Having now finished what seems like an exhaustive set of posts about June in Buffalo, I turn my attention to another side of my output. In my spare time, I research the analysis of interactive music, with extensions into multimedia as well. I've got a previous paper published in the proceedings of EMS-2012, and I've worked up a fair amount of future material as well. But this post isn't about my research--it's at best fledgling and somewhat naive, even though I'm doing what I can to tackle some difficult materials.
Instead, it's about another conference. This time, I traveled to Portugal for EMS-2013--Electroacoustic Music in the context of interactive approaches and networks. Ah, now you see the relation to my preamble. My research is the reason I was able to participate in this great yearly event.
Strangely, I didn't write about my experience last summer. More than likely I was in one of my lulls, moments when existence seems its most futile. Or perhaps I didn't have the words for the experience. So, a year later, I'll sum up briefly before hitting 2013.
EMS-2012 was in Stockholm, Sweden. Coincidence? Not really--I had the idea for my Fulbright, but going to Stockholm, meeting people, and spending time at the conference cemented my resolve, and helped start important contacts. I presented the paper linked above. This paper was originally written for a course at UMKC taught by Paul Rudy--the analysis and aesthetics of electroacoustic music. Not too many of those courses taught in the US, and, obviously, it was worth every moment of my time.
The conference itself was inspiring. I had never even tried to get into an academic conference before. First try and I'm off to Stockholm for one of the big EA conferences (the biggest of course being ICMC, but that one is a bit too big...and tech rather than analysis heavy. At least the organizers of EMS thought so...and most were on the board of ICMA!). It was an astounding experience. As with all conferences there were highs and lows. But I met Simon Emmerson, Michael Clarke, Rosemary Mountain, Bill Brunson, and many others. I even made friends my own age, that even a year later I still talk to online. And not just about research. LOL
So, I entered EMS-13 with high hopes, but also with a clear mind. I'm not so foolish to think that my experience wasn't coloured. Oh no, as I slept and prepared my powerpoint between JiB and EMS, I knew full-well that the high of last year would not be repeated. That first experience is always memorable.
And with that I flew to Portugal. Much was the same--I reacquainted myself with Simon, Michael, Rosemary, and Bill. I made some new friends, drank inexpensive beer, and talked about a great many things with a large number of people.
I won't go through the papers, abstracts, and discussion with the same level of exactitude that I did with JiB. There's one major reason--my poor little head, even with my notes, the program book, and online resources, couldn't possibly wrap itself around so many topics.
One of the few disappointments I saw in this conference compared to 2012 was the lack of cohesion. There was a topic (see above). And there were papers on it--Simon Emmerson, Pierre Couprie, a nice discussion of an installation by Ola Nordal (forgive the lack of accents...), a presentation on the Emo-Synth by Valery Vermeulen (MIND BLOWING!), John Colter's discussion of his sound-dome, and a few others. Again, I'm purposefully not being exhaustive. But there were, at most, maybe 8 presentations of the topic. The rest were wide-ranging, from philosophy and ontology, to listening strategies, to analysis of acousmatic works, to pedagogy. Many great presentations...but with the breadth of people flipping from subject to subject, it made it very difficult to follow and keep my head straight. Having a session with 3 papers, with 3 different topics, in 1.5 hours was a bit rough on my poor noggin.
But that's a small complaint. What's really important is the context.
Why would I fly all the way to Lisbon, Portugal for an academic conference about electroacoustic music?
I reference a bit of my earlier post on why JiB is important for participants. One huge, but simple point--while we live in a world where information travels easily from continent to continent, we are all still very localized.
Our concerns are, first, to our own lives. My life is currently in Kansas City. If you ask me about the contemporary music scene, or the electroacoustic scene, I know what's happening fairly well. I'm clued in slightly to the NY scene as well thanks to living in the region for a while. I know bits from friends who live all over the country.
I do not know about the scene in Portugal beyond the existence of Joao Pedro Oliveira, and he doesn't currently live in Portugal. I do not know all the current research being done at De Montfort University in the UK regarding teaching EA music to K-12 learners. And even though I know Michael Clarke, we're not great friends, and I don't email him constantly asking about the development of TIAALS. And I just met Fredrick Dufeu (sorry, no accents), so I couldn't very well email him either.
Even though these are people and places dealing specifically in what I do, I don't have constant contact with them. I'm worried about my local environment--as are most people.
And that's the real reason I flew to Portugal, and why i'm going to do my damnedest to get to Berlin next year. Yes, presenting a paper, getting a publication possibility, and the professional side is great. Meeting all the people and making new friends, also great.
But it's the ideas, the information, the reconnection to the global community that is so important for me. I come away with tons of new ideas, ideas that are not anything like what is happening locally. Things that, at times, stretch far beyond even what's happening on a state level or national level. And it puts into perspective just how different the systems are, how diverse interests worldwide are, and where I fit within a global society of musicians.
