lacking.
2. A man tells me about a group of radicals in Amsterdam in the 80s - I forget their name now - and how he is writing a book about their work as architectural practice. Squatting is architecture, he says, and architecture needs to maintain its place as radical social formation. I ask him if he followed at all the upsurge of interest in Buckmisnter Fuller a few years ago - the return to utopian planning - and suggest that he is suggesting a very interesting model. Utopia from below, as it were. He doesn't reply; just tells me the two things he thinks are wrong with Fuller.
"I have attempted briefly here to set forth a view of the arts which does not separate them from the rest of life, but rather confuses the difference between Art and Life, just as it diminishes the distinctions between space and time. Many of the ideas involved come from the Orient, particularly China and Japan. However, what with the printing press, the airplane, telegraphy, and nowadays Telstar, the distinctions between Occident and Orient are fast disappearing. We live in one world. Likewise the distinctions between self and other are being forgotten. Throughout the world people cooperate to effect an action. Hearing of anonymity, one can imagine the absence of competition."
Cage walks this constant line between a certain hoaky-ness and a clarity and depth of thought, and its sometimes hard to reconcile them. (Watch him on youtube here, for example.) But much of what I am interested in in this project is to take this idea of anonymity seriously. If you watch the youtube clip, it appears at first very random what he is doing. But it is important throughout to remember that Cage choose everything he did very specifically, to create what he called "no matter what eventuality," a way of freeing up the performance from determination and power. This will be a major focus of my talk tomorrow, which I will upload via sound cloud. I will discuss anonymity, its relationship to Silence, and to new media, throughout this blog, in my talks, and in the articles written for Machete.
Two anecdotes for now.
1. Very jet lagged, I heard a talk yesterday on "Where are the animals? Animality and relationality", which turned out to be about happiness. Insisting that happiness in English was too hoaky a word, the speaker used the German, glucklich. He argued that any search to become happy was bound to fail, since happiness was not the possession of any individual. Happiness is always exterior. I asked him after the talk if it was exterior, then where was it. Social democracy, he said. I started to reply but someone interrupted. My reply would have been that a distinction between happiness and social democracy is absolutely necessary. But thinking about it more, the two languages seem the more important point. The friend I am visiting here had a show once entitled, "Yes yes I am happy, aber glucklich ich bin nicht". That seems the crucial point - I am happy in the English sense of personal possession, but the glucklick of social justice is lacking.
2. A man tells me about a group of radicals in Amsterdam in the 80s - I forget their name now - and how he is writing a book about their work as architectural practice. Squatting is architecture, he says, and architecture needs to maintain its place as radical social formation. I ask him if he followed at all the upsurge of interest in Buckmisnter Fuller a few years ago - the return to utopian planning - and suggest that he is suggesting a very interesting model. Utopia from below, as it were. He doesn't reply; just tells me the two things he thinks are wrong with Fuller.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Beginnings
I leave tomorrow to begin The Silence Project, funded by a grant for research and new media.
Based on John Cage's book by that title, the project looks at Cage's work as it interfaces with new media. The aim, following Cage's example, is to produce a series of lecture-conversations as well as anecdotes surrounding them. Further, like Cage, the project does not create a hierarchy between text and anecdote; it integrates them.
Based on John Cage's book by that title, the project looks at Cage's work as it interfaces with new media. The aim, following Cage's example, is to produce a series of lecture-conversations as well as anecdotes surrounding them. Further, like Cage, the project does not create a hierarchy between text and anecdote; it integrates them.
The project differs from Cage's in two ways: (1) events will be documented simultaneously with on-line recordings, and anecdotes will be created, crafted, and edited on the blog (alongside notes for anecdotes and other musings). (2) All names in the anecdotes will be given random generations. No real names will be used. The method for generating these names – it must be precise – will be determined in the next few days. The reasons for this choice will be pursued in future posts.
There will be three venues for the lecture-conversations: the Jan Van Eyck Academie in Maastricht, Netherlands (May 29); the Based in Berlin festival (June 23); and the MFA Program at Bard College (date TBD) (also home of the John Cage Trust). Webspace to upload the conversations is currently being negotiated. The first conversation will focus on Cage's notion of indeterminacy; the second on pessimism versus optimism in the cultural community; the third on the notion of precision. The second and third events will be co-given with Alexi Kukuljevic and Nick Keys, respectively.
The thesis: Cage's goal is to turn history into indeterminacy by way of the technological production of global transparency. The method is precision. The ethics are formally situational, and their content is compassion.
The task of the lecture-conversations and the blog will be to unfold this still unclear (perhaps unwieldy) claim within a communal setting. None of the lectures have been written. Based loosely on the methodology of the "How to Get Started" Project of the Slought Foundation, each will be the extemporaneous exposition of ideas working from scattered notes. Participants are encouraged to reply, question, interrupt – both in person and on the blog.
People following the blog are encouraged to read the Cage texts from Silence posted here (the text by B. Joseph is helpful as well): http://www.marginalutility.org/machete-group/2011/machete-group-19-february-2011/ (The Machete zine will also publish some more polished thoughts from the lecture in the July issue.)
…more to come….
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)