Wolff
August 12, 2022 | Author: Anonymous | Category: N/A
Short Description
Download Wolff...
Description
Christian Wolff A M E R I C
MICHAE L HI CKS CHRISTIAN ASPLUND
A N
C O M P O S E R S
christian wolff
a m e r i c a n
Composers
A list of books in the series appears at the end of this book.
Christian Wolff
Michael Hicks Hicks and Christian Asplund
u n i v e rs i t y o f i l l i n o i s p re s s
Urbana, Chicago, and Springfeld
© 2012 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois All rights reserved Manufactured Manufactur ed in the United States of America 5 4 3 2 1
C
∞ This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hicks, Michael, 1956– Christian Wolff Wolff / Michael Hicks and Christian Asplund. p. c. — (Aerican coposers) Includes bibliographical references and index. 978-0-252-03706-1 (cloth) 1. Wolff, Christian, 1934– 2. Coposers—United States—Biography. 3. Avant Avant garde (Music)—United States—History— 20th century. I. Asplun Asplund, d, Christi Christian, an, 1964– II. Title. m410.w81453 780.92—dc23
2012 2012005714
contents
acknowledgments
1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
vii
Introduction 1 Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers 5 Situations of Too Extree Difculty: 1951–1959 19 Vast, Sparse Areas of Possibilit Possibility: y: 1960–1969 31 Let Playing Be Coposition and Coposition Playing: 1969–1974 45 Soething More Specically “Musical”: 1973–1984 57 Not to Do Soething I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999 70 Aong Friends, in a Private World 87
notes
99
for further reading recordings
index
113
111
109
ac a ck now l edgmen t s
This book book began tice. The rst rst beginning beginning as hen Christian Christian Asplund invited Christian Wolff and others to the capus of Brigha Young University in the spring of 2006 for a sall syposiu in Wolff’s Wolff’s honor. honor. Asplund, ho had studied, perfored, theorized, theori zed, and taught Wolff Wolff’’s usic for decades, de cades, anted to shocase s hocase the coposer’s ork and allo students to perfor his usic ith hi. Asplund also organized a paper-reading session and a panel discussion, both of hich he and Hicks took part in. The second beginning as hen, at the end of the syposiu, Hicks ade this unusual proposal: Would Asplund be illing to collaborate on a sall book about Wolff Wolff on the condition condit ion that Hicks do all the riting? riting ? Hicks ouldn’t attept riting a book on Wolff Wolff ithout Asplund’ Asplund’ss help in navigating the topic. But he had tried collaborating on prose before and couldn’t do it. Asplund agreed, he and Hicks devised a book proposal, the University of Illinois Press accepted it, and the ork coenced. American Music (2007–10) Hicks’ss unexpected four-year stint as the editor of Hicks’ of American (2007–10) sloed the process yet alloed the authors’ ideas to foent. Asplund aassed scores, annotated the, intervieed friends of Wolff,archive. and selected and copied hundreds of priary docuents fro Wolff’ W olff’ss personal Hicks intervieed Wolff W olff and kept up up an an eail dialogue ith hi on any biographic biographical al and usical atters, large and sall. The to authors discussed, Hicks drafted, shared drafts ith Asplund (and Wolff), Wolff), revised, and so forth. fort h. Here no are the results of a happy collaboration. A collaboration, once begun, inevitably idens. We ust thank the any friends and faily of Wolff ho provided reiniscences and anecdotes, soe in iniature, others at length: lengt h: Robert Ashley, Ashley, Kui Dong, Petr Kotik, June K. Lein, Bunita Marcus, Larry Polansky, Jaes Tatu, Tatu, Calvert Calv ert Watkins, Willie Winant, Tasen T asen Wolff, and Tristra ristra Wolff. Other artists and schola scholars rs discuss discussed ed our our ideas, ideas,
vii
christian wolff
viii
| Acknowledgments
read drafts, draft s, and ade us feel at hoe in a counity counit y of the learned. learne d. (To of those scholars ork don the hall fro us: Jerey Grisha and Steven Johnson.) David Bernstein and three anonyous readers considered either our initial proposal to the press or a copleted draft; all of the gave good advice. British scholars Stephen Chase, Philip Thoas, Laurence Sanders, and Virginia Anderson helped at variouss ties ith variou ith facts and and encourage encourageent. ent. We also think think fondly fondly of discussions discussions ith stude students nts ho have play played ed in Aspl Asplund und’’s Grou Group p for Expe Experi riental ental Mus Music ic or have attended various related events eve nts in hich Wolff Wolff or the authors took part. We We can’t recall all those hose thoughts crossed the paths of ours, soeties lighting the ay through through a ord ord or phras phrase. e. Our deep apologi apologies es for for any percei perceived ved ingratit ingratitude. ude. The archives of Wesleyan and Northestern universities provided great Christian Wolff and John Cage aterial; other university libraries, ostly via interlibrary loans, shared of their troves. Our BYU deans, departent chairs, and librarians all lifted burdens and opened doors. At the University of Illinois Press, Judy McCulloh encouraged our initial idea and Laurie Matheson coaxed the book into print. Our ives and children graciously consented to suffer fro our occasional neglect of the for this book. Here’s hoping they’ll have labor’s fruits to copensate. This set of acknoled acknoledgents gents is already tipping out of balance for so short a book. But e ust describe the lovely patronage and indulgence of our subject, Christian Wolff. Over ve years’ tie he shared ith us ore than 160 substantive eail exchanges, four long recorded intervies, and any unrecorded con versations. He He also opened to us his personal archive, hich hich included hundreds hundreds of ites, fro concert progras to letters to sketchbooks to photographs to recordings. We relied on hi to tell us his intentions, his inuences, and soe dates and other personal pers onal facts that ere otherise otheri se unlocatable. In soe cases, e found docuentation docuentation in his on papers or elsehere that corrected or refreshed his eory. the endthe he read coented on all the chapter drafts. He on sees to haveInenjoyed ride, and bups and all. So eofhope this book ill honor his achieveents not only by our on acadeic judiciousness, but by an engaging style that dras the reader into the usic and its aker’s outlook.
christian wolff
Introduction “I have noticed something . . . about Christian Wolff’s music. All you can do is suddenly listen in the same way that, when you catch cold, all you can do is suddenly sneeze.” —John Cage, Silence
of the many analogies ade
to usic in our tie, that ay see one of the oddest—a respiratory one, ade not ith contept but adiration. John Cage is not alays easy to read, and his eaning here has the ring of a Zen koan. But adirers of Wolff’s usic ay nd in Cage’s epigraph, as Marianne Moore said of poetry, a place for the genuine. One often responds instinctively to Wolff’s usic, its ipulsiveness, its teasing gestures, its prickly resistance of logic. It is a usic often ore halting than oing. But any of us are dran to it involuntarily, inexplicably. That ay suggest hy hy,, in an acadeic usical culture obsessed ith reasons and explanations, theory and analysis, Wolff’s usic has attracted less than its share of critical attention. Analysis craves ethods and systes to hich orks ay be subjected. Musicology craves consistency in a coposers’ ork, at least enough to bundle bund le pieces into “periods” or “phases.” And teaching, teaching , of course, craves the things that are ost easily taught. All of these cravings nd little satisfaction in Wolff’s usic. If Wolff has a ethod of coposing it is to overturn ethods fro piece to piece. The constancy is change, often radical change even in the vocabularyy of a single vocabular single ork. ork. That is bound bound to ork ork against against the the stability stability on hich analysis ust build. 1
christian wolff
2
| Introduction
The restles restlessness sness of his iagination prevent preventss hi fro settli settling ng into a Wolff “style,” or clearly recognizable recognizabl e idio—except that he favors epigraatic epi graatic utterances, even blunt stateents, though often as gentle as spare. They unfold, he says, in “a rhyth that has to do ith being surprised.” If ost usical rhyth is tied to dance—pulse divided and ultiplied—Wolff’s gros out of a respect for the delicate, barely predictable rhyths of the central nervous syste. His rhyths see ore neural than cardiological, not rooted in pulse but ipulse. Perforers and listeners ust consent to respond to at least soe of his usic in an alost autonoic ay. It is not to be savored by ental coparisons ith usic of the classical canon. It relies on ne ays of behaving usically. But ithin sall gestures gest ures one often nds oridity: “grace notes note s and feratas, you ight say, are the to odels for [y] kind of rhyth.” Soeties it sees as though Wolff Wolff’’s usic ere in a latter-day lat ter-day French style—highly st yle—highly ornaented, o rnaented, but no ith the ain ideas, the ones ostensibly being ornaented, oitted. Ideally for Wolff, these ornaents ill cobine in a texture of collective spontaneity, “not so uch an expression of the player (or coposer) as a ay of connecting, aking a counity . . . soeties involving internally those uid and precise,
and transparent, lines or projections of connection.” Wolff has explained that he rites according to a vefold “series of ideas.” The rst, as e have suggested, suggested, is is change. change. Wolff Wolff ants to ake ne things, even teaching. One “strange” things. Next is teaching. One ust convey ne ideas to listeners; the ideas ay be abstract or quite concrete—even starkly political, as e ill see. Third is unpredictability. T unpredictability. To o ebrace the orld is alays to ebrace a certain randoness. And the spontaneity spontaneity one one feels in rando randoness ness should should infor one’ one’ss usic. Fourth reedom.. This sees intrinsic to his other purposes, of course. Yet Wolff ust is reedom is noise. assert its fundaental value as an idea in usical behavior. The fth idea is noise. One should explore (and ultiately ultiate ly challenge) that category categor y of sound. What ay see disordered ay siply anifest, hen close attention is paid, a ore coplex for of order. Noticeably absent fro Wolff Wolff’’s series of ideas are “beauty” or “craft.”” Though “craft. Though the latter ay infor a ork’s ork’s construction and the forer derive deriv e fro it, Wolff Wolff subjugates the t he both to the larger ideas that propel his usic. Or, put differently, essential beauty and craft appear in the ideas theselves. Wolff spent decades as a professor of classics at Harvard and Dartouth. The very ord “classics, “classics,”” of course, iplies a standard of taste that can be veried by traditions, even hierarchies of cultural poer. That Wolff should pursue “classics” for a career, then, ight see to soe s oe beildering at best and, at orst, hypocritical. But this perceived dichotoy isses the ark. Reeber that the classics—especially Greek, Wolff’s specialty—exist in either dead languages or
ones that reain r eain reote fro Aerican English. While Old World World classics classi cs ay be canonical in soe sense, they are also arcane. They require a change of ind to appreciate. In that light, Wolff’s friend Frederic Rzeski speculated in 1985 hy one ould be dran both to ancient Greek tragedy and to experiental usic: “What appeals to e personally is that I nd yself ys elf in the sae situation, situat ion, basically, that these characters ere in: confronted ith the as yet not-too-clear possibility of a ne civilization.” If Wolff’ olff’ss career as a classicist is unusual aong progressive coposers, so ight be his traditional faily life. Married for life and devoted father of four children, Wolff ay see uch “squarer” than his usic. But Wolff found that children in the hoe provoked ne copositional coposit ional strategies. strategie s. Interruptibility, for exaple, had to be taken into account. Collecting ideas and assebling the like a osaic becae habitual. And the lessons learned fro children (especially rhetorical strategies) insinuated theselves into ne orks. Although scholars seldo discuss the t he effects of parenting on aking art, ith Wolff Wolff one ust acknoledge the. Encountering Encounteri ng Wolff the an, one ay notice ho uch his speech reseble resebless his usic. He soeties holds forth ith great aniation and erudition then stops, suddenly pensive. At the height of a passionate stateent statee nt he ight halt and look into your eyes as though he had just taken a vo of silence. His usic displays the sae ixture of eloquence elo quence and reticence. reticen ce. A orid passage that iplies iplie s a developental continuation ay siply cease or peter out as though exhausted. What one is left ith sees clipped or perhaps siply allusive. Wolff accepts that the listener ill entally supply a consequent for any antecedent he presents. What is less typical of the an is the juxtapositi juxtapositional onal nature of any orks. While Wolff tends tends to speaks in paragraphs, paragraphs, logical and orderly orderly,, he tends to cocopose ith fragents. That gives his usic a sense both of restlessness and hisy. Were W ere it not laden laden ith ith so any pauses, one ight ight call call the usic peripatetic. But agitation gives ay quickly to an underlying cal. Thus his gestures take on the character of tentative but exultant oents. We feel soehat daunted to assess the ork of a coposer still living, riting, playing, and speaking about his ork. Given the careers of soe conteporary coposers—Milton Babbitt and Elliott Carter, for exaple—Wolff could ell continue his path, his “series “se ries of ideas, ideas,”” for any years ye ars that ay yet y et yield surprises. On the other hand, e have had the good fortune of Wolff’s help ith this rst continuous narrative of his life and ork. Although it is only introductory, e hope it ill illuinate ell a coposer ho alays aspires to illuination through usic.
