"But my dream for the future is to create pieces for, and in a sense, with orchestras that I call "scorestreams," which are dynamically generated scores displayed on networked screens." - Michael Dessen |
Find out from composer Michael Dessen what participating in Jazz Composers Orchestra Institute La Jolla Symphony New Music Readings
means to him as a jazz composer and about his dream of creating dynamically generated
scores displayed on networked screens called “scorestreams.” Here is Part Two of our Q&A with Michael Dessen.
American
Composers Orchestra: What does this experience mean to you as a jazz composer?
What would you like to say to other jazz composers who may be interested in
applying to JCOI?
Michael
Dessen: I'm not sure what it even means to be a "jazz composer" these
days, and I'll leave it to others to decide whether the label fits me since I
don't really care, but it is true that jazz traditions are one of the core
inspirations for my music. But it's not just the sonic vocabulary or musical
forms in jazz that are important for me. I'm also referring to the methods that
jazz musicians developed for creating their music, the way their work embodied
particular values, ideas, ways of being together in the world. Jazz musicians
throughout the last century established a sophisticated set of new
compositional techniques, but they also moved in very fluid ways across
conventional boundaries between composer and performer.
Of
course plenty of composers throughout history have also been performers, but
I'm referring to something more. Performing in jazz goes way beyond
interpreting a composer's ideas - it requires you to make choices that are also
compositional ones, and the context in which this takes place is also a
community affair, since musicians move frequently among different roles and
power relationships, being a sideperson one day and a bandleader the next, and
learning from all these collaborative experiences. So for me, the legacies of
jazz really unsettle this whole idea of single authorship in a fundamental way,
while still retaining certain benefits of that tradition such as working with
complex, precomposed musical structures.
Even an early, iconic jazz composer
like Duke Ellington had a deeply collaborative notion of composition, and
depended on his performers to bring their personal voices to the music. This
contrasts with what you usually find in the world of orchestral music, where
musicians expect extremely precise instructions from composers, and where the
size of the ensemble typically precludes the extensive rehearsal time required
to bring the players' individual sounds and identities more fully into the
creative process itself. But I can also imagine a future for the orchestra that
embraces new ways of working, and does so without throwing tradition out the
window. I also know that orchestral musicians do think of their own sound in
very personal terms, and that most would enjoy opportunities to work
collaboratively with composers, the way that contemporary music chamber
ensembles are doing more and more today.
So
to answer your first question, I have to confess that this JCOI experience is
part of a longer-range plan for me. For this first piece, I'm focused on
improving my skills writing for orchestra, so I decided not to include
improvisation, technology or anything too outside the box in terms of method.
But my dream for the future is to create pieces for, and in a sense, with
orchestras that I call "scorestreams," which are dynamically generated
scores displayed on networked screens. I've created several of these for small
ensembles in the past few years. My scorestreams are basically custom software
applications that contain a kind of logic for navigating a collection of
musical notations. This gives each piece a recurring identity across
performances, but each performance is also different because both the software
and the musicians can make different choices. It'll be a challenge to find an
orchestra willing to take the time to really experiment with me on this, but
I'm optimistic it could happen. The Brussels Philharmonic recently started
using Samsung tablets to read music, and clearly our future is increasingly
paperless, so pretty soon one of my biggest logistical hurdles - how to get
access to that many tablet screens - will disappear. And when that happens,
orchestras will eventually discover that in addition to being a cost-effective
substitute for sheet music, touch screens and computer software open up many
new possibilities for extending the ways we create music together.
About the 2nd question, I
would just say that if the orchestra is a resource that could be useful to you
in expanding your own music, don't be afraid to just dive in, pay some dues
through study, and most of all imagine your own relationship to the orchestra
and seek ways of putting that into practice. And right now JCOI is one of the
best ways, maybe one of the only ways, for jazz composers to go through this
process, so I hope they keep the program going. Also, orchestras carry a huge
organizational apparatus and can be quite rigid about notation and other
conventions, all of which can seem like obstacles for those of us used to working
in looser, small group contexts, but Steve Schick made a comment on this at
JCOI last summer that was especially inspiring to me: He suggested that despite
all of those constraints, we should remember that the orchestra is basically
huge group of musicians eager to work with you to make music together,
ultimately not that different than any other band. I realized that this is how
I felt intuitively about orchestras when I first started playing in them as a
teenager, and that this spirit of cooperative music making is still what makes
it exciting for me to return to the orchestra now as a composer coming from
improvisatory traditions.
No comments:
Post a Comment