It's invigorating to me, important professionally and pedagogically, and entirely worthwhile.
FPV 2014--We're gonna change Berlin forever.
Showing posts with label festivals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label festivals. Show all posts
7/2/13
The Importance of Leaving...
...the goddamn bubble. I remember in undergrad, professors always spoke of the "DePauw bubble." I didn't get out a whole lot during undergrad, but I luckily had enough sense to realize that what I was doing probably wasn't new, exciting, or different, and that people had great ideas all over.
During my Masters, I didn't have to go out much. Something about Brooklyn, NYC, and being around a wide variety of composers. I definitely didn't go out nearly enough, and that's my own fault. But I did listen to a lot of new music. No festivals or anything like that though--my mentors at BC weren't too keen on the competition circuit, and neither was I.
A piece of me agrees with my teachers during my masters--the competition and festival circuit can be a bit of a racket. Lots of submissions ask for money, and there's only so much I'm willing to shell out for competitions. You've got to pick and choose.
But it's important to go, especially if it's an opportunity with guest ensembles, lots of composers, and possibly guest lectures and masterclasses. Even the smaller festivals can provide experiences that your institution probably can't.
**********************************************************
This is a continuation of my series based on my experience at JiB. Past entries include posts about Charles Wuorinen and entrepreneurship, Brian Ferneyhough and treating music properly, and Augusta Read Thomas, Yehudi Wyner, and criticism.
Going into JiB, I knew what it was: it's more than a festival, more like a week long hardcore workshop. You work with an ensemble, go to tons of concerts, a few masterclasses, and lectures. You attacked by music. From 9am-9pm, I was busy with some requirement, with brief moments to grab food between them--that's the one big issues with JiB...it can be difficult to find dinner!
In one week, I met 20+ composers, far more than my department turns over in year. 20 new people, with new ideas, and new music. There were four special guest composers giving masterclasses (Raphael Cendo, Ferneyhough, Thomas, and Wyner), another guest lecture (Wuorinen), and of course David Felder. There's also rehearsals with an ensemble, in my case Ensemble Signal. That's more new faces than I meet in a standard semester at any of the schools I've attended, and all the people came prepared with their own music and presentations.
But it's ever so important. First off, you gain a much wider view of music. What ARE people doing around the country? What approaches are being taken? It's a difficult thing to understand when you're stuck in your department. You gain new techniques and new appreciation.
You gain friends, contacts, and associates. Your name gets known to a wider group of a people, people that you can call when you need a drink in a foreign city, or who may run ensembles themselves one day. The ensemble that plays your piece may like the piece and keep it around. A music critic may hear your concert, enjoy your piece, and want to do a write-up.
Let's be honest, those things don't happen too much on most campuses. Of course, there are exceptions (Manhattan based schools, I'm looking at you!) but even the more "professional" concerts I've done in KC go unreviewed, and the contacts remain somewhat minimal...granted I suck at hobnobbing afterwards, which probably limits the contacts heavily.
In the masterclasses, you have a chance to make an impression with a well known composers--this could ingratiate you, and they therefore remember your work when it comes time for judging a competition. Yeah, that is a horribly grim outlook on it, but it's entirely true. Nepotism in music is a very real thing, and until the next generation decides to forgo it and become a "meritocracy," we're stuck with it.
The biggest thing is the music and the ideas. JiB is unique in that you're somewhat forced into groups thanks to the masterclasses. After a day or two, you've found at least a small clique worth hanging out with. Or, if you're like me, you'll flit around a bit at the periphery--it's not that I disliked anyone, it's that I dislike large groups, and those had a tendency to form!
Still, the thoughts flowed freely. Composers discussed each others music, their institutions, gave and received advice, socialized, told stories, got drunk. And listened to music. So much music. Minds were expanded, exploded, and changed.
That's really what festivals are about. A good festival/conference/workshop will invigorate you. New ideas will come rushing in, old ideas will be made more clear, and new friends will challenge or affirm your positions. Someone like Charles Wuorinen will incite a group into heated discussions, while the direct criticism of Ferneyhough will make an entire room really delve into what they could improve.
And it's this influx of ideas, the meeting of minds that is so important. It's easy to get stuck--four years in undergrad, two or three for a masters, two to four for a doctorate. Same three or four teachers revolving around, you form your clique and maybe hear some different music. You might have one new complexity guy, a hardcore French-style acousmatic composer, maybe a spectralist, a neo-Romantic, a sound artist, and a couple post-minimalists. And you'll get along, but in the end, you'll face the same questions and affirmations.
It's great to see how people across the country (or world) deal with music. And it's as important for development as standard schooling.