christian wolff
| Introduction
3
4
If this book is introductor introductoryy, it is also revisio revisionist. nist. That you are holding this book in your hands is a partial refutation of his reputation as only a eber of the Ne York York School of coposers, co posers, or, indeed, an adjunct to t o it. Because he had a separate career and did not need to stake clais in the usical landscape in order to survive, Wolff partially receded into the backbrush of that landscape—despite Cage’s attepts to push hi forard. In this ork e try to offer a fresh ap to his pioneering.
1
Orpheus in Tenni enniss Sneaker Sneakerss
late at night, februar y 27, 27, 1933, forty-six-year-old
Kurt Wolff W olff sat ith his ancée Helen listening to Herann Herann Göring on the radio radio ferociously blaing the Counists for the burning of the Reichstag. Kurt burst out: “These are aden. Pack!” Within three days he and Helen had left Gerany. By the end of March they had arried in London and oved into a house in the hills above Nice, France, here they rented rent ed roos to other Gerans ho had ed. Kurt Wolff had long been restless and on edge. Since the 1910s he had sought out and published progressive European authors, including Kafka and so-called “expressionists”—though Wolff rejected attepts to “force on the a shared identity. iden tity.”” “Creative achieveen achieveent, t,”” he later insisted, insis ted, “is alays the ork of an individual.” Having atched the econoic crises of the 1920s and a groing reticence aong the Geran avant garde, Wolff Wolff had sold his publishing publishin g interests in 1930 (the sae year he divorced fro Elisabeth Merck, ith ho he had to children, Maria and Nikolaus). No, ith “aden” in full reign, “heaven didn’t beckon,” Kurt explained, “heaven kicked.” But the path to heaven as a labyrinth. Alost a year to the day after she ar ar-ried Kurt, tenty-seven-year-old Helen gave birth to their rst and only child: Christian George Wolff. In 1935 the three oved to a house in the countryside near Florence, here they harbored other refugees, until the revocation of their
christian wolff
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
5
6
passport in 1938 drove the back into France. In May 1939 they oved to Paris, here, hen ar ith ith Gerany Gerany broke out that fall, fall, Kurt as as interned for three three eekss by the Fren eek French ch gove govern rnent. ent. The foll folloi oing ng year he as inte interned rned aga again; in; Hele Helen n soon folloed, sending six-year-old Christian to a convent school for six onths. By suer 1940 the faily had reunited in Nice. In the folloing onths they igrated est to Spain and Portugal; then, as part of a assive U.S. liberation of Pinto, a croded ship to the United States, landing exiles, they boarded the Serpa Pinto, a on the Ne York shore on the sunny orning of March 30, 1941. They checked into the Hotel Colonial, here they stayed for ve onths before oving into a craped apartent at 41 Washington Square—the heart of Ne York York City’s Greenich Village, Village, hich no teeed te eed ith artistic ar tistic and intellectual exiles fro Europe. In Deceber the United States entered the World War W ar.. Geran exiles becae becae eney aliens, ho had to pool their resources and talents to survive. Wanting to elevate European thought in the U.S. book trade, Kurt negotiated ith his old friend Curt von Faber de Faur—then at Harvard— for a loan to start a ne book copany in February 1942 ith a ythic nae he had used for an earlier copany in Italy: Pantheon. He and Helen created a otto for the copany’s rst prospectus: “Classics that are Modern, Moderns that are Classics.” With anuscripts and letters spread throughout the Wolffs’ apartent, Pantheon quickly becae the Aerican voice of the European literary avant garde, including Stefan George, André Gide, and Albert Caus. In 1943, Pantheon joined forces ith the Bollingen Foundation to issue the coplete orks of Paul Paul Valéry Valéry and Carl Carl Jung. After they had copleted Pantheon ork in the daytie, the Wolffs’ nightly routine included Helen cooking the eals and Kurt and Christian ashing the dishes, here the kitchen sink becae the ain site of conversations beteen father and son about social and aesthetic issues, ith literature being a rosetta stone to both. Kurt spoke to Christian either in Geran or English depending on context and ood. English orked ell enough in undane conversation, and both parents anted their son to aintain a U.S. identity. But Kurt kept his native tongue alive in his son, according to Helen, not anting to speak in a “rudientary” ay to Christian, ho in 1942 had begun school at Friends Seinary on Sixteenth Street. One of the any nonsectari nonsectarian an schools founded by Quakers across the U.S. Northeast, Friends becae Christian’ Christ ian’ss school fro then t hen through all of his precollege school years. It as an old-fashioned, highly disciplined school ith classes fro kindergarten through telfth grade, each ith about tenty to tenty-ve students, including a groing share of eigrés, any of the Jeish. Each sub-
ject had one one teacher, teacher, soeties soeties a highly highly trained expert expert to ho students could go for knoledge beyond the basic curriculu. Openindedness as as crucial as scholarly zeal. The school had an intraural basketball tea on hich Christian played in his high school s chool years, despite his father’s objections that such sports ere ultiately “unhealthy and and dangerous.” dangerous.” Still, one easured social status at Friends by ho any languages one could speak, Russian novels one had read, French ovies one had seen, or art galleries one had visited. Christian enjoyed Flaubert and Tolstoy though favored Aerican classics such as Tom Sawyer and and Treasure Island. But Island. But Friends offered no usical training, though students soeties played at the eekly Quaker asseblies here everyone learned to sing hyns beteen long stretches of silence and the occasional iproptu speaker. Kurt Wolff, hoever, kne the usic orld ell. He as an accoplished cellist. His father had been a usic professor profes sor and choral conductor in Bonn, ith ties to Brahs’ Brahs’ss and Joachi’ Joachi ’ss circles. (Indeed, (Inde ed, as a boy, Kurt had et e t Brahs at Clara Schuann’s Schuann’s funeral.) In Ne York, York, Kurt and Helen Hele n had notable European usicians for friends, especially Adolph Busch and his ore proinent son-inla,, Rudolf Serkin. Hoping to lift the cultural sights la sight s of their only child, Kurt and Helen exposed Christian Christ ian to any artifacts of Western Western culture—paintings, culture—painti ngs, poes, and, of course, usic, hich for the eant a repertoire doinated by Bach at one end and Brahs at the other. Although associated ith odernis because of the authors ho Kurt had published for decades, his and Helen’s personal tastes in usic rested rly in historic styles and idios. Christian folloed suit. He ent to as any classical concerts as he could, especially piano recitals, often arriving at interission hen one could enter e nter ithout paying. Soeties he booed the ne usic he heard. He borroed books of Beethoven piano sonatas, hich he picked through, never really learning the to perforance level, but coing to kno their thees and textures. He did the ell-T Tempe empered red Clav Clavier ier.. Since his school taught no usic theory, sae ith it h Bach’s Bach’s Wellt heory, he read a book on the “eleents” of usic—notation, key signatures, basic harony, and instruentation. Until his parents got a piano he had to settle for practicing at school or friends’ hoes. Despite its lack of usic curriculu, Friends fostere fostered d uch of his inforal training in the art. One of his best friends at the school fro the seventh grade on as David Lein (ho ould becoe one of the nation’s best-knon usic theorists). Less than a year older than Christian, Lein as already a ne pianist ho had studied ith Eduard Steuerann and had even played Schuann’s Kreislerianaa in a Friends assebly. David and Christian soeties arrived at the Kreislerian seinary around 7:30 (an hour and a half before classes started) to practice four-
christian wolff
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
7
8
hand scores at the piano, soe of hich they played for friends after school. The repertoire consisted of classical asterorks, ostly Bach and Mozart. On the hole, the to disliked popular usic. Christian responded only tepParade ade radio idly to the fe Broaday shos he sa and vigorously resisted Hit resisted Hit Par radio prograing. While he and his friends kne nothing of the ore adventurous jazz then eerging in soe local clubs, they did cherish one U.S U.S.. vernacular style then resurging: resurgin g: Dixieland. Most Friday and Saturday nights, Friends high school boys ould gather at the Stuyvesant Casino on Second Avenue and Tenth Street (or at Central Plaza, a fe blocks aay) to hear players like Sidney Bechet, Pee Wee W ee Russell, Mugsy Mug sy Spanier, and Jaes Jae s P. Johnson playing hot jazz fro the 1920s. The Stuyvesant as one of a fe big, barnlike structures in the area ith very “live” acoustics, acoustics, not to ention beer by the pitcher, pitcher, table dancing, and no one checking IDs. The atosphere as raucous—far fro the Quaker ideals of quietude—and the boys fro Friends found the club intoxicating in every sense. In retrospect, to aspects of the usic pregured Christian’s later usical practices: virtuosity virt uosity and heterophony heter ophony.. The Dixieland that enthralled enthr alled hi and his colleagues as, as he later put it, “strong” chaber usic—“high-energy usic—“high-ene rgy collaborative usic-aking” by spontaneously inventive and technicall technicallyy skilled players. In the suer of 1948, Kurt and Helen took the fourteenfourteen-year-old year-old Christian to a Tangleood Tangleood concert concer t of the Juilliard Juill iard Quartet playing a progra progr a of Berg’s Berg’s Lyric Suite, Schoenberg’s Fourth String Quartet, and Webern’ s Five Pieces for String Quartet. Later, Christian frequently recalled this one event as life changing: he heard for the rst tie usic that he thought not only ovingly strange but free enough that he hiself ight be able to rite it—uch different, he thought, fro the pseudo-Bachian counterpoint he had attepted unsuccessfully unsuccessful ly before, ith little grasp of its rules and procedures. At about the sae tie, a faily friend asked Christian if he anted his cache Quarterly. ly. Christian of back issues of Henry Coell’s Coell’s New Music Quarter Christian eagerly accepted. As he he pored pored through the pages, pages, he sa the scores scores to any any “ultra-oder “ultra-odern” n” orks, as Coell called the, especially percussion pieces: John Cage’s Amores, Cage’s Amores, Edgard Edgard Ionisation, and Varèse’ V arèse’ss Ionisation, and the Three Dance Movements by by Willia Russell (the ending of hich featured the shattering of a bottle). The haronies and tibres in these scores struck hi as ysterious, the rhythic congurations unprecedented. With no recordings of these scores at hand and, so far far,, no opportunity to hear the in concert, Wolff had to appreciate ostly the sheer iage of difference they presented. Nevertheless, he could hear soe odernist pieces on WNYC Oresteia setting. radio, including Ionisation including Ionisation and and Milhaud’s early Oresteia setting. In these orks he found odels of radical attitude, if not of specic technique. Together ith
