#Meeting 2
On August 9th, I had a second meeting with Juan to discuss the project’s work method so that we could get to work and not waste any time.
At first, I told him that the duration that I initially proposed was a bit unrealistic, especially given the amount of time we had, so I suggested shortening it to 10-12 minutes.
Then, since we had only briefly discussed it in our first meeting, he wanted to know more about my references and the reasons why I chose this type of project. Therefore, I talked with him about the artist I researched for my thesis, John Cage and his Theater piece, about the collective Zaj and Llorenç Barber, and how all of these things changed the way I approach music.
I clarified that my goal wasn’t to replicate what they did, but rather to materialize the knowledge and inspiration I gained from studying their work and philosophy. Basically, I tried to explain what I mentioned in the introduction: freedom, experimentation and interdisciplinarity.
Fortunately, he was familiar with these composers and even sent me some interesting articles written by one of the members of Zaj, Ramón Barce, which I found to be useful for the research. We also talked about how John Cage organized time in his compositions; the works were not influenced by the pulse but rather by actual time.
I proposed a method to work with the three elements (audiovisual, text and music) that I want to combine in this piece. From my mentioned references, I got the idea of working without hierarchies, that is, treating the three elements equally important. As a result, I considered creating the elements of the piece in a chain, starting with one and then creating the others two. However, the starting point can be altered by changing the order. By doing this, I'm attempting to avoid hierarchy while encouraging our creativity.
He was intrigued by my idea, but he also cautioned me to keep in mind the project's overarching theme, which is the appropriation and interaction with space. He was unsure whether the method I proposed made sense in regard to the central theme because, in his opinion, doing so was necessary to ensure a high-quality end product.
His advice helped me to reconsider my proposal in order to avoid any mismatching that could affect the project. I gave this some thought, and I came to the conclusion that exploring and “playing” with the disciplines I mentioned is a good way to become more closer and aware of the surroundings, particularly with the methodology I’m working with, which is close to documentary film, soundscape, journaling, etc. In any case, I still have to reflect on how I can clearly connect the theme and the work method.
We finally discussed the general structure of the piece, considering the three elements and the way I wanted to work with them.The audiovisual part must first be edited, so it has a set time length, making it by nature the more fixed one. As a result, the text and the music have a clear guideline to follow. For this reason, we contemplated the idea of working horizontally, as Juan said, which would mean not using tempo marks, and instead work with minutes and seconds. This is a direct reference to John Cage’s way of composing.
In addition to the viola part, electronics will also be used in the music section. Juan thought that we can use them to smooth the transitions but more importantly, to ensure I have cues to follow while I'm playing the viola. I believe that this is a typical solution for music that incorporates both instruments and electronics, but because this project also includes text and visuals, it's crucial to check that everything is placed correctly. At the same time, we both think that working with real time is going to influence the nature itself of the music section,becoming more free and open to sonic experimentation.
Following the methodology, we decided to include middle sections where the audiovisual is not the starting point, but the music or the text is. We take this as an experiment, willing to see the result while maintaining a general coherence throughout the project.
At the end of the meeting, I shared with him my desire to participate in the composition process of the musical section. For this, I considered doing an experiment in which I would react with my viola to some of the takes I’ve previously recorded, either in search of resembling sonorities or merely being moved by the visuals. Afterwards, he can use the results of the experiment as resources during the composition.
He also asked me about the scenography since I had previously discussed with him the idea of making an installation for the performance. I admitted to him that I was still debating whether or not to depict my room's dimensions. However, I thought that I could switch out the wood for cardboard. It’s probably simpler to work with and of course, less expensive. We both agreed that I should test out this idea beforehand because cardboard tends to look overly crafty. Additionally, the interaction with the scenography was another thing I realized I needed to consider in order to give the performance a deeper meaning.
#Meeting 3
I had a third meeting with Juan on September 22nd, after taking some of August and September off to rest, reflect and get back into the routine after the summer break.
To better understand the artistic background that motivated me to make this project, I sent him both the introduction of this research and my bachelor thesis.
He praised me for the research because he found the parts he was able to read to be really interesting. He focused particularly in the chapters on Postmodernism, John Cage and the Spanish collective Zaj. He questioned what I was interpreting from all of these references and what I want to apply to this project. He was unsure whether this project adhered to postmodernist ideals and John Cage's philosophy because he thought that the route we were following was closer to modernism and even the romantic idea of individuality. He held that Cage and the postmodernists do not represent reality in their works; rather, they work with reality and make direct references to it. Also, he was surprised that what I was taking from Cage was interdisciplinarity, which for him, wasn't one of the main aspects of his career.
I explained my position on John Cage's production after hearing his viewpoint. Though his work is primarily focused on music, I think that because he was inspired by Zen philosophy and wanted to transform the way we approach and create art, he developed a philosophy that can be applied to any artistic discipline.
Towards the end, it's fascinating to observe how Cage and all of his adherents shifted from the traditional understanding of music to a more experimental one that allowed for the use of other means of expression.
I attempted to clarify for him one of the pieces I studied for my research, Llorenç Barber City Concerts, which I had mentioned earlier in the introduction. The artist employed every conceivable element to craft an encounter that encapsulated the essence of the city for which the composition was intended, including folk melodies, bells, architectural features (such as cathedrals and churches), the orography and spatial arrangement of the city, its citizens, etc.
In conclusion, I found their intention of fusing art and life to be incredibly inspiring, as they utilized every angle available to us to engage with our environment. However, I made clear that I wanted to approach this project more like Barber did, since he started with music and then explored other mediums.
