Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Garton - Why I Hate Concerts
Garton - Why I Hate Concerts
Garton - Why I Hate Concerts
Brad Garton
To the left of the stage at Vario Hall in Tokyo, placed on the wall about 15
or 20 feet from the floor, is a giant digital clock. The passing hours and
minutes are registered in large (about 12" high, I think), softly lit
seven-segment digits. This clock is the thing I remember most from the 1993
ICMC concerts. The ICMC organizers had graciously published the approximate
length of each piece performed in the Hall in the ICMC program. The most
vivid recollection I have of nearly all the music done in Vario Hall is the
memory of watching the minutes tick by and thinking: "only 4 more minutes to
go... only 3 minutes left...". Occasionally I would play the game of not
looking at the clock for a period of time, hoping that the numbers would
change faster. They never did.
- cultural reasons
When most people in our culture think of music, they think of the music
being *performed*. Concerts are the archetypal setting for a musical
performance -- witness the large number of music videos on MTV showing
concert "performances" of recorded music. I would argue that this is an
essential part of music. A person listening to a recorded piece of music is
hearing a virtual recreation of some concert or performance situation.
This has been shaped by centuries of music concerts, evolving from the first
organized human societies through the religious gatherings of the middle
ages to the contemporary concert format as established in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries. Any composer laying claim to the 'tradition' of
western art music implicitly embraces the concert hall. In the western
world, concerts are where music happens.
- practical reasons
The most obvious explanation for this state of affairs is that the concert
hall (the church in older times) was one of the few places where the resources
for the production of music could be gathered. In order to hear music, people
had to go to some type of concert.
This reason holds true for computer musicians today. Especially for
live/interactive pieces involving a heavy computational load, it is
difficult to gain access to the equipment and musicians required for
contemporary computer music. In addition, it is still necessary to perform
the music in a large hall if more than a few people want to see the
performance.
- aesthetic reasons
When a 'big' sound is a desired result, using a concert hall for the
presentation of a new piece of music becomes an aesthetic issue. To be
sure, the entire pro- vs. anti- concert debate could be recast as an issue
of aesthetics only. For some listeners, music simply sounds better in a
concert hall.
- social reasons
These social reasons take a turn towards the political when the concerts
attended are largely in the domain of academia. Concert performances count
as "scores" (no pun intended); the points gained go towards the climb up the
academic ladder of success. Resume-scanners are always on the lookout for
the latest performances of someone's work: When was a particular piece
done? Where was it done? How many times? The more concerts devoted to a
certain person, the greater the POWER that person has. Does the last time I
played my tape piece for a few friends at home count in this game?
The concert event takes on an aura of some perverse contest: composer vs.
composer, composer vs. performer, performer vs. computer, musician vs.
omniscient/judging audience. This infected atmosphere so colors my
perception of music in concert that any intellectual and emotional content
is lost. Is this the best place for a lasting musical experience?
I don't see these competitive aspects of the concert hall being
intrinsically located "in" the music. However, the context exerts a powerful
influence upon the perception of the music. Much music I truly love is
downright embarrassing in a concert. Sitting in the cramped environs of the
darkened concert hall, I often find myself struggling to get through a piece
that is absolutely marvelous when I hear it at home. Concerts change music,
and I don't particularly like the results.
I can't argue too much with those who find the concert itself aesthetically
appealing. Obviously, my own musical aesthetics are poorly served by a
concert. For those who love sitting in a hall and hearing music, I can only
respond with "I am different from you."
As for the "cultural reasons" for concerts, my hope is that the musical
heritage carried through the concert hall endows us with an evolving and
dynamic tradition where the weight of history is more than counterbalanced
by the contemporary creative impulse. If we do indeed implicitly embrace
the concert hall when we lay claim to the western art tradition, and if a
virtual recreation of that tradition is present in the pieces we as composers
write, then is it really necessary to maintain our strong links to the image
of the concert hall itself? Can't we to break down the aspects of the concert
experience we dislike, and begin building upon the features of music more
suited to our contemporary aesthetics? Of course, in these statements I am
assuming a contemporary aesthetics intended to encompass the multiplicity of
music extant in the world coupled with a 'tradition' of musical innovation.
I intend for this position to stand in contradistinction from those who
proclaim loudly that they are "preserving the Tradition" by remaining rooted
in a music of the near-past. I believe that these neo-traditionalists do
not really want to preserve an on-going tradition, but would rather freeze a
particular moment in musical history; a static snapshot of how music should
go forevermore. Instead, I would like to see preservation efforts (if you
want to call them that) directed at maintaining a continuity of change and
creative invention.