hat he had heard at Tangleood and and the Stuyvesant Casino, the copositions copositions began to give hi vague ideas of usic that had the rigor of European asters but the happily cluttered textures of Dixieland. Attepting to follo the exaples he had heard and seen, he rote a fe dissonant iniatures on the piano his parents had no acquired. Soetie in 1948, friends of the Wolffs arranged for Christian to audition the (along ith soe classical standards) for their thei r neighbor Carl Friedberg, Friedberg , an aged forer pupil of Clara Schuann. Although not ipressed ith it h Christian’s Christian’s playing, hich even the fourteen-year-old fourteen-y ear-old kne as lackluster lackluste r, Friedberg thought Christian’ Christian’ss copositions had potential. He encouraged the young an to spend tie iprovising at the keyboard. Wolff began to do so as a eans of generating ideas—leading his other, a friend recalls, to greet hi as he iprovised ith the siple question, “Koponierst du?”—“are you coposing?” Late in 1949 Christian began piano lessons ith Grete Sultan, another Geran ho had coe to the United States in 1941. Wolff kne soe of Sultan’s staunch perforances of old-orld classics but only gradually cae to realize her devotion to ne usic, especially especially hen he turned pages for her on a set of pieces by Hans Apostel she played at Colubia University. He learned she had even et and played pieces by Henry Coell, publisher of the New the New Music scores scores that had beguiled hi. With Sultan’s guidance he began to practice the op. 11 of Arnold Schoenberg, his rst playing of the kind of usic he had heard at Tangleood. Wolff olff’’s lessons ith Sultan ere a ixed success. On the one hand she tolerated and even encouraged his bringing of sall, quirky original pieces to lessons. On the other hand, he practiced less and less, arriving at each lesson unprepared to play but ith a ne coposition or to in hand to sho her, brief pieces that iitated Schoenberg and Bartók. After eeks of this, she told hi he needed to nd soeone ho could help hi ith coposing; she could not. Christian thought iediately of Varése, ho had once knocked on the Wolffs’ door and introduced hiself, and hose Ionisation hose Ionisation Christ Christian ian kne. But Varèse’ Varèse’ss reputation rep utation for severity and for courting excessive devotion fro students arded Christian aay fro the idea. Sultan, eanhile, thought of a friend of Merce Cunningha, the dancer ho lived upstairs fro her. Merce’s friend as another New another New Music percussion percussion coposer, ho had been introduced to Sultan by Henry Coell in 1945: John Cage. In March 1950 Wolff ade an appointent to see Cage at his Loer East Side teneent on Monroe Street, a rundon at next door to a burned-don rat-infested bakery. With no naeplates on the doors, Wolff knocked on one door after another anot her until he found fou nd Cage’s Cage’s on the top oor. He shoed Cage a fe
christian wolff
10
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
sall, densely dissonant pieces, including to for violin quartet and a song cycle
9
for voice and to violins on a text by a French edieval poet. After seeing these orks, Cage agreed agreed to teach the young an. an. When Christian Christian left, Morton Feldan recalled, Cage “cae donstairs and tubled into y apartent, shaking ith exciteent. He just couldn’t get over the usic that as brought to hi, especially fro soeone so young.” Cage rote enthusiastically to his friend Pierre Boulez: “I have a onderful pupil. He is sixteen and his favorite coposer is Webern. He has great intelligence andsensitivity. What’s ore, he as born in France. His nae is Christian Wolff.” At the tie, Wolff kne only the Webern of earlier orks, especiall especiallyy the op. 5 pieces for string str ing quartet, quarte t, hich Wolff Wolff had heard h eard at Tangleood. Tangleood. But Cage had hand-copied the Ne York York Public Library’ Library’ss score s core to Webern’ Webern’ss Syphony Sy phony,, “since it as nohere to be bought.” Probably relying on hat he had learned fro Boulez in a visit to France in 1949 and fro Leiboitz’s nely translated book on the Second Viennese School, Cage had begun an analysis of the ro fors in the rst oveent of the Webern Syphony. He assigned his ne student to nish labeling the ro fors in that oveent, a rigorous indoctrination into telve-tone pointillis. For six eeks, one lesson a eek, Cage also gave Wolff exercises in species counterpoint (g. 1) and taught hi his ethod of organizing a hole piece so that all the tie spaces, both icro and acro, ere in proportional relationships. The purpose of these technical studies, Cage explained, as to learn ho one develops discipline. After the foral lessons stopped, Wolff kept riting usic and et ith Cage fro tie to tie, the older entor not only advising Wolff on his ork, but introducing introduci ng hi to the usic of Erik Er ik Satie and Virgil Thoson, fro both of ho, Wolff recalls, “I rst got a sense of ho vernacular strains ight be copatible ith odernis.” Cage, folloing the exaple of his forer teacher Arnold Schoenberg, didn’t charge Wolff. Hoever adventurous Cage as in his ideas, he as a strict acadeician, hose notion of usic abandoned expressivity and relied on a priori fors not built fro up fro “content” (e.g., exposition, developent, recapitulation) but fro proportional schees—nubers and groupings of easures or beats, into hich one could pour short short usical gestures, including including percussive percussive “noise.” “noise.” And he elaborated these proportional schees not by intuitive lengthening of segents but through the nesting of proportions, apping teporal ratios onto various structural structural levels, fro icro icro to acro. It as an an acadeicist acadeicist odernis odernis that took its cues fro Webern, as Webern had taken his fro early sixteenthcentury counterpoint.
Figure 1. A page of Wolff’ Wolff’ss rst species counterpoint exercises ith corrections by John Cage. Wolff Papers. Used by perission. perission.
11
christian wolff
12
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
Cage urged Wolff to copose ith only a fe notes in scale segents. This
began ith solo sol o onody, onody, then advanced to pieces piece s for ultiple instruent ins truents. s. (Wolff (Wolff also explains that, “one day, I as brosing through this book about edieval usic . . . and I sa a usical exaple ith soe close to-part counterpoint ith very fe notes, notes , and for soe reason re ason that iage stuck in y ind.”) By May 1950 he had copleted three songs for voice and ute, four for voice and to percussionists (a grouping derived fro Thoson), and four instruental duos—none the involving In June, of Wolff rote a piecepiano. for just three adjacent pitches, the Duo for Violins, hich becae his putative op. 1. It consists entirely of the pitches D5–Eb5–E5 played in different rhythic and tibral cobinations for eighty-ve easures (alost four and a half inutes). inu tes). For the duo, the sixteen-year-old sixte en-year-old Wolff Wolff orked out a rational schee, one that put a ne tist on “telve-tone” theory. He surised that a group of three pitches deployed beteen to solo-line instruents could yield telve tel ve different “sounds.” Each individual pitch pit ch played alone akes a sound. There are also three dyadic siultaneities (pitches 1 + 2, 2 + 3, and 1 + 3). So far, then, a total of six different sounds. But Wolff adds to that the various skeerings of the dyads-that is, dyads in hich the to pitches are not attacked siultaneously or not held the sae length of tie. So e have: 1 to which 2 is added, then both held to a simultaneous ending ending
or
1 and 2 simultaneously attacked attacked but held for different lengths
—and so on ith the other to dyadic cobinations. These skeerings of the dyads, then, create six additional add itional “sounds,” giving Wolff Wolff a total of telve different sounds fro one three-pitch set for to solo-line instruents. For his reaining year of high school, Wolff continued developi developing ng siilar techniques fro the Webern-Cage axis: short, lean pieces ith only fe pitches or xed “gauts.” For Cage, a “gaut” as siply a collection of o f sounds, each an individual pitch or noise or clup of either. These gauts ould take the place of scales. Each gaut could be arranged into a single onophonic line, a “elody” of assorted sonorities. Such lines could then be deployed in preconceived groupings of easures or beats—often be ats—often “square-root” fors, organized into A × A foral structures or tie lengths. The “elodies” of gauts, draped over these syetrically nested fors, constituted the hole substance of ne orks. Thus the pieces in Wolff’ olff’ss early opus—hich set the pattern for all his subsequent copositional periods—ere epigraatic, not only for their brevity, but for the terseness of their gestures. Silences also lled the pieces, rendering the usical fabric allusive: the spaces resebled the gaps in short-line Aerican poetry, poetry, invit-
ing the listener to focus on individual ords or brief phrases. These early pieces (and ost that folloed) often seeed like little patchorks of usical haiku.
