Since the beginning of the performance of Organ2/ASLSP in Halberstadt, three different organ-concepts have been considered. The initial organ was designed by Gerard Wöhl and was sort of an organ sculpture, that “looked a bit like a mushroom” (Ericsson 2015, Interview). Karin Gastell describes that this first organ was to be painted in bright colors and had three sides it could be played from. The organ itself stood on the ground and the three sides came together in the air with a twist. Then, on top, there was something like a ‘hat’ for the sound (2015, Interview).
Nonetheless, the organ was never build, as two music theorists, Heinz-Klaus Metzger and Rainer Riehn, argued that the instrument had a strong personality to fit the project. They argued that it was too much for John Cage and said: “This instrument has too much of a personal identity, we cannot take this” (Gastell 2015, Interview). Hans-Ola Ericsson also notes that “it was too artistic somehow”, but also stresses that he thinks that there is nothing like a Cage-organ (2015, Interview). Yet, the fact that the researchers do feel the urge to create an organ that ‘fits’ with John Cage, again brings into show the difficulty the researchers have with relating the current performance back to John Cage’s initial ideas.
Here too, the openness of the project is something that the researchers still struggle with. Currently, the second organ —a small and simple interim organ —is to be seen in the Buchardi church, but the third organ concept has already been designed. In this concept, the past, the present and the future are taken into account simultaneously: the ideas of Cage, founding members and future researchers are approached openly. This organ is a “dislocated organ”: the pipes are spread through the space of the church and they only need some wind to function (Bossert 2015, Interview). One of the advantages of this idea, is that the instrument does not draw too much attention to itself:
You can walk, from one side of the church to another and so on. Instead of looking at a machine that creates the sound, we can now come into the sound. In a very literal way the organ is opened up in order to be able to deal with sound in a more direct way than through a large instrument (Bossert 2015, Interview).
Not only does this dislocated organ no longer form a visual focus within the space, it is also open for future change in interpretations because it has to be build up step by step. Founding members can make it look and sound like they want right now, but because the instrument is not as solid as the first concept, the next generation can easily change it: “they can change the places of pipes and paint it, whatever they want, so maybe this is the most honest way to build an organ, because it grows up with the performance” (Gastell 2015, Interview).
Being flexible at the core, this organ addresses the problem of ‘fitting John Cage’ by not having a too strong personality on its own, while at the same time it addresses the problem of future generations of researchers by having an character that is open to (re-) interpretation. It replaces the focus on the finding a correct interpretation of John Cage’s idea with a focus on doing, on trying. Paradoxically, it is through this open approach that Cage’s ideas might be taken into account after all: the fact that the decisions about the organ remain open and flexible for the future seems to me a very non-expressive way to make a performance last hundreds of years.
References
- Bossert, C. (07-05-2015). Interview with the author.
- Ericsson, H.O. (27-04-2015). Interview with the author.
- Gastell, K. (20-04-2015). Interview with the author.
