Home 1. Introduction 2. Markers 3. Archive 4. Audible Markers 5. Visible Markers 6. Notational Markers 7. Conclusion
4.1. A Checklist 4.2. Waveforms 4.3. Examples 4.4. A New Checklist
Cage’s composition nicely torpedoes classical preconceptions, even as it holds classical elements: three movements, a score, a pre-determined length, a formally-dressed performer, an expensive 19th-century instrument. Without being able to “see” the performance, the audience needs to find another way to “see” silence. Interpreting Cage’s work as a non-classical piece—with the possibility of variations, covers, re-interpretations, and improvisations—seems now more fruitful to me. This research, including the analyses of the YouTube videos, has created multiple viewpoints from which I theorize the validity of many embodiments and styles. Reflecting on my research, I re-wrote my checklist:
A New Performance Checklist (2020)
-
How/when does it start?
-
How/when does it stop?
-
How silent will/should/could it be?
-
Can I create a favorable environment for the audience to listen, and to listen to themselves listening?
-
What are the situated elements: architecture, seating, spatial layout; and how do they contribute to summoning silence?
-
Does “real life” intervene?
-
-
Is confrontation a goal? A side-effect? An accident?
-
Is there a performer? And if so, why?
-
Does a performer impose, summon, or describe silence?
-
Is non-playing or not-playing appropriate?
-
-
Cage removed the three movements in later versions of the composition. A choice should be made in advance about durations/ use of movements.
-
Is time marked?
-
Are the movements marked?
-
-
Is the piece poetic, ironic, self-destructive, narrative, static, or…?
-
How is it framed or bookmarked? (what happens before and after must be planned, for these bookends raise expectations, create tension and anticipation, recollect and recall events afterwards)
-
Should the piece be described and situated for the audience via program notes or spoken word?
-
Are expectations set up and thwarted, and how?
-
My performance goals have changed substantially. This checklist reflects a new interest in the audience experience, the imbalance between the performer’s and receiver’s experiences, and questions of confrontation, juxtaposition, and “real life” vs. performance. Further, Hernik and I discovered at the outset of my research that the start and stop of the piece held key values and that the manner of framing the piece often defined and created it.
Contemplating the potential applications of this revised checklist raises questions regarding future performance direction, especially when incorporating a piano. Can innovative approaches, inspired by the YouTube videos, provide alternative performance “solutions”? Possibilities include:
-
utilization of deliberately anti-establishment or destructive materials (garbage, spray paint, breaking something/destroying value);
-
integration of usually noisy items for exaggerating “thwarted” silence (for example, Dead Territory’s use of amplifiers and electric guitars);
-
incorporation of social media comments as a means of un-silencing the audience (for example, a re-mix of Dead Territory’s video with their YouTube comment feed);
-
confronting the audience by, for example, using extreme noise (heavy machinery or airhorns) combined with some method of silencing (earplugs, noise-canceling headphones);
-
marking the movements in unexpected ways, such as changing the décor as Kim does;
-
emphasizing the elements of classical music in Cage’s work: exaggerating traditional markers, like wearing a tuxedo, overdoing the lighting, or turning it into a Liberace-type experience, in which traditional classical markers are ironically overemphasized;
-
creating a “pastorale” by shifting the audience setting from the hall to the natural environment. This could be accomplished by performing the artwork outdoors, as in Kim’s example, which could even reference the première, which took place in the forest setting of the partly open Maverick Hall.
Using this new checklist, I performed 4’33” at a music festival in Burgundy in July 2021. My instruments for the three movements were a massive and heavy power drill, a tiny Chinese bell, and a large broom. These were deliberately chosen for their visual impact and their potential for noise-making. There was some laughter at my choice of instrumentation, but otherwise, the audience was relatively silent and patiently waiting for me to begin. I used a silent and hidden stopwatch to avoid visually reminding the audience of the elapsed or remaining time; although the work may be about time, I wanted to remove overt references to time from the stage. The drill was in standby mode, producing a low electronic buzz; this blended in with the whir of the theater’s air-conditioning. I turned off the drill after the first movement, creating an unexpected experience of comparative silence.
The performance was successful in that it encouraged lively audience discussion and re-evaluation of what, for many, has become a cliché artwork, a relic of the previous century. Experiencing that the work could be refreshed by simple means was gratifying. The biggest lesson was that by partially removing the overt imposition of authority, shifting focus away from the performer, using elements of thwarting and real life, and heightening the audible, I created a more successful work, granting more freedom for audience listening.
(Re)considering My Own Practice
Central to my original checklist was how I could summon and impose silence. Now, my focus is more diffuse. Is the artwork about listening (e.g., Hôpital Goüin), about non-playing (e.g., Marx), about attention (e.g., Leyin), about “real life” (Moscow), or about time (e.g., Tudor)? Each performance brings a different approach. Some (Kahn) may still consider Cage’s artwork a failure because it cannot answer questions about what it is or what it is about. However, my conclusion goes in the opposite direction: the case studies demonstrate that by opening so many options, 4’33” is still very much valid as we move further into the 21st century. It forces us to re-think the answers and reformulate the questions continually. There will be no absolute answer to what the composition is about nor how it should be performed. Choices will be necessary, and each performer must make those choices. The next performance by the same performer could result in entirely different choices. Like any great piece of performance art, and perhaps even more so than most, 4’33” defies a final prescription and analysis.
All of the YouTube performers deal with conventions and traditions, (implicitly) playing with the western ways of perceiving music as well as the frames to mark the edges of the performance. Through the different ways in which I have approached 4’33”–analyzing other performers, comparing waveforms, reading reflections on this piece by other scholars, and presenting the piece in different contexts–I have been able to question traditional performance paradigms, advocating a broader, more inclusive approach to understanding and experiencing Cage’s work. The updated checklist for performing 4’33” emphasizes the artwork’s fluidity and the performer’s release of control, reflecting a journey from classical adherence to interpretations that challenge and expand the conceptual and literal borders of silence and art.
In classical performances like Chopin’s ninth nocturne discussed in the previous chapter, or in the Beethoven sonata that will be discussed in the next chapter, there is a direct narrative relationship between describing and summoning through the embodiment of silence. But to what extent are descriptive markers in Cage successful in this respect? My own experience of performing it demonstrates that descriptive markers are easier to implement than summoning ones. Cage himself tried (and failed) to summon silence in the Köln performance. Trifonov imposed silence, but it is uneasy and fraught with awkwardness. Trying to impose silence or summon it performatively does not always evoke audience engagement and can even lead to a distancing between listener and performer.
In all their richness, the YouTube performances show the pointlessness of restricting or codifying 4’33”. Cage’s piece has come full circle: from an avant-garde marginal work to a mainstream meme, to an annoyingly trite standard, and back again to the hip margins of the mainstream. My original checklist focused on preserving the performer’s hegemony and the composer’s authority. From my research, I conclude that this piece is infinitely resilient and can function on many levels. Even if it has lost the power to shock, my research illustrates the potential richness of this composition and its surprisingly future-proof endurance. Undoubtedly, my checklist will continue to evolve along with the artwork.