![]() ![]() ![]() Omission of all accidental properties of a sonic event is the necessary precondition of visually fixing music by symbols and signs. Obviously, nothing of this has to do with notation and inscription in the strict sense of “writing something down.” But it might have become clear from this hypothetical derivation that the attempt to transform sonic ephemerality into a stable, reproducible musical form strongly relies on abstraction. It becomes, as the media theory of sociologist Niklas Luhmann would have it, form. The advantage of this first (proto‑)musical operation lies precisely in abstracting certain stable elements from all the other qualities (audible or not) of the original acoustic event: by formalizing it, the simple tune (to be clear: this is an entity purely theoretical in nature, for it does not exist outside of the abstraction) will stay the same (and recognizably so) whether sung, whistled or hummed the rhythmic pattern will be identical (and therefore repeatable) whether clapped, tapped or drummed. Every other aspect of the original event-tempo, pitch and tone, for example-is considered to be an accidental property and can therefore, relative to the hypothesized tune or rhythm, be perceived as ephemeral, informal and unique. A certain tune or rhythmical pattern is abstracted from an originally more complex acoustic event and is, by imitation, made reproducible. Luhmann 2012: 123–138) is the selection of certain (recursive) forms audible in a pristine chaos of sonic impressions and perceptions (and perceptions of sonic perceptions). The phenomenological precondition enabling the communication of (proto‑)musical entities (corresponding to the invention of verbal languages-see e.g. The dilemma of writing the ephemeral even, and especially, holds true in music history, and more precisely, in the history of musical notation and in the evolution of (forms of) writing music. Music history and the history of musical notation The problematic situation of any analysis of the ephemeral thus consists in the impossibility to medially codify (in a metaphysically non-biased terminology) what one actually tries to analyze. The ephemeral, from this perspective, remains external to all media: that which cannot be inscribed, noted or written down. And whatever is to be considered ephemeral is essentially constituted by its unrepeatability, and therefore cannot possibly be recorded (at least not without the loss of its quality of being ephemeral)-be it on paper or on electromagnetic tape. Whatever can be written down and medially inscribed is, by definition, repeatable and therefore cannot, by definition, be ephemeral. The function of writing, as legends have it, consists in making (relatively) permanent, lasting and endurable what otherwise would be irretrievably lost in time.įrom a philosophical point of view, the concept of the ephemeral thus poses a dilemma. Repeatability on the other side, stability (temporal as well as spatial) and absence (of the communicator) precisely seem to represent the key features of writing and inscription. At the core of any notion of the ephemeral-the transitory and the short-lived, the elusive and the perishable-emphatically stands the idea of non-repeatability, singularity and of a fragile presence that vanishes in the very moment it comes into existence. Upon first consideration, the concept of the ephemeral-the common topic the articles in this issue engage with-quite plausibly seems to be a radical antonym of writing. John Cage’s Lecture on Nothing as a Landmark in Media History John Cage’s Lecture on Nothing as a Landmark in Media History. This article argues that these works are best understood as an artist’s quest for an adequate semiotic means of writing an aural event after electroacoustic media have become widely accessible. Seen as such, the Lecture on Nothing can be connected to Cage’s electronic music on audiotape, Williams Mix for example, and his elaboration of 4’33”, which forms the basis of his “silent pieces.” What unifies these three contemporaneous, but essentially different, works is their thought-provoking semantic emptiness. The text, however, also accurately and subtly reacts to the profound destabilization of the relationship between literacy and orality triggered by these inventions by applying new methods of writing. Cage’s lecture overtly responds to the establishment of the electromagnetic recording, storing and distributing of acoustic material after World War II by reflecting on these technical developments. The score of the lecture can be understood as a reaction to one of the most momentous cuts in twentieth century’s media history. John Cage’s Lecture on Nothing is one of his early, legendarily forbidding speeches first held in 1950. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |