ATTEMPTS TO ARTICULATE A BEGINNING: A CODE OF ETHICS OR ETIQUETTE?

Everything spoken is provisional, an offering to be considered but not a rule. Not everything needs to be considered & perhaps the strength of collaboration is in helping each other sort out the excess that gets in the way of creation. = Everything is fair game & also everything is vulnerable to veto.

A reference to the carbon table: before we sit down for a discussion we must describe where we are sitting, what we are sitting upon: to feel the presence of the room in how it influences/inflects our attention, & also to craft a conversation which is truly unique to us - two individuals colliding in an intentional way.

Imagined variables: intentionality & rules / improvisation & freedom / technique (of the instrument) & composition (with notation) = we both can & will consider all possible variables, but to begin perhaps we should lay claim to a territory: ___ with technique, TW with notation forms // action & intention.

On this point: it seems imperative that we avoid dualisms, binary oppositions, simple & dumb dichotomies. Rather we should pursue the possibilities of multiplicity, of the (and) / (+) more so than the (or) / (-) (|), etc.

Should we play together? Is it just a conversation? It's both, always. How do we continue the conversation to craft an intentional cerebral music that also allows for exploratory freedom? How do we communicate with instruments, technique, & sound to expand our awareness of what is possible, thereby expanding the peripheries of the conversation? Where do we do it? How often?

For now, we come together to talk & hash out ideas solo: ___ concentrating upon technique, TW focusing upon visual notation/communication structure. Next meeting will be an exchange of these individual pursuits & we will go from there, depending upon what is produced.

PROGRESSION OF FIRST IDEAS:

A notation structure of "blocks" allowing for choice of the performer, consisting of note variables & differing pathways all leading to the same place, empowering players to insert a measure of their own will in the composition = still determined by the composer. Doesn't need to be written, but is based upon a pre-determined agreement: a series of rules decided before playing. Modular modalities, a system with variables, a small fraction of choice but still a "follow the leader arrangement."

Reverse engineered notation: must avoid taking something complex & merely making it accessible! Instead striving for understanding & clarity - to have the improvisation determine the notation. Improv (chaos of expression, intensity of feeling, spontaneity in time, etc) to coagulate into a communicable form that can be shared with other musicians so that the potency of the experience can be recreated = a document of the cerebral intensity, of the mind of improvisation, more than a document of the sound effects/affects >> implies that there's a different between an audio document recording the effects of a session & a visual-notational document recording the affects of a session. = maybe impossible.

Free Jazz: a genre of deconstructing the modes/rules of melody to amplify feeling & spirit. Offers a rich history, but also must be avoided = offers an awareness that we can reference without repeating (not to quote but to learn from the mistakes). How to compose music "after free jazz"? This is just one point among many: none should be fallen into completely.

Skill & technique in building/writing: idea & practice, skill & technique, action & action upon different planes of consideration (must be careful not to succumb to simple binary oppositions!).

Goal: to build a relationship between the playing & the writing that is exploring the relations of meaning with depth & sensitivity. To avoid loose improvisations with weak visual supplements which break down into abstractions, & also resist the urge to write the music first, to be interpreted by performers later, so as to maintain & strengthen the reciprocal exchange between writing/performing music & conceptualizing/actualizing sound.

Cornelius Cardew: Scratch Orchestra, Conlan Nancarrow's player pianos, Morton Feldman (less than there & more than not there) :: different compositional/improvisation techniques/scenarios.

Numbers & colors, lines & shapes, circles & bars, images & movement. Gradients: a spectra in-between black & white. Symbols, archetypes, alphabets. The problem: to devise the system of translation to give it meaning, to avoid a free interpretation of colors, esoteric forms, etc., but instead use the notation system as a tool for expanding awareness of technique & vice-versa. To coordinate & correlate the system with the technique. Also an issue of fidelity: what variables are important, what can be left out? Too high fidelity can never be realistically played, too low fidelity leaves too much to the performer's interpretation. What is to be played, how is it to be played, without either the instruction or improvisation taking priority?

The system should be devised by us (not collage or pastiche). The music should be performed by us (not other performers). Let's use what we have, at least for now, for sake of focus & (relative) simplicity in this complex conversation.

The possibility of a third element: another person, another instrument? Are they brought in to the conversation? As we compose, making room for another instrument. Before they are brought in, we should be sure (between ourselves at least) what their role, or responsibility, or limitations, may be. Bands/collaborations form a kind of hierarchy, & we must define that before we bring in other players or would-be collaborators. How can we learn from our own histories, learn from our past mistakes - in past bands & musical scenarios, to avoid drama & turmoil while maximizing creative freedom.

We should meet regularly - once a week? Let's keep playing & talking equal - don't let playing take predominance: no pure jamming. Also, we have work we can attend to individually during the week: ___ focusing on playing (technique) while TW focuses on visual research/reference to complicate the conversation more. The weekly meeting should be limited - an hour or two? - in order to concentrate our attention & energy while we are physically together.

Images & words as necessary supplements to the writing process: organic words with roots in nature & time.

Is playing the guitar an organic experience? Wood vs aluminum, natural vs industrial feel of various guitars. Different materials change the approach = the instrument influences/inflects the possibilities of playing. *When do we attend to the materiality of the guitar? Make or modify our own? ___ could explore the varying qualities of feeling, evocations of time, "naturalness," etc., of different instrument materials. The relation of effect & affect: music as a series of physical effects that evoke biological affects. It's never just one or the other, always both, always an atmosphere of sympathetic vibrations, otherwise it's merely robotic (which we agree we should avoid).

Nature + Time: big vague eggs waiting to be cracked.

IMMEDIATE GOALS:

Something recorded (audio) for our own reference by the end of May.

Something documented (visual) that we can think about by the end of May.

To be able to discuss the relationship between these documents/recordings to brew upon while we are separated for the month of June.