The duo as the rst of a series of orks ith less than the total chroatic chroatic.. Although Alth ough defyi defying ng the hyper hyperchro chroati aticis cis of the Scho Schoenber enbergg and Webern he loved (not to ention ost of Cage’s ork), Wolff used liited-pitch pieces to rene the discipline Cage had enjoined. These nine orks, all copleted before Wolff graduated fro Friends Seinary in 1951, proved soe of his ost prescient and inuential. While they share a coon spirit of constraint, each ork broke soe ne ground for hi, suggesting a peripatetic spirit that ould energize his ork for decades and fuel the ore spontaneously changeable (he ould say “efcient”) sei-iprovisatory orks for hich he ould becoe best knon. Several of the copositio copositions ns of this period see like tropes on the technique of Duo for Violins. Consider the String Str ing Trio, Trio, for exaple. exaple . In the duo, the “elody” consisted of pitches sounding alone, siultaneously, or overlapped in varying ays. In the String Trio, Wolff increased the nuber of instruents by one and added double stops to the texture. He also splayed the harony: here the duo had three half-step-related pitches, the trio used three half-step-related pitch classes (C#–D–D #), xed in their registral placeent but spread quasi-syetrically over a span of four octaves (C #2, D3, D #4, D5, C #6). Forally, the piece unfolds in a strict ABA for the rst tenty-seven easures (arked by a double bar), folloed by BAABA, in hich each of the “expositional” A and B segents is subtly varied, typically by inial elongations or copressions of tie lengths. It exeplied a trait to hich Wolff ould recur throughout his career: doggedly forulaic structures tepered ever so slightly by oentary intuitions. His next piece, the Serenade (for ute, clarinet, and violin), broke ne haronic ground, using three pitches spaced in perfect fths: E4/B4/F E4/B 4/F#5. This overtly perpetuo pointillistic texture, oddly forediatonic fraeork, deployed in a moto perpetuo pointillistic shadoed the classic inialis of the next generation. Forally, Wolff adapted 4 set of proportions Cage’s “square-root” for as his scaffolding. He starts ith this Cage’s t his pr oportions 2:1.5:3:2.5:1 (= 10), hich represent nubers of easures in 4 (or, in other ords, forty beats arranged into groups of 8:6:12:10:4). In Cage’s ethod, one ould take that series to represent the nuber of sounding repetitions of the forty-beat pattern in each section of the piece, thus:
2 × (8:6:12:10:4) 1.5 ×
"
3 ×
"
2.5 ×
"
1 ×
"
13
christian wolff
14
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
Rather than this essentially additive approach, Wolff took a ultiplicative ons onto approach, apping the sae proporti sae proportions onto each section. Thus, the tenty-ea-
sure rst section divides into ve segents ith the lengths of 4:3:6.5:2 easures each (each segent arked by a dynaic shift). The second section (15 easures) divides into ve sections in these proportions: 3 (12 beats):2.25 (9 beats):4.5 (18 beats): 3.75 (15 beats): 1.5 (6 beats) (= 15 easures, or 60 beats). And so forth. After riting a four-pitch trio (January 1951), Wolff rote his rst ork based on the “chart” technique Cage had used in his Concerto for Piano and Orchestra. This technique involved the coposer aking a box of squares, like a sall chessboard, across each ro of hich he rote series of sonorities. Wolff or Prepared Piano. This Piano. This four oveent took that basic idea but odied it in F in For piece coposed in the spring of 1951 used Cage’s technique of applying objects to strings to turn the piano into a sall pseudo-percussion enseble. To structure the piece, Wolff ade four 5 × 5 squares into hich he rote vertically (up, don, up, don, etc.) sonorities fro gauts he had created for each square (each sonority fro one to ve pitches in density): I = 7 sounds II = 12 sounds (+ 1 that sounded only once) III = 10 sounds (+ 1 that sounded only once) IV = 6 sounds (+ 3 that sounded only once apiece)
(Only by the fourth oveent had all telve pitch classes appeared.) Then, having lled in each box verticall verticallyy, Wolff rote out resultant horizontal 4 lines, packing various linear cobinations into the tenty-ve 4 easures of each oveent, ith irregular lengths of rests aong the, privileging silence to a degree not knon in his earlier orks. This ethod, of course, perutated the sounds in a ay systeatically contrary to their actual coposition. Thus, fro that process, Wolff arrived in the rst oveent at his seven sounds arranged in this order: 123234234253426137235154653761277624414
Their construc constructive tive origins notith notithstanding standing,, one ay sense a pleasing pleasingly ly “organ “organic” ic” unfolding of eleents: the gradual introduction of each ne sound one at a tie (after the initial three have sounded in succession) until no. 7 nally arrives as the eighteenth attack in the piece. Wolff olff’’s illful executi execution on of “non-int “non-intention entionality” ality” ipress ipressed ed Cage deeply. For or Prepared Piano, Cage Piano, Cage explained to Boulez at the tie, Wolff had created In F In “usic in a structure hich xes sounds in a preconceived space ithout regard for linear line ar continuity continui ty.” .” “It as Wolff,” Wolff,” Cage later lat er explained, explai ned, “ho [in this piece]
ade clear to e the necessity to renounce any interest in continuity. It as he ho, in order to ‘let sounds sounds coe into their on,’ on,’ rote usic vertically vertically on the
page though the usic as to be played horizontally.” Thus Wolff had “discov“ discovered geoetric geoetric eans for freeing free ing his usic of intentional intenti onal continuity.” continuity.” In a 1959 essay,, Henry Coell faously said that Cage and his Ne York essay York School colleagues colle agues (Wolff, Feldan, and Earle Bron) ere “four coposers ho ere getting rid of the glue.” That eant, Cage explained, that hile other coposers “felt the necessity to stick sounds together to ake a continuity, e four felt the opposite necessity to get rid of the glue so that sounds ould be theselves.” Cage then said, “Christian Wolff as the rst to do this.” Though ipress ipressed ed by Wolff olff’’s ideas, Cage encourage encouraged d his student to get practical experience by riting and playing for dancers. Wolff arranged ith Jean Erdan—a friend of Merce Cunningha and the ife of Pantheon/Bollingen author Joseph Capbell—to Capbell—to play for a fe of her classes and for at least one of her students’ dance recitals. At that 27 May 1951 recital, hich included orks by Morton Feldan Feldan and Lou Harrison, Harrison, Wolff played piano piano for six of the ten nubers. These included pieces by Schoenberg and Bartok, as ell as to of his on, one of hich being his rst public attept at iprovisation. It as a stop-gap solution for having hav ing to play for a dance he had thought t hought ouldn’t be ready (and hence hadn’t hadn ’t ritten a piece for), but ended ende d up on the progra. To iprovise iprovis e in this circustance asn’t an aesthetic choice, of course, but a pragatic one. Wolff W olff recalls it as “not so uch ‘spontaneity’ as being being ready as a perforer to do hat’s necessary to keep things going.” The onth after that recital, he graduated fro Friends Seinary and his parents took hi on a trip to Europe. Cage got Christian to spend a eek in Paris ith Boulez Boulez,, ho shoe shoed d Wolff aroun around d the ne usic co counity unity there and even gave hi the anuscript of Boulez’s Boulez’s rst piano sonata, inscribed “in adiration of his so precocious talent fro one ho is nearly an old an.” Boulez “basically babysat e,” Wolff recalling t hat “I spent all y tie t ie hi andeach he introduced e to all his said, friends and ethat hung out together and ith e shoed other usic,” including soe by hiself and Feldan. During Wolff’s visit, Boulez rote a letter to Cage afring that Cage and Boulez ere then “at the sae stage of research.” Boulez did not no t like Wolff Wolff’’s liited-pitch liited- pitch technique, techni que, though, nor did he think highly of his copositions, he rote to Cage. Cag e. He urged Wolff Wolff to use the coplete set of all telve pitch classes—hich Wolff ould exuberantly do a fe onths later. While this trip introduced Wolff to the orld of the European serialist serialists, s, it also shoed hi ho differently he and his Ne York colleagues had coe to
christian wolff
16
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
vie usical construction. construction. Where Webern had inspired inspired the Europeans ith ith his orderliness, the Aericans prized Webern’ Webern’ss terseness. terse ness. Boulez and his copatriots
15
busied their textures ith elaborate ebellishents of serial schees. Cage and his friends increasingly pared don their textures, constructing constructing delicate isolated gestures that ere like constellations conste llations in their sparsity. Inference becae the ideal. After his return to Ne York, Wolff began a kind of graduation piece—a suation of the techniques of his entors (Cage via Webern and vice versa) coupled ith an expansion of forces. The title, Nine, title, Nine, suggests suggests soe copositional constraints: • 9 instruments (ute, clarinet, clarinet, trumpet, horn, trombone, celesta, celesta, piano, two cellos) • 9 pitches (E2, F #2, F #3, G #3, A4, E5, B5, C6, D7—the pitch classes of an A minor ascending melodic minor scale, with the E and the F # doubled) • a 9 × 9 grid, into which Wolff would place sounds from an enormous gamut 28
He did the latter by laying out various kinds of continuities in geoetric patterns. Each continuity could consist of different relationships. For exaple: consider an isolated block chord of four pitches, played by four instruents at the sae dynaic (this is the t he “purest,” ost stable haronic har onic unit in the piece). piece ). One then has any possible “continuities”: different pitches (soe or all), different instruents (soe or all), different dynaics (soe or all), overlapping the chord ith one or ore pitches sounded by another instruent (or other instruents), spreading out the attacks of chord tones, expanding the nuber of broken-chord tones (to as any as nine), and so forth. Any such variant could be chosen (or cobined) in a given square; successive squares in diagonal or other patterns ould follo the sae kind of “continuity “continui ty.” .” Having “coposed out” o ut” the grid in this ay ay,, linking one sound to the next along a given line of boxes—and including occasional epty boxes, connoting longer rests—Wolff rests—Wolff could then proceed fro left to right or Prepared Prepared Piano Piano)) to realign the continuities into discontinuities. He then (as in F in For essentially transcribed the piece fro the t he grid, deploying rests as needed, recast4 4 into
2 4,
ing the eter fro 81 easures of 162 easures of and occasionally 3 changing the eter (e.g., to 8 ) for ease of reading. Nine becae, Copleted in Septeber 1951, 1951, Nine becae, in effect, Wolff’s hybrid of Webern’ W ebern’ss Syphony—a Syphony—a rigorously rigorously organized pointillist piece for for ixed orchestral colors—and Cage’s Sixteen Dances—a nine-instruent chart-based gaut piece copleted in January of that year. Where Webern had used a telve-tone technique ith canons, canons , Wolff used block-by-block block-by- block non-telve-tone non-telv e-tone usical “tiles” in a osaic of sound. It as atonal and tightly controlled on one hand, but pitch restricted and intuitive on the other. In later years, Feldan ould call it the “asterork” of this period.
By then Wolff had dran fro Cage the fundaental ideas, habits, and relationships that ould guide the rest of his copositional career. The ideas included an overall nonexpressive constructivis; the priacy of rhythic scheatics for a
piece; the poer of silence; the technique of sonic “gauts”; the breadth of usable continuities fro sound sound to sound; and the value of all kinds of ideas for rethinking usic. Species counterpoint gave Wolff a sense of discipline and calculation at a note-to-note level; iprovisation freed Wolff for the spontaneity that ould pervade his best knon pieces. Cage brought Wolff into a nurturing counity of likeinded artists (including painters). By Wolff’s high school graduation, he as an insep inseparab arable le e eber ber of hat oul ould d beco becoe e kno knon n as the Ne York Scho School ol of coposers, consisting of Cage, Feldan, Wolff, and Earle Bron (husband of Carolyn [Rice] Bron, a ne dancer in Merce Cunningha’s copany). And Cage taught Wolff that only perforance constituted the copletion of a ork. Hence, Wolff Wolff ould soon becoe less les s true to “ideal” rules than to do-it-yourself do-it-y ourself ethods that ould facilitate perforance. perforance. But Cage repeatedly said that “I learned ore fro [Christian Wolff] than he did fro e.” That clai ay be as uch generosity as fact. But Wolff Wolff certainly provided three things that notably altered Cage’ Cage’ss copositional career. One as the or Prepared Prepared Piano, Piano, the calculated discontinuity of F of For the “letting sounds be theselves” ith hich Cage Cage credited Wolff. Wolff. Another as Wolff’ olff’ss gift to Cage in return for free lessons. In 1950 Pantheon had published a ne to-volue edition of Cary Baynes’ss English translation of Richard Wilhel’ Baynes’ Wilhel’ss Geran version of the Chinese I Ching. “Because I as getting free instructions and e ere friends,” said classic I classic Wolff, W olff, “I ould try . . . to ake y y contribution” contribution” to Cage’s Cage’s ork. Wolff thought thought the ne I ne I Ching edition edition ight interest and even eve n inuence Cage, partly because he kne his teacher’s interest in Jung, ho rote the preface to this edition. The I The I Ching ’s rst volue also contained agic squares and, at the end, a fold-out chart of hexagras that resebled agic square syetry. So Christian gave the set to his teacher (the rst of any Pantheon publications he ould give Cage). “I as struck iediately iediately,,” Cage said, “by the possibility of using the I the I Ching as as a eans for ansering questions that had to do ith nubers”—better even than the agic square. The I Ching suggested The I suggested to Cage a echanis for routinizing chance operations—that ethod for hich Cage is perhaps best knon. But a third, broader and ore lasting inuence on Cage ay actually have coe through Christian fro his parents. Cage had pursued a European artistic lineage by studying ith Schoenberg on the West Coast. But Cage found in the Wolffs W olffs an entrée into both the Old and Ne World intelligentsias, one for hich his friendship ith the proprietors of Pantheon Books as the best credential.
