Prompting Creativity through Collaboration

For Moran and John-Steiner the goal of collaboration ‘is not to reach consensus, as such agreement does not lead to learning’. Tension is an element of working together, the strain between vulnerability and security, doing and getting done, forging ahead and holding back. Differences are not subsumed into a cosy consensus but are taken advantage of as a way of bringing forward opportunities (Moran and John-Steiner, 2004: 12). Developing an understanding of differences, taking advantage of suggestions and creative prompting formed an important part of the collaborations in this research. Experimentation and development of mutual creative approaches was a feature of these interactions. Amongst many examples, I found it fascinating to realise that I could be assisted in a technical way about creative approaches to playing the clarinet. On one occasion O’Leary suggested a novel way of exploring the instrument; she suggested I try to work the hands independently, like a pianist does when playing the piano. This action is completely counterintuitive, as playing the clarinet involves the hands working in an integrated way. However, this suggestion encouraged me to experiment with using the hands separately at different speeds on the clarinet, which produced a distinct and unique timbre.

On other occasions, especially as the pieces were nearing completion, the attitude of the music emerged through dialogue and awareness. With Guilfoyle much of this attitude was expressed through gesture and singing. On a final run through of his piece in the final meeting he described a section of the piece thus:

This part here is a typical jazz gesture that guys would do [sings the phrase]…it’s like a little improvisation and then the next section is the melody again…you should feel absolutely free to colour these in any way you want.

[Track 19]

For O’Leary the attitude and accent of music is best developed collectively. She suggested, knowing each other over a long period of time and knowing what to expect on both sides is important and also writing for the same people over a period of time really help. ‘I have to say it’s hard to write for people I don’t know at this stage’ (Roe-O’Leary, 2004: Meeting 1). O’Leary further explained that working collaboratively encourages experimentation and creative development. She described how one of her earliest experiences of collaboration affected her ongoing musical development:

I remember working with a guitarist and it was revealing that I could write for an instrument that I never touched before in my life…it was a revelation. I thoroughly enjoyed working with him…afterwards I realised my writing had changed as a result of the things I discovered…a whole strand of my string writing developed from this work.

Roe-O’Leary, 2005: Meeting 2

For Bennett working on this bass clarinet piece pushed him to consider different directions. ‘I wanted to make a piece which wasn’t fixed, which most of my pieces are…I’m trying to work in a different way as a composer so a performer has to be up for it…and it’s great that you’re into trying things out’ (Roe-Bennett, 2005: Meeting 1). This encouragement to be flexible and not too literal was a constant thread in working on the new pieces developed. Each of the composers regarded the notated version of their pieces an invitation to exploration and experimentation, in light of the collaborative process. For my part these collaborations provided a keen sense of the intention and the vision inherent in each of the pieces through my personal engagement with the composers. In a practical way the playing of these pieces is always accompanied in my mind by this personal engagement—the gestures, singing and creative provocations that made up the collaborative work.

5.5 COLLABORATION AND WORK

Working collaboratively impacts on musicians’ practice in a technical and practical way, but it also relates to creative experimentation. The effect on work that

is produced and performed is substantial, with an increased awareness and understanding that comes from working together. Since the Romantic period separation between composer and performer has been promulgated in classical music. This was particularly evident in the early twentieth century, with pronouncements by Adorno, Schoenberg and Stravinsky making it clear that boundaries were to be respected. ‘The performer’, Schoenberg opined, ‘for all his intolerable arrogance, is totally unnecessary, except as his interpretations make the music understandable to an audience unfortunate enough not to be able to read it in print’ (Newlin, 1980: 164). Stravinsky argued that success lies in the performer being aware of the ‘law imposed on him by the work he is performing’ (Stravinsky, 1947: 127). Fortunately attitudes such as these are less prevalent in the twenty-first century, with the realization that cooperation and mutual respect is a significant asset in productive creativity. The performances of the new pieces composed as part of this investigation were completely influenced by the collaborative processes. Creative decisions I made in preparation were based on the experiences and the artistic development that came about as a result of the collaborations. The performances of these works were imbued with a flow and energy that was the culmination of immersion and creative instinct, informed by the collaborative process undertaken.