Lattice/continuum

Goodman’s theory of notation is grounded on a finite differentiation between its constitutive symbols. It is precisely this finite or discrete aspect that Trevor Wishart finds most problematic in Western notation: ‘Notation (...) imposes a finite state logic upon the two domains [pitch and tempo]. The result is that music, at least as seen in the score, appears to take place on a two dimensional lattice’ (Wishart, 1996, p. 23).

Trevor Wishart, as well as being a pioneer in electronic music, is a solo-voice performer and improviser. His approach to sound while performing perfectly illustrates the types of gestures, or sonic morphologies for which notation is problematic. In his book, On Sonic Art (Wishart, 1996), he mentions the Japanese and Indian traditions as music to which glissando, portamento, vibrato and other continuous transformations of the sound are of central importance. These gestures, whilst commonplace in music of the Eastern tradition, are not well suited to Western notation. Wishart writes: ‘An attempt to capture the essence of this music in conventional Western notation would clearly fail miserably’ (Wishart, 1996, p. 27). Indeed our notational system is not adapted for such types of gestures and ornaments. As he remarks, music notation viewed as notes on a stave is best suited to a keyboard, where the sound can’t be modified and keys can only be pressed up or down: ‘The keyboard (...) represents the ultimate rationalisation of a lattice-based view of music’ (ibid, p. 27). For Trevor Wishart the lattice poses two problems:

1. It ‘forces ‘musical sounds’ onto this lattice’, thereby transforming what is being notated according to the constraints imposed by the notational system. This is reminiscent of an interesting anecdote from Brian Ferneyhough. In an interview with Richard Toop he mentions a dream in which he had seen a score, and the frustration he felt upon waking up and realising that he was not able to reproduce it, ‘because (...) the act of writing already dictates to you in a very strong and physical way what it wants to do, and not what the thing you are trying to recreate seems to be’ (Ferneyhough, 1995, p. 262). Both composers speak of the notational system not as a transparent medium, but rather as a filter with its own behaviour.

2. According to Wishart ‘the lattice only remains an approximate representation of what takes place in actual sound experience’. Again on this point Brian Ferneyhough would agree: in an interview with Philippe Alberà he says: ‘I don’t accept that a musical object can ever be defined precisely by any form of notational convention whatever. Even the most exhaustive notation only offers a semblance of precision’ (Ferneyhough, 1995, p. 319). However, while Wishart sees this approximation as a limitation of notational conventions, the impossible match between notation and its acoustic image is source of stimulation for Ferneyhough, prompting him to seek ever more detail in his notation.

1.2.3 Tablature

Trevor Wishart’s concept of lattice is an apt illustration of what many composers, particularly those who make regular use of extended techniques, find limiting with conventional notation. Today, the main alternative to traditional ‘lattice-

based’ notation is tablature, or prescriptive notation, in the sense defined by

Mieko Kanno: ‘Prescriptive notation specifies the means of execution rather than the resultant configurations of pitch and rhythm’ (Kanno, 2007, p.1). The distinction between prescriptive and descriptive notation was already discussed in the fifties, as can attest the following statement by Charles Seeger:

‘Prescriptive and descriptive uses of music writing, which is to say, between a blue-print of how a specific piece of music shall be made to sound and a report of how a specific performance of it actually did sound (…)’ (Seeger, 1958, p. 1).

What brings closer Seeger and Kanno’s conceptions is the idea that prescriptive notation is charged with a certain intention, whereas descriptive notation is more neutral, like a transcription from one code to the other. However, Seeger and Kanno use this distinction in very different ways: Seeger considered traditional (common) music notation as prescriptive, and encouraged to use the technologies of the day (oscillograms) in order to describe music in a more objective way, and to consider musicology as a descriptive science. Kanno, on the other hand, considers most conventional music notation as descriptive (i.e. describing the resultant configurations of pitch and rhythm), and examines ‘how prescriptive notation unlocks creativity in areas unknown to conventional practice’ (Kanno, 2007, p.1). Kanno’s definition of prescriptive notation is therefore more appropriate here in order to discuss the tablature-based types of notations which interest many contemporary composers today.

Chinese traditional Guqin has used, for at least 1500 years, a system of tablature notation which prescribes tuning, finger positions and stroke techniques but not the resulting pitches. Tablature was also commonly used for lute writing in Renaissance and Baroque eras. The recent emergence of a new array of extended instrumental techniques has inevitably renewed interest in this approach. Pression (1969), for solo Cello, by Helmut Lachenmann is one landmark example of the reappropriation of largely obsolete principles. In the score, the clef is famously replaced by a schematic representation of the body of

the cello, so that the stave becomes a graphic indicator of where to perform

which action upon the instrument. The concept of Musique concrète instrumentale, central to the German composer’s aesthetics, possesses an

undeniable affinity with the type of prescriptive notation discussed above: ‘The sound events are chosen and organized so that the manner in which they are generated is at least as important as the resultant acoustic qualities themselves’ (Lachenmann, 2008, p.1).