christian wolff
18
| Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers
Kurt and Helen invited Cage to dinners and parties, hose guests included Alan Watts, W atts, Josep Joseph h Cap Capbell, bell, and other auth authors ors publ published ished by Panth Pantheon. eon. Alrea Already dy soe soe-thing of a polyath, Cage eagerly ebraced this heady copany and referred
17
to their orks and ideas for decades thereafter. As early as 1954 Cage rote to Helen Wolff of “y love for you and a sense of responsibility to you and to Mr. Wolff W olff (through (through y relation to Christian) fro hich hich I a not free. free.”” Christian, though, as too young to enter Cage’ Cage’ss social circle fully fully,, the older art crod that lingered linge red in long, l ong, nightly discussions dis cussions at the Cedar Ced ar Tavern. Tavern. (“Well, (“Well, I ight tag along,” Wolff said, “but hen it as suppertie I . . . had to negotiate it at hoe.”) Still, he kne ho hard Cage and Feldan struggled as coposers to pay the bills. He decided not to attept, like the, a career as a coposer. If Wolff had iicked Cage in attitudes and ethods, he rejected the hand-toouth existence that seeed to nourish Cage’s onastic approach to craft. And hile Wolff’ Wolff’ss parents exeplied to Christian a stolid self-reliance, their pragatis tepered any of the speculative adventurousness adventurou sness Cage prized. So in Septeber 1951, Christian enrolled at Harvard, here his bookishness led hi into classics, a eld suitably esoteric, yet bankable as an acadeic career. But by then his reputation repu tation as a Ne York York School hero as already al ready xed. xed . Years later, lat er, Feldan ould characterize characterize the young scholar scholar of Greek and Latin ith ith his on classical classical etaphor: Wolff, this inventive and prescient coposer in their idst, had been “Orpheus in tennis sneakers.”
Situations Situati ons of Too Extreme
2
Difculty: Difcul ty: 1951–1959
Boston sleepy and sedate— a perfect place to study the canon of dead languages, but less apt for radical experients in sound. Harvard itself as notoriously conservative, not only in its social habits and politics but in its cultural life. Music coposition on capus as staid, staid, though avid, avid, its thriving thriving acadeic acadeic progra progra overseen by Walter Piston and Randall Thopson, both einent coposers ith Old World regard for for, coherence, and balance. Although they guided their t heir students (ho included include d Leonard Bernstein and then neoclassicist Elliott Carter) into the odernis of Stravinsky, Bartok, Hindeith, and even Schoenberg, Piston spurned Cage and his ilk—ore puzzled than disissive, he found the experientalists experientali sts ausing but artistically arginal. Understandably, Wolff shied aay. But he continued to copose. Fro the tie he entered Harvard in 1951 until he enlisted in the ary in 1959, all but one of Wolff’s surviving copositions ere piano pieces—seven orks in hich he oved fro Cageian gauts and prepared piano to utterly ne congurations of usical aterials and coposer-perforer relationships, though still generally ithin Cageian overall fors. To rite for f or piano—Wolff’s piano—Wolff’s on instruent—fost inst ruent—fostered ered innovation inno vation and evolution, since since it relieved hi of the need to anipulate instruental tibres: the piano becae, in effect, a liited color gaut ithin hich to explore pitch and aff t er m a nh at ta n , wol a w ol f f f ou nd
christian wolff
20
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
rhyth. At the sae tie, he had not only hiself as a potential player, but also Cage and, ore iportant, Cage’s friend David Tudor, hose superb technical skills, severe discipline, and zeal for the neest and opaquest usic had becoe
19
the Ne York School s virtuoso ace in the hole. For or Prepared Piano in Piano in the suer of 1951, at Tudor bega began n play playing ing Wolff olff’’s F Boulder, Colorado, in his rst full recital of Ne York York School orks. He becae the ork’s chapion for the next six years, playing it throughout the United or Prepared Piano Piano as States and Europe. F Europe. For as the ost iediately appealing of Wolff’’s teenag Wolff teenagee orks for its delicacy, exoticis, exotici s, and allusive allusiveness. ness. At Tudor’ udor’ss no legendary Cherry Lane Theatre perforance in Ne York City, January 1, 1952, the piece sat alongside assive orks of Boulez, Cage, and Feldan (the three coposers ho had bonded ith Wolff to coplete a joint set of essays explaining their respective usical “researches”). “researches”). The The New New York Times revieer revieer understandably found Wolff’s sall set—darfed by the usic that surrounded it on the progra—perhaps the ost charing on the progra: they ere “quite attractive. . . . brief and istful, and lonely in their effect. It as like listening to rain dripping fro an eave and splashing and dropping and clanking as it fell on different objects.” In the eeks folloing that Boulder recital, Wolff rote a ne piece he titled For Piano I. It For I. It contained only nine pitches (D #1, E2, F #2, F#3, G #4, G5, C #6, G #6, B b7), thirteen durations, and nine dynaics, all recongured in often brutally difdif cult ays. In one instance, one has to play a chord spanning over four octaves ith different attacks, durations, and dynaics: that is—using actual fractional values of durations—a sixth note B b6 (at ff ), a sixth note C #6 (at p), a fth note G #4 (at f ), and an eighth note F #2 (at ppp). What occasioned such nonrecurrent cobinations as Wolff Wolff’’s use of a gaut of sixteen different di fferent densities, de nsities, a “density” being dened by the nuber of pitches sounded anyhere ithin a given space. For exaple, the rst density consisted of three pitches sounded ithin a space of nineteen sixteenth notes; the second density, seven pitches ithin the space of no pitches three eighth notes; the third density no pitches sounded ithin the space of seven eighth notes; and so forth. These densities could also be superiposed, alloing the saller one to occur anyhere ithin the space of the larger one. The sequence and superiposition of densities, though, ere deterined by chance procedures. For or Piano II, hich II, hich A year later, Wolff produced that piece’ piece’ss unlikely sequel, sequel, F used all eighty-eight eight y-eight keys k eys of the piano—Wolff’s piano—Wolff’s response to t o Boulez’s Boulez’s critique of his restricted-pitch technique—ith technique—ith tepi exible (ithin given liits) and dynaics (except for a fe) chosen by the perforer. The piece unfolds in four parts
that ove gradually fro intuitive hyperchroatic gestures toard increasing logic and order: The rst part has no discernible ethod, siply the free use of any pitches scattered around the keyboard. Folloing a brief pause, the second part continues this seeingly haphazard unfolding, bringing in all the reaining
pitches. The third part (ith no pause preceding it) features ve xed “scales” of thirteen or fourteen pitches apiece and a xed nuber of rhyths and rhythic structures; after another pause, as beteen oveents, the fourth part continues the rigors of the third. Wolff used the top and botto notes of the keyboard only once each, and others ore, often ultiple ties in close succession, giving eeting hints of the staticity of his earlier orks. Still, the effect is of a ferocious pointillis, ildly traversing the keyboard in ays he had not previously attepted. Dozens of this piece’s siultaneities require gynastic hand deployent (as in the sixth easure, e asure, hich called for B2, E4, and and B b5 to be played essentially together hile one hand holds a long D #4 that had been attacked aid an even ore iprobably dispersed set of pitches pit ches in the previous easure, including a siultaneous attack of C #4 and F7). Tudor learned the piece, drove up to Harvard ith Cage and preiered it at the April 1953 Festival of Harvard Coposers—here it protruded sharply fro an otherise ore progra student orks—and kept thealost piece in his repertoire forconventional the next three years, of perforing it in recitals that, York Times disissed as “hollo, sha, pretentious Greenpredictably, the New the New York ich Village exhibitionis. exhibitionis.”” Meanhile, Wolff olff’’s copositional output sloed in 1954, ith only one ork, the Suite for Prepared Piano (again, for Tudor), cobining the exotic sonorities For or Prepared Piano ith Piano ith the ore jagged rhetoric of F or Piano II. During II. During the of F of of For 1954–55 school year, Wolff focused on copleting his honors progra in Classics (i.e., Greek and Latin), barely cracking the Harvard usic scene but aking the occasional foray to Ne York and a suer trip to Europe though avoiding France, fearing he could, by his birth status, be inducted into the French ary. The year 1955 proved a culination for Wolff and his faily faily.. In the spring of rom the Sea. By Sea. By that year Pantheon published Anne Morro Lindbergh’s A Lindbergh’s A Git rom the end of the year it had sold ore than 600,000 copies in the United States State s alone, draatically lifting Kurt and Helen’s prestige and bargaining poer po er.. Graduating that spring fro Harvard ith a agna cu laude bachelor’s degree, Christian also received Harvard’s Richardson Prize, a Woodro Wilson Felloship, and a Fulbright scholarship scholarship to study language and literature at the University of Florence for the 1955–56 school year. On the boat to Italy that suer, he sketched ideas for a ne piano duo and also befriended the young coposer Richard
christian wolff
22
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
Maxeld, a fello traveler then on his ay fro studies ith Milton Babbitt to ork ith telve-tone coposer Luigi Dallapiccola. Whatever Wolff Wolff learned le arned of literature in Florence as overshadoed by usical adventures—a trip to Cologne, for exaple, here he visited the loquacious Karlheinz Stockhausen,
21
ho played Wolff three hours hours of recordings of of ne European European usic, ostly his on. (Wolff (Wolff’’s reputation reputat ion had preceded pre ceded hi, though: though : Tudor Tudor had ritten ri tten to t o Stock Klavierstüc rstücke ke hausen,, likening Feldan’ hausen Fe ldan’ss and Wolff Wolff’’s piano orks ork s to Stockhausen Stock hausen’’s Klavie in their “psychic status of great denition,” hich he considered the authentic “path,” hose “ore rigorous astery of aterial ateri al should reveal easily eas ily the higher spiritual states.” ) In Florence, Fl orence, Wolff Wolff occasionally played his and Feldan’s Feldan’s piano usic for sall gatherings and discussed ith Maxeld hat Wolff considered Babbitt’s “absurd preoccupation ith pitches.” He also attepted coposing, though after ve onths had only about to inutes of a trio to sho for it. In March 1956 Cage rote Wolff Wolff about a six-eek series of concerts he as planning for that May and June in Ne York—hat could Wolff send hi? Wolff rote that he as as “fresh “fresh out of ideas. ideas.”” At the end of 1955 Feldan had ritten to Wolff and urged hi to “spread the gospel—rite articles and ait.” Wolff coplied ith the adonition via Stockhausen, ho asked an article Geran)suer about Webern his Reihe, Reihe, the ne journal, Die theWolff housefor organ for the(in Darstadt courses,for a panEuropean usical curriculu touting the latest “researches” in coposition. In suer 1956, as Wolff headed hoe, he ade a stopover in Darstadt, here Feldan’ss teacher, Feldan’ teache r, Stefan Wolpe, Wolpe, and Tudor Tudor both bot h held forth, giving hasty surveys or Piano I and F or Piano II. II. of ne Aerican developents, including Wolff’s F Wolff’s For and For After Tudor Tudor played the pieces, a young Harvard student coposer and pianist, Frederic Rzeski, Rze ski, approached Wolff, Wolff, introduced hiself, hise lf, and arranged to pursue purs ue coon interests in experiental e xperiental usic back at Harvard, here Rzeski, though he considered Randall Thopson his best teacher, as also knon as the rst person to acquire the latest radical scores (even before the university library). In the fall, Rzeski introduced Wolff to a younger friend, David Behran, no president of the Harvard undergraduate usic club. That gave Behran and, in turn, Rzeski and Wolff, rent-free access to Paine Hall for recitals. They scheduled a joint perforance of experiental usic for the spring seester. But Wolff, no beginning a graduate progra in coparative literatur literature, e, had acquired a teaching assistantship ith a assive load. For just one of the to classes he taught in spring seester, for exaple, he had to teach Don Quixote, Gulliver’s Travels, Travels, Tom Jones, Great Expect Expectations, ations, Moby-Dick, Moby-Dick, and Peace— and War and Peace— all, of course, ajor orks outside of the canon of his undergraduate studies. He