So yes, it can be a racket. It can be a pain in the ass. But festivals are worthwhile and important experiences for musicians of all ages. Just be sure to research what you're getting into first before sending in your app and fee. And find yourself some funding through grants.
And then head off for an experience that will fill in tons of gaps left by a "traditional" educational model.
During my Masters, I didn't have to go out much. Something about Brooklyn, NYC, and being around a wide variety of composers. I definitely didn't go out nearly enough, and that's my own fault. But I did listen to a lot of new music. No festivals or anything like that though--my mentors at BC weren't too keen on the competition circuit, and neither was I.
A piece of me agrees with my teachers during my masters--the competition and festival circuit can be a bit of a racket. Lots of submissions ask for money, and there's only so much I'm willing to shell out for competitions. You've got to pick and choose.
But it's important to go, especially if it's an opportunity with guest ensembles, lots of composers, and possibly guest lectures and masterclasses. Even the smaller festivals can provide experiences that your institution probably can't.
**********************************************************
This is a continuation of my series based on my experience at JiB. Past entries include posts about Charles Wuorinen and entrepreneurship, Brian Ferneyhough and treating music properly, and Augusta Read Thomas, Yehudi Wyner, and criticism.
Going into JiB, I knew what it was: it's more than a festival, more like a week long hardcore workshop. You work with an ensemble, go to tons of concerts, a few masterclasses, and lectures. You attacked by music. From 9am-9pm, I was busy with some requirement, with brief moments to grab food between them--that's the one big issues with JiB...it can be difficult to find dinner!
In one week, I met 20+ composers, far more than my department turns over in year. 20 new people, with new ideas, and new music. There were four special guest composers giving masterclasses (Raphael Cendo, Ferneyhough, Thomas, and Wyner), another guest lecture (Wuorinen), and of course David Felder. There's also rehearsals with an ensemble, in my case Ensemble Signal. That's more new faces than I meet in a standard semester at any of the schools I've attended, and all the people came prepared with their own music and presentations.
But it's ever so important. First off, you gain a much wider view of music. What ARE people doing around the country? What approaches are being taken? It's a difficult thing to understand when you're stuck in your department. You gain new techniques and new appreciation.
You gain friends, contacts, and associates. Your name gets known to a wider group of a people, people that you can call when you need a drink in a foreign city, or who may run ensembles themselves one day. The ensemble that plays your piece may like the piece and keep it around. A music critic may hear your concert, enjoy your piece, and want to do a write-up.
Let's be honest, those things don't happen too much on most campuses. Of course, there are exceptions (Manhattan based schools, I'm looking at you!) but even the more "professional" concerts I've done in KC go unreviewed, and the contacts remain somewhat minimal...granted I suck at hobnobbing afterwards, which probably limits the contacts heavily.
In the masterclasses, you have a chance to make an impression with a well known composers--this could ingratiate you, and they therefore remember your work when it comes time for judging a competition. Yeah, that is a horribly grim outlook on it, but it's entirely true. Nepotism in music is a very real thing, and until the next generation decides to forgo it and become a "meritocracy," we're stuck with it.
The biggest thing is the music and the ideas. JiB is unique in that you're somewhat forced into groups thanks to the masterclasses. After a day or two, you've found at least a small clique worth hanging out with. Or, if you're like me, you'll flit around a bit at the periphery--it's not that I disliked anyone, it's that I dislike large groups, and those had a tendency to form!
Still, the thoughts flowed freely. Composers discussed each others music, their institutions, gave and received advice, socialized, told stories, got drunk. And listened to music. So much music. Minds were expanded, exploded, and changed.
That's really what festivals are about. A good festival/conference/workshop will invigorate you. New ideas will come rushing in, old ideas will be made more clear, and new friends will challenge or affirm your positions. Someone like Charles Wuorinen will incite a group into heated discussions, while the direct criticism of Ferneyhough will make an entire room really delve into what they could improve.
And it's this influx of ideas, the meeting of minds that is so important. It's easy to get stuck--four years in undergrad, two or three for a masters, two to four for a doctorate. Same three or four teachers revolving around, you form your clique and maybe hear some different music. You might have one new complexity guy, a hardcore French-style acousmatic composer, maybe a spectralist, a neo-Romantic, a sound artist, and a couple post-minimalists. And you'll get along, but in the end, you'll face the same questions and affirmations.
It's great to see how people across the country (or world) deal with music. And it's as important for development as standard schooling.
So yes, it can be a racket. It can be a pain in the ass. But festivals are worthwhile and important experiences for musicians of all ages. Just be sure to research what you're getting into first before sending in your app and fee. And find yourself some funding through grants.
And then head off for an experience that will fill in tons of gaps left by a "traditional" educational model.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)