Composer Aaron Cassidy has dedicated a significant portion of his career to the development of tablature-based notations. Most of his scores since The Crutch

of Memory (2004) have abandoned traditional clefs in favour of multi-layered

tablatures. In this work, three separate staves control different playing technique parameters independently for a solo string player: ‘the movement up and down the fingerboard, the spacing width of the fingers, the contact between fingers and strings, as well as the actions of the bow and right hand’ (Cassidy, 2004, p.1). The resulting notation gives rise to what the composer describes as ‘decoupling’, i.e. a de-correlating of the component movements of an instrumental gesture. Precursors to Cassidy may be found in works by Brian Ferneyhough, notably his

Time and Motion Study II (1973-76) for cello (where left and right hand are

notated on different staves, each with its own, autonomous rhythmic structure), or Unity Capsule (1980) for solo flute (where voice and instrument are notated on different staves, despite being predominantly treated homorhythmically).

In the case of Cassidy, tablature notation gives rise to a situation where resulting pitches are largely unforeseeable; therefore, the notation does not provide instructions for performance of a strictly pre-defined, definitive text, but rather functions as a tool which interrogates the performer’s modus operandi. Although highly conceptualised, the notation here seeks to communicate in a very direct, somatic way with the performer: he or she is required to find his/her own responses to the challenges imposed by the score. In other words, the performer is explicitly required to take part in the emergence of the work through a direct dialogue with the notation, rather than through an attempt to recreate a fixed entity; this correlates in my view with Umberto Eco’s notion of work of art:

A work of art, therefore, is a complete and closed form in its uniqueness as a balanced organic whole, while at the same time constituting an open product on account of its susceptibility to

countless different interpretations which do not impinge on its inadulterable specificity. (Ecco, 1984, p. 49)

1.2.4 ‘Transparent notation’ versus performance, text versus script

In general, the demanding types of notation described thus far involve working with a small group of specialised, new music performers. A composer writing in a more classical language, and for large ensemble or orchestra, will often be inclined to use common music notation, which, today more than ever, is largely standardised. Behind Bars, a very useful guide to notation by Elaine Gould (2011), shows how in most situations, a given approach to notation will be clearer than another, and therefore understood faster and by a wider community. The mastery of such conventions undeniably facilitates a fast and effective transmission of musical information from composer to performer; however, at the same time, one may argue that the works of composers who use them resist innovation in this area, anchoring the musical language within the notational practices of the 19th century.The performer will often see this clarity as a positive thing: he/she is provided with information which describes concretely the pitches and rhythms which are to be performed, but such ‘transparent notation’, since it does not resist sight-reading, may imply the idea that the work already exists within itself, and that it does not necessarily require a deep engagement from the performer in order to be conveyed. In other words the performer is implicitly adhering to the – presumably obsolete – ideal of an autonomous text, a conception that minimised the importance of performance in favour of the realisation of the score.

Nicholas Cook has discussed this issue: ‘The text-based orientation of traditional musicology and theory hampers thinking about music as a performance art’ (Cook, 2001, p.1). Talking about the score-centric or composition-centric representation of music that is again largely inherited from 19th century traditions, he suggests: ‘This gave rise to the idea that meaning is inherent in the text, so that performing it becomes an act of reproduction, something essentially peripheral to musical culture’ (Cook, 2005, p.2). Text-based or composer- orientated views tend to minimise the fact that what an audience hears in a musical performance is often less concerned with the composer/score interaction rather than with what happens between the performer and the score. Such considerations lead Nicholas Cook to introduce the notion of script, which allows for more flexibility:

Whereas to think of a Mozart quartet as a ‘text’ is to construe it as a half- sonic, half-ideal object reproduced in performance, to think of it as a ‘script’ is to see it as choreographing a series of real-time, social interactions between players. (Cook, 2001, Chapter 3: music as performance)

This notion of script displaces the emphasis, from the text/score towards its performance: ‘The shift from seeing performance as the reproduction of texts to seeing it a cultural practice prompted by scripts results in the dissolving of any stable distinction between work and performance’ (Ibid.).

This idea has gained considerable traction over recent years in the realm of musical performance studies, insofar as the term ‘interpretation’ seems today to connote an outmoded notion of performance.

For Pablo De Assis for instance, interpretation is only one stage in a three-step process: execution/interpretation/experimentation, where the last stage (the experimental one) is essential:

Taking Gilles Deleuze’s invitation not to interpret but to ‘experiment’ with the materials of our domain, this research project aims to develop a different and original model for musical performance – a model that takes into account older modes of performance (execution, Vortrag, interpretation, performance and others) but which is crucially based upon ‘experimentation’.

(De Assis, 2013, p. 100)

These views on scores and their performance may be associated with a wider paradigm-shift which occurred in the 1990s in the humanities and social sciences, which is commonly referred to as the performative turn (Conquergood, 1989), itself often associated with the young discipline of performance studies. This performative turn occurred when the focus of study shifted from the text, or fixed-representation, towards an event which unfolds in time, a performance. It is founded upon the assumption that all human actions are performed and as such considers human behaviour in general as a public presentation of the self. The famous words of William Shakespeare constitute a good formulation of this statement:

All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances, And one man in his time plays many parts, His acts being seven ages.

(Shakespeare, [1599] 2004, act II scene VII)

Writing principally for voices has led me to reflect deeply upon the potential theatrical aspects of music. Audio-scores were always conceived in my compositional research as performance-centered (as opposed to composition-

centred), as a means of facilitating the performers’ task, or liberating them from

the anxiety which difficult material may cause.