had little tie to copose, at least not the kind of elaborate, precisely notated scores he had already produced. The question he faced then as ho to achieve an elaborate post-Webernesque usical surface that as structured and had a sheen of virtuosic intensity but did not require labored coposition, let alone
practice, of the intricate rhyths and coplex chords he favored. He decided to ove toard soe kind of indeterinate notation notat ion in a ne piano duo that alloed hiself and Rzeski latitude, not iprovisation iprovisati on per se (ith hich they had little experience), but hich freed the fro the dictates of a rigorously deterinate score. At the sae tie, an ingrained desire desi re to break ne ground ith it h each ork ipelled Wolff to devise notations different fro any he had yet seen. In 1950 Feldan had ritten the rst of his Projections pieces, pieces, hich began several years of “box notation,” in hich pitch as governed only by register (high/iddle/lo)) and intensity left copletely indeterinate. Soe of the pieces (high/iddle/lo olio set Earle Bron assebled into his F his Folio set (1952–53) consisted of notations that soeties differed little fro local visual artists’ pen-and-ink draings. In a ay Bron had reached the very heart of the notational conundru: conundru: hat is the connection beteen sight and sound in the aking of usic? So long as the visual stiuli provoke an interesting aural result, Bron iplicitly ansered, the score, even if indeterinate in all paraeters, still succeeds. Hoever prescient he as in experientalist construction of aterials, though, Wolff had resisted experients expe rients ith notation. notat ion. Except for his three-voice Madrigals (1950), piece Madrigals piece (1950), hich notated rhyth strictly but left pitch only relative, Wolff W olff used only standard scoring techniques before 1957. In that year, for the prospective spring-seester, Wolff constructed a piece as he often had before, using sall collections of pitches and clock-tie scheatics, all coupled ith the extended techniques of the Coell-Cage tradition, playing directly on the strings—haronics, plucking, uting, and inserting preparations. Also, as one had coe to expect in his scores, Wolff built substantial silences into each part, silences that, as in eighteenth-century counterpoint, the other player ould likely ll. But Wolff ent on to set up possibilities possib ilities fro hich players play ers had to choose in the course of playing. So, for exaple, one ight have ve seconds to play to pitches fro a given collection. One could play the in either order, siultaneously, hold the for different durations, and so forth. fo rth. This as, in concept, hat he had done in deterinate fashion in his rst pieces (and not far fro hat one could choose to do in the box-notation pieces of Feldan). For this piece, no discarded, Wolff developed a ratio syste of notation that notes, one ould characterize his next fe pieces. Rather than notes, one ight call these neumes, signs inscriptions neumes, signs for actions to take place but not specic sounds to be
christian wolff
24
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
ade. These earliest earli est neues in hat ould ou ld becoe Wolff Wolff’’s distinctive distinctiv e scores e call ratio neues: each action has a nueric ratio. The rst nuber in the ratio refers to a duration in seconds. The second nuber nuber in the ratio refers to ho any of a given group of pitches (or pitches chosen ad lib by the perforer) to play.
23
Modications to the nubers (various letters and brackets) tell ho to odify Modications the pitches (e.g., transpose, prepare the strings) or the playing (i.e., inside-thepiano techniques). Wolff as delighted at the result: “It ade a usic that, as far as sound ent, as just as as intricate and interesting interesting as the stuff that e ere aking aking hen hen e rote everythi everything ng out. This as a revelation. An enorous aount of this labor-intensive process of aking every single note, every notation and so forth, hich ould take eeks or onths, onths, suddenly in tenty-four tenty-four hours e e had ade a piece hich orked like this, and hich . . . as iediately available for perforance.” W Wolff olff as dran to the efciency of the process but also to the sense sens e of controlled iprovisation to hich it led. It as not free, really, but rather a dialogue beteen to equally equipped equi pped players ho ould respond to each other ith choices choices necessarily necessarily conditioned by hat hat the other played. played. And that that interacinteraction enlivened the piece perhaps ore than if the parts had been carefully constructed and strictly dictated to the players by the coposer. In this piece, Wolff had reconciled ith his early interest in Dixieland jazz—not overtly, he says, but subliinally. “It’s like a chord chart,” he said, a “funny version of a chord chart. And you do riffs riffs over it, ith that aterial. aterial.”” That piano duo becae the prototyp prototypee for Wolff olff’’s next four pieces, each for one or ore pianos, each ith verbal instructions longer than the one preceding it, and all scored ith ratio neues. The rst of these pieces as probably the Sonata for Three Pianos, preiered in April 1957. Asked to rite for a concert of ultiple piano orks, Wolff devised this relatively siple ork, ith no score but three individual piano parts, not coordinated except that durations ust be folloed strictly enough (preferably using stopatches) that the players proceed at the sae pace and end at the sae tie. The Sonata used a kind of baseline notation, derived fro the earlier prototype, on hich all later orks of this type ould elabora elaborate: te: siple ratios denotin denotingg tie on the left and nube nuberr of sounds on the right, pitch collections fro hich to choose, preparations for certain notes carefully specied, and a fe dynaics scattered throughout. As ith all of the ratio-neue pieces, the tiny fractional tie values could be extraordinarily difcult to anage. But there as no inside-the-piano playing in the sonata, nor as there any cuing aong players. Although strikingly ne, even in the experien-
tal context of this recital, Wolff disliked the sonata and spoke to Feldan about revising it. Feldan suggested he just proceed differently in his next piece. That piece, Duo for Pianists 1, again had no full score, only a part for each player. The notation resebled rese bled that of the sonata sonat a but no prescribed soe silences (i.e., ith a “0” on the right of the ratio sign), alloed for soe ad lib octave oct ave trans-
positions, and occasionally called for playing inside the piano. Preparations ere no longer prescribed; rather, each perforer chose to different preparations to be assigned to t o notes ore or less le ss ad lib. Although Wolff Wolff had the parts part s ready only a eek before the concert, Tudor and Cage preiered it at Harvard, ten days before Christas 1957. As it turned out, both perforers ended up translating the ne notation into “noral” notation on regular score paper, aking the various choices ahead of the perforance and then practicing the in a relatively con ventional ay. ay. “The ore choices [Wolff] [Wolff] offered,” offered,” Tudor explained, “the ore it as necessary to rite it out. . . . When you have tenty-four different pitches you can choose choose fro and it doesn’ doesn’tt ake any difference difference to hi hat hat they are— the point is, it akes a difference to you. to you. It’s It’s a possibility that he didn’t think of, that it ould ake a difference to the perforer.” There is no ay (and perhaps no need) to tell ho “accurate” that preiere perforance as. But e can deduce the general gene ral effect of the piece. As ith other Wolff W olff pieces, the gestures echoed Webern’ ebern’ss pithines pithinesss and understa understateent. teent. Yet the ne notation gave the piece a particular character, entally focused yet playful. It provided a solid anser to Darstadt serialis, hich had begun to produce highly deterinate, ultraorganized scores that Wolff thought aesthetically dead. His intent, born of the exigencies of graduate ork in another discipline, as to ake a score that ould be less text than pretext for usical conversation, yet ith a clear clear affection for the atoized atoized sonorities he adired in Webern. The Duo for Pianists 1, like the to pieces before it, energized Wolff. He had no learned to rite pieces that ere about usic aking, not “usic” (and certainly not pitch, hich Boulez insisted as the ost iportant eleent of usic). In the duo, Wolff effectively deoted pitch in the hierarchy of usical values by alloing players to choose pitches fro groups he gave the. The quality of surprise that gives pleasure to repeated perforances of a ork had gron treendously through his ne notation. Still, these orks raised questions. Soe ere practical. Ho could one accurately execute the coplex tie lengths? (Cage and Tudor had used stopatches in perforance to aintain at least a seblance of synchronicity.) Ho should a perforer judiciously ake decisions about pitch, register, and various special effects? Other questions ere 25
christian wolff
26
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
ore philosophical. What is the identity of the piece? Ho far can one rely on perforers’ good faith hen one leaves the so any choices? As it turned out, the difculty of these questions only added to the sense of ystery yster y that tantalized Wolff W olff and his his Ne York School colleagues. Wolff expanded on these questions in the Duo for Pianists II II (1958). In this
ork for unprepa unprepared red pianos pianos,, Wolff for the rst tie alloed for a “0” to be placed on the let side side of a ratio, eaning any aount of tie or even no aount of tie. He also conceded that soe tones could extend beyond their given tie. Most iportant, the coordination coordination of events in Duo II depended on elaborately described cues, the idea of hich, Wolff explained, derived partly fro Indian usical “gaes” in hich players ust listen to each other to deterine hat to play next. Here is a siple explanation of ho these cues ork. Placed in a circle before alost every section of events e vents is a particular type of sound (e.g., “high ff ”). Whatever type a player last heard perfored by the other player dictates hich section or sections to play next. Thus, hen player 1 hears a high, very loud pitch played by player 2, he or she ust play a passage arked ith that cue (“high ff ”) on his or her score. That eans eans that not only ust each player be prepared pre pared to go to any portion of the piece based on choices the other akes, but also that the piece had no xed length: cues keep propelling it forard, ad innitu. In this ork, cues alays truped tie, because the playing, Wolff said, had to reain continuous and there as no cue for ending. It as a kind of Möbius strip of aterial, ith the ending delegated either to the perforers’ prearrangeent of approxiate clock-tie length le ngth or their ad lib decision de cision to stop. Thus the piece shifted the t he usic’s usic’s preises even further aay fro sound or even tie—heretofore tie—heretofo re the foundation of Wolff’s usical structuring—into the real of relationships. It as perhaps inevitable that such a piece ould be both overrehearsed and underrehearsed. On one hand a player had to prepare for any possibilities, any contingencies beyond those an ordinary perforance deanded. There as no xed set of deands to hich one ust reain true. That situation required preparation above and beyond be yond “noral” rehearsal. On the other hand, one siply could not prepare for as any possibilities as one ight encounter or rehearse any one of the as any ties as one ould need to accoodate any contingency. The tension that ensues seeed unnerving—or perhaps nerving in in the sense that each player in the Duo II had to be fully present in the oent of perforance. One could not “lose oneself” in the piece but only stay alert for the piece’s constant utations.