I proposed to him a work-method that could be beneficial for avoiding any possible hierarchy among the different disciplines I wanted to combine in this project. I thought it would be best to divide the work into multiple sections, each of which would be created using one of the elements as a model for the remaining two. For instance, for one segment we start creating the audiovisual part and afterwards, we decide the music and the text.
In this way, I attempted to establish a connection between all the components while maintaining the flexibility to concentrate on a single discipline at a time.
By using this approach, we attempted to incorporate it into a structural sketch of the entire work, which we decided should last between 15 and 17 minutes.
The first sketch was the following one:
INTRO
Text
*TRANSITION: Music
SECTION 1
Audiovisual -> Text -> Music
SECTION 2
Music -> Audiovisual-> Text
INTERMEZZO
Music
SECTION 3
Text -> Audiovisual -> Music
SECTION 4
Music -> Text -> Audiovisual
CODA
Audiovisual
In this first sketch we tried to define each section and how we were going to work for each one. It's also important to emphasize that, in an effort to minimize jarring transitions between them, we made an effort to connect the final element produced to the following one.
However, I thought this sketch was too busy; if we were going to continue with a 15–17 minute time limit, the sections would have to be much shorter to maintain the number of divisions, making it harder to develop the content in each.
As a consequence, we tried to delimit a new structure with longer sections, which is the following one:
INTRO
Text
*TRANSITION: Music
SECTION 1
Audiovisual -> Text -> Music
INTERMEZZO
Music
SECTION 2
Music -> Text -> Audiovisual
CODA
Audiovisual
This division would allow us to explore the material of each section in greater detail, giving the piece a distinct identity rather than being a collection of short ideas.
In our next meeting, we decided that he would begin composing as soon as I sent him the text and audiovisual materials for the introduction and first section.
#Meeting 4
On November 13, there was the fourth meeting. I had previously sent him the audiovisuals of the first section, which lasted about five minutes and was edited during October. In addition, I sent him the experiments I've been doing so he could have some audio samples to use in the electronics or even in the instrumental part of the composition.
He examined all the material, but before this meeting, he asked for some feedback from a friend who is an actress, which he transferred to me. They thought that the first video I sent didn’t transmit the message of space/place. They said it was a little confusing the constant switch between what appeared to be a storyline and outside images. Another observation from the friend is that there were a few rushed or underutilized scenes, particularly the one where I was looking at some pictures. She believed that the intention or feeling wasn't entirely clear. As a result, she was unable to comprehend the audiovisual’s purpose within the piece.
I appreciated all of this feedback, as I believe that getting outside input is crucial when engaging in any creative process.
To be honest, I wasn't too proud of the first video I edited, in which I tried putting together some of the takes I recorded in Spain during the summer. Though it's the place where I grew up and feels safe, in retrospect, I don't think I was particularly inspired during the filming. This is likely because the emotions I'm going through during my time in the Hague are far more intense and fresh. Also, my time to film in Spain was much more limited, so I couldn’t spend a lot of time experimenting with the camera.
I clarified that I didn’t have the intention to make a short film for the audiovisual part, but rather a video essay, something that doesn’t require a very specific plot. In terms of emotions, I chose certain pictures that, while still being considered neutral, have the potential to evoke certain feelings.
In response, the composer suggested focusing on longer takes that help in establishing the overall tone of the piece rather than using a lot of images. He was also worried about the visuals because he thought that having a busy audiovisual section might overwhelm the audience with too many stimuli, which would be detrimental to the musical portion.
At last, we decided to modify the first section's editing and to hold weekly meetings to make decisions together. In addition, he intended to use and edit some of the audio samples I sent him prior to our meeting to show me some work in development.
#Meeting 5
As we arranged, we had the next meeting one week after the previous one, on November 19th. For this one, we started listening to the first draft of the electronic part which lasted 2’30”. He manipulated for its creation an audio in which I concentrated on harmonics, since I was trying to emulate the fragile nature of the light filtered through the trees, as if they were made of glass. His sample caught my attention because it has a gradual build of activity while maintaining a calm atmosphere that makes it seem like a nice way of starting the piece.
After this, I tried to expose my thoughts of the last meeting. I came to the realization that my approach to the audiovisual portion was, in fact, a little erroneous, since I was constrained by the idea that the piece's intensity and even its narrative should come from the visual section, which is ultimately very different from the initial intention to work with all disciplines equally, using for that the previously described method.
However, I still wanted to keep a clear relation between the music and the video, in a similar way I did with my brief experiments. In other words, I wanted to use a sort of symbiotic interaction between the two disciplines to justify whatever occurs in them.
We both agreed on this matter since he was against taking the risk of creating a piece of music that could easily stand alone as an independent musical work with external elements that could be easily removed.
For this reason, we discussed the staging in order to take advantage of the performance space (Barthkapel).
At first, we had to come to an agreement regarding the orientation of the installation. My initial thought was to place it following the chapel's vertical shape, but he felt that the horizontal position was a better way to allow everyone in the audience to see the performance space without any issues.
After I acknowledged his point, we talked about projecting the video content. He defended the idea of projecting the visuals onto the installation's background, while I supported the idea of using two screens next to the installation. He made this suggestion because he believed the visuals could be incorporated into the scenography, but I was a bit hesitant because this would change the audiovisual material's role.
He was in favor of using it as a color, though I felt that it went against my intention to give each element some independence. Furthermore, I believe it's a resource that's used a lot.
We didn’t come to an agreement so I decided to consult this situation with some teachers in order to have an external opinion that could help us in the final decision.
We finished the meeting and decided that he would continue working on the electronic part, and he would start composing the instrumental part as soon as I sent the new editing of the first part.
Back to 2.Creative process
Continue to 3.The piece