When Cage and Tudor preiered it at Darstadt in Septeber 1958 (alongside Duo 1, both pieces in ultiple versions), versi ons), any listeners found the piece pie ce boring, Cage said. But he felt it accoplished a higher intellectual ai than sonic pleasure or ental play. In it, Cage said, “a thing hich is difcult to rationally conceive takes place, naely zero tie.” “Have you ever noticed ho you read
a nespaper? Juping around, leaving articles unread, or only partially read, turning here and there. Not at all the ay one reads Bach in public, but precisely the ay one reads in public Duo II or Pianists by by Christian Wolff.” Wolff.” In that ork Cage believed his forer student had oved usic’s substance fro object to process. Duo II as “evidently not a tie-object, but rather a process the beginning and ending of hich are irrelevant to its nature.” “You see,” said Cage, “if object, then usic is conceived as an object, then it has a beginning, iddle, and end, and one can feel rather condent hen he akes easureents of the tie. But hen [usic] is process is process [as [as in Duo II], those easureents becoe less les s eaningful, and the process itself, involving if it happened to, the idea of Zero Tie (that is to say no tie at all), becoes ysterious and therefore einently useful.” Cage later explained such “usefulness” by by suggesting that only ystery akes art truly useful for changing one’s thinking, hich as art’s ideal purpose. Although Wolff avoided conscription in France, by the spring of 1959 he could no longer do so in the United States, not because he as ineligible for deferent, but because he had forgotten to send the draft board his annual student exeption papers on tie. So in the spring of 1959, claiing conscientious objector status, he entered the t he service as a noncobatant. On 11 June 1959 Wolff Wolff began his ary service, arriving at Fort Sa Houston in San Antonio for training as a edic. DurDuring that onth and the next he copleted the next piece in his evolving cycle of or Pianist, Pianist, W piano orks. Though he generically titled it F it For Wolff olff specically eant it for Tudor, not only to challenge the virtuoso, but in fact to disrupt his noral orking ork ing etho ethods. ds. Tudor ala alays ys resco rescored red indet indeteri erinate nate piece piecess in order to prac practice tice the. This piece ould frustrate such attepts. As ith the to duos, Wolff used ratio notation and inside-t inside-the-piano he-piano playing (ithout preparations). prepar ations). But any aspects ere ne. Soe pitch choices ere no copletely open—that is, ith no arrays of notes fro hich to choose. Wolff W olff for the rst tie included feratas. And the pages ay be played in any order (an idea Wolff borroed fro pieces by Bron and Stockhausen). What ay be ost striking (and daunting) ne aspect of the piece is the reaking of the to hands into a veritable “duo,” functioning soehat independently, ith hand-crossings being choreographed diagraatically. Wolff adapted the cuing 27
christian wolff
28
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
technique of Duo II to a solo perforer: the player had to respond to cues created by the possible outcoes of hat the player already attepted—ho long or loudly a struck note sounded, hether a haronic as accurately played, and so on. Different outcoes required the player to play different responses. This created a ne kind of virtuosity for the ethodical Tudor. He had to attept a hyperconsciousness of each oent, yet reacting not to another player’s choices
but to the unforeseen consequences of his on. In this ay, the piece continued in a deepening track for Wolff: the usic as less about the sounds it produced than thelater ethod of executing piece as T Tudor udorabout ould confess. “But the the. usic “That usic as beautiful. beauti ful.” ” terribly frustrating,” The culination of Wolff olff’’s ratio-neue notation cae in his next ork, a Music or Six chaber piece ritten during his rst suer as an enlisted an: an: Music or Seven Players (also Cunningham). (also knon siply as Music as Music or Merce Cunningham ). This as his second ork for Cunningha, director of Ne York’s preiere experiental dance copany, for hich Wolff ould rite interittently over the next six decades. Wolff had et Cunningha shortly after eeting his partner, Cage, in 1950 and received a coission—his rst—fro Cunningha in 1952. That Tape I, on I, on resulted in his one nonpiano piece of that period, Music period, Music or Magnetic Tape hich Wolff Wolff had collaborated ith Ted Ted Schulz, an engineering student at Har vard, gathering and and recording recording sounds, sounds, and then fully notating notating the into a score, ith sound sources and durations (in (in inches, at 15” per second) for each layer of sound. Cage, Bron, Tudor Tudor,, and others then t hen assebled the piece, cutting the tape fro the specied source and splicing it to the next sound source (or silence) for each of up to ve tracks, hich ere then overdubbed. Music overdubbed. Music or Magnetic Tape I Chance, the rst ork in becae the basis for Cunningha’s dance titled Suite by Chance, the his repertory he had structured entirely using chance procedures (an idea he got fro Cage). The usic, though, disappointed Cunningha’s dancers. Carolyn Bron, Earle’s Earle’s ife, found Wolff Wolff’’s sounds relentles rel entlessly sly harsh, noting that t hat the rather rath er gentle young coposer hiself seeed disquieted at hat he had produced. Though that piece felt abrasive to the dancers, in 1957 Cunningha choreographed Wolff’s Suite for Prepared Piano into an astonishing solo for hiself, hich he took on tour that year to great acclai. Cunningha gave Wolff a second coission in the spring of 1959, this tie for a tenty-ve-inute chaber ork, hose tie divisions—fro fteen to ninety seconds apiece— Cunningha orked out and sent to Wolff. Wolff essentially patched the ork together during free tie at the ary base, sending segents and instructions to Cage and Cunningha along the ay—including the direction that Tudor or Pianist Pianist as should use soe of F of For as a solo section in the ne ork. But in this ork
the coplexity of ratio-neue notation began to reach a point of diinishing returns. Rzeski, ho had spent the previous school year as a student of Milton Babbitt at Princeton, iediately got to study the t he ne piece fro his ne post as Cunningha’ss rehearsal Cunningha’ rehears al pianist. He as blunt bl unt about the probles he sa: Wolff Wolff 1 had “created situations of too extree difculty—e.g. 6 :2 :2 ith 40 or 50 possithink, but bilities—so that the fact that there is no tie to think, but only tie to perfor ″
echanical operations, not only akes any freedo for the perforer in such cases ipossible, but but also akes the liberties you allo hi superuous & therefore vain,“possibilities” since they cannot fullle fullled. d. (Otherise looks beautiful).” beautifu l).” added that the “possibi lities” Wolffbehad Wolff propos proposed ed ith anyitneue “in reality realit y .He . . do not exist: only one possibility exists, naely that hich the perforer has learned by rote.” He continued in a subsequent letter to critique the resultant sounds of these recent scores. Having heard Music heard Music or Six or Seven Players (called Rune (called Rune on on Cunningha’ss dance progras) Cunningha’ p rogras) four ties thus t hus far, Rzeski rote Wolff: Wolff: “With each piece your usic becoes less plastic, ore like a bizarre geoetrical shape hich is unrecognizable like a Moebius band, ore disturbing as a result.—& this piece is the ost disturbing.” The frozen, constellationlike pointillis of Webern W ebern continued to resound in Wolff’ Wolff’ss usic, undoing, perhaps, perhaps, the sense of free play that delegating choices to perforers seeed bent on ensuring. As Music or Magnetic Magnetic Tape I, Wolff I, Wolff also faced criticis for this as dance usic, ith Music ith though in at least one instance for reasons copletely opposite fro the earlier criticiss: it as not that the ne ork as harsh but that “the pointillistic “the pointillistic score score of Christian Wolff so sparsely so sparsely sustained sustained the pulse and breadth of the solo.” British coposer and pianist Cornelius Carde played in the preiere of Music or Six or Seven Players as as a concert ork in Cologne, January 1960. He ould oul d soon rite abou aboutt the great pro proise ise he found in the score’s seein seeingg “ipo “iposssibilities,” herein a player ight have to execute nuerous sounds or actions ithin a fraction fraction of a second—or no no seconds at all (the “zero tie” that pleased Cage in Duo II). Wolff had ade a score that “is no longer a notation that one can read . . . . it ust be translated t ranslated into int o a notation,” often fro soe so e “ipossible” constraints. The proble as to deterine hich aong potentially conicting “rules” in the notation took precedence or hich ere binding, hich not. Wolff’ W olff’ss call for the playing playing of three notes in zero in zero seconds, seconds, for exaple—not just a fraction of a second—led Carde to reark that “groping for the ungraspab ungraspable le is the ost satisfying of odern pasties, here the satisfaction lies in the fact that satisfaction is ipossible.” But the sense of liberati liberating ng process for hich Wolff ould becoe best knon had not yet arrived. As he rote to Cunningha in sending the parts to Music
christian wolff
30
| Situat Situations ions o Too Extreme Difcult Difculty: y: 1951–1959
or Six or Seven Seven Players, Players, Wolff Wolff as beginning to suspect that he had “lost sight of the conditions of perforance” perforance ” in his usic. It as aid his ne tea-oriented ilitary environs—hich fortuitously hapered his access to a piano—that Wolff Wolff decided to copletely revap his notational practice in order to allo for ore of the “possibilities” the ratio-neue pieces had ultiately obstructed. By the tie he nished his ilitary tour of duty, April 1961, his ne scores ould lean
29
alost holly aay fro structure toard applied sociology.
3
Vast, Sparse Areas of Possibility: 1960–1969
a lt h o u g h t r a i n e d a s a m e d i c in
Texas, Wolff had been assigned in January 1960 to the Inforation Section of Headquarters, Seventh Ary,, in Ne York, fro hich he as Ary as shipped shipped out to Patch Patch Barracks, Stuttgart Vaihinge V aihingen, n, Geran Geranyy, to becoe an instructo instructorr and adin adinistrative istrative assistan assistant, t, teaching ofcers and enlisted en ho to teach and anaging paperork for serviceen at all levels. The director of the schools, Burdette Stapley, ould later rite gloingly gloingly of ho “cooperative, iaginative and highly highly intelligent in every respect” he found Wolff Wolff in planning, planning , teaching, and indeed being “the epitoe e pitoe of tact” in orking ith his ilitary students. At the sae tie, Wolff developed his usicianship through prose poleics and ne copositional strategies. Reihe Reihe published ing fro In 1960 Stockhausen’ Stockhausen ’s Die of published a second article by Wolff. Mova detailed discussion Cage’s square-root for, through suaries of usic by Earle Bron and Stockhausen, Wolff uses his on Duo II as a case study in “precise actions under various indeterinate inde terinate conditions.” conditi ons.” He explains ho for ight be detached fro older notions of “structure” and becoe siply “a theatrical event [hose] length itself ay be unpredictable.” In so doing, he calls into question the for-deterining character of a score. “The score akes no nished object, at best hopelessly fragile or brittle. There are only parts hich can be at once transparent and distinct.”
christian wolff
32
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
Around this tie Wolff began dropping ratio neues fro his scores in favor of hat e ight call coordination neues—lines ith circles attached, angled variously to indicate indicate interactions interactions aong players. In the the Duet I (Deceber (Deceber 1960) for piano 4 hands, his rst ork to use this notation, to pages of score accopany or Pianis Pianist, t, W three pages of explanation. As in F in For Wolff olff uses lettered pitch gauts fro hich the perforer perforer ust ust choose, choose, species various inside-the-pian inside-the-piano o techniques, techniques, and governs the progress of the piece by cues. The to pages of the score should
31
be played in order—or order—or only only one of the to pages ay be played. Many pitches are given ith a threefold range of durations: lled notehead = shortest to medium square open notehead = medium to very long ovular open notehead = any duration
Meanhile, the eight different different coordination coordination neues include include sybols for attack as simultaneously as possible, but player 2 holds longer than 1 1 starts anytime, 2 plays as soon as possible after 1 releases 2 plays rst, then 1 and both release together
and so forth. In this ay ay,, Wolff continued continue d to develop devel op style traits t raits he had shon as early as his teenage violin duo, here different relationships relationships of starting and ending interacted ith the copulsive restriction of pitch. In this ne duet, strategies of listening and reacting trup pitch and rhyth as the fundaental structuring principles of the ork, hich has no iplicit duration, only the instruction to “end hen neither player ants to go on.” But on a larger level, the score deands the relearning of hat a “score” is. The rules are clear, painstakingly so, but so detailed and often intricate that they reseble rules one ight nd in sophisticated board gaes. Wolff used variations of this kind of notation (ith occasional ratio neues added back in) in other scheatically notated and generically naed pieces ritten hile he served in the ary (through April 1961) and in the suer onths thereafter, during hich he attended the University of Munich: Suite II (horn and piano), Duet II (horn and piano), piano) , Trio II (piano (pi ano 4 hands, percussion), percussi on), Duo for Violinist Vio linist and Pianist, and nally nally,, the ost coplex coplex of the lot, lot, Summer for for string quartet (August (Augus t 1961). After that ork, Wolff ould take a year hiatus hi atus fro coposition hile he orked on his dissertation and taught again at Harvard. Meanhile, he began to get his previous ork published and recorded. In Noveberr 1960, Walter Novebe Walter Hinrichsen Hinr ichsen of the C. C . F. F. Peters usic publishing publi shing copany ade a deal de al ith Wolff Wolff to publish all of Wolff Wolff’’s usic, an arrangeent arrang eent siilar si ilar to one Peters had just ade ith Cage. (At this tie, Cage had published his rst
Silence, in book of essays, Silence, in hich he had naed Wolff proinently as a entor for his ideas.) What Peters had not bargained for as the difculty of engraving Wolff Wolff’’s ne notations. Eventually, Ev entually, offset versions ver sions of Wolff’s Wolff’s anuscripts anuscri pts and typed instructions proved the only feasible eans of publishing the. At the sae tie, the sall independent label Tie Records hired Earle Bron to produce a series of ne usic albus anthologizing the ost radical ne usic in Europe and the United States. The series, hich ran fro 1961 to 1963 (reissued on the
Mainstrea label, 1970), 1970), included recordings recordings of orks by over over to dozen cocoposers, including Stockhausen, Luciano Berio, Henry Coell, Charles Ives, and Bron’ss Ne Bron’ Ne York York School S chool peers—Cage p eers—Cage,, Feldan, and Wolff. The next threshol threshold d in Wolff olff’’s experient experiental al evolutio evolution n cae in 1962, hen he began a to-year span of riting only pieces ith unspecied instruentaor 5 or 10 Players Players,, hose enseble could consist of any ve tion. The rst as F as For or ten perforers (nothing in beteen), each player using one of the ten score pages (or to of the ten in the version for ve players). Although instruentation reained open, the notation geared the choices aay fro instruents ith liited tibres because becaus e so any of this piece’s piece’s neues required tibral changes. change s. The spare notation represented a ultivalent ultivalent syste in hich one had to learn ne rules for ho to construe siple arabic nuerals (in the sae ay that, in ore conventional notation, a “3” could represent a ngering, the top of a tie signature, or a triplet). For a sense of the ork’ ork’ss deands (i.e., possibilit possibilities), ies), consider the rst page of its score, seen in gure 2. Each inverted U shape (hich e’ll call a cap for convenience) represents a sonic event. An event generally consists of to parts: event aterial (ho any sounds and hat kind) and event coordination (hen to begin and hen to end). The event aterial appears above the coordination aterial; a vertical bracket connecting capped events gives the player the option of executing either event. The rst things notated under each cap are pitch and tibre: a nuber in a box tells the nuber of pitches to be played; an unboxed nuber represents the nuber of tibres to be played; no boxed nuber eans only one pitch, no unboxed nuber eans only one tibre; an x in either position allos the player to choose. Thus (using letters e have added to g. 2) the page shos the folloing: A = 1 pitch, 4 timbres B = 1 pitch, 1 timbre C = 2 pitches, 3 timbres D = 1 pitch, 2 timbres E = 1 pitch, 1 timbre
33
christian wolff
34
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
Figure 2. The The rst page of the score to F to For or 5 or 10 Players (ith (ith added letters for identications). Peters EP 6637. Used by perission of Peters Edition, Ltd. F = any number of pitches, 1 timbre or 1 1 pitch, 1 timbre G = 2 pitches, 4 timbres H = 1 pitch, 5 timbres or 1 1 pitch, 1 timbre I = 1 pitch, 1 timbre or 5 5 pitches from the set shown, 1 timbre
The next level benea beneath th each cap sho shoss dyna dynaics, ics, ith anoth another er set of rules. On the loest level beneath each cap Wolff has coordination neues, hich sho ho any seconds before or after others sounds an event should be executed (as in earlier copositions for specied instruents). All the levels of notation for events suggest a coplex interlocking of actions and reactions to be learned le arned and planned. or 5 or 10 Players, Players, Wolff After For After F Wolff rote his next three pieces ith siilarly In Between Between Pieces (1963), For or 1, 2 or 3 free instruentatio instruentation: n: In (1963), and 1964’s 1964’s Septet and and F People. The People. The sketches for the latter, seen in gure 3, suggest ho uch Wolff had oved fro the hyperspecic tiings and pitch collections of his ork in the 1950s to a concern ith relationships beteen “people” (the shift fro “players” in the earlier ork’s title to “people” is instructive). For or 5 or The nished coposition strealine strealined d and siplied the scoring of of F 10 Players, aking Players, aking it easier to perfor and requiring less conscious “thinking” hile playing, playing, see table table 1.
Figure 3. A page fro Wolff’s sketches for F for For or 1, 2 or 3 People. People. W Wolff olff Papers. Used by perission. 35
christian wolff
36
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
Comparison o Score Layout and Perormance Logistics in For 5 or 10 Players Players and For 1, 2 or 3 People For 5 or 10 Players 10 pages
5-person version: players can have either one page (1–5 or 6–10), two pages (a = 1&6, b = 2&7, c = 3&8, etc.), or each player gets a copy o all ten pages
For 1, 2 or 3 People 10 pages
The group chooses which page (or pages) to play. Each player has a copy o this page (or these pages). They all divide the events on the page(s) between members o
10-person version: each player gets one page unique to him or her, or two pages (a&b = 1&6, c&d = 2&7, etc.), or each player gets a copy o all ten pages.
the ensemble (i.e., players may not share events). Division is specifed or two players on page 7; they perorm the chosen page(s) together.
At any time during the course o a perormance, the entire ensemble, on cue, perorms all o the events on their pages in sequence, let to right. At other times, the players may play any events in any sequence rom their pages, unless the events themselves constrain order or repetition.
All events must be played, in any order, and may not be repeated. The exception is page 9, which allows omissions and repetitions.
Complicated coordinations, with many rules
The coordination neumes are simpler. Events do not use “caps” or brackets.
(Solo perormance is not an option)
The possibility o solo perormance presents unique challenges. Wol suggests coordination between events when possible, or coordination with environmental sounds.
Large numbers at the top o events: boxed number = number o pitches (i no boxed number, then one pitch)
Black numbers = number o pitches (no number given = 1)
Unboxed number = number o timbres (i no number, then one timbre)
Red numbers = number o timbres (no number given = 1) A number on a coordination line = that number o changes in some aspect(s) o the sound i black, or timbre i red, during the course o the coordination. A red 1 = a dierent timbre rom the immediately preceding one
The saller nubers of personnel it required also ade it ore practical or 5 or 10, especially 10, especially since a solo perforer could execute it. and portable than F than For The piece caught on, especially through Rzeski, ho had been living in Europe since 1963 and ounted perforances of F of For or 1, 2 or 3 in several countries, leading hi to rite Wolff in Noveber 1964 that his parts to the piece ere “already used up.”
For or 1, 2 or 3, W 3, Wolff During the tie he as coposing coposing F olff provided provide d a brief brie f but highly concentrated explanation of his otives otive s for such scoring. In an intervie Collage, W published in the Palero journal Collage, Wolff olff explained that his philosophical ai as “to have ade soething hazardous ith hich e ay try ourselves, ourselv es,”” a kind of précis for the idea of “danger usic” that ould becoe a cause célèbre in soe experiental circles. His task as a coposer as to deploy “xed points” around hich perforers could ove. Wolff explained ho he arrived at such a task t ask in ters ter s that ere at once undane and radical. To To copose this
ay as quicke quicker. r. It avoide avoided d redund redundancy ancy in perfo perforances rances.. It ade the usic better able to accoodate “interference” or “contingencies” in perforance. Perhaps ost iportant, the ne notation led to a psychosonoric effect in hich a listener could perceive “the sound of a player aking up his ind, or having to change it.” it .” By the tie he rote rote F For or 1, 2 or 3, 3, W Wolff olff’’s acadeic and faily oorings had begun to shift. In January 1963, he subitted his 170-page dissertation dissert ation for the doctorate in coparative copar ative literature. lit erature. Titled “Aspects “Aspects of the Later Plays of Euripides,” Orestes, and Iphegenia Among the Taurians, Taurians, folloed it as a close reading of Ion, of Ion, Orestes, and Iphegenia folloed by an explication of coon thees and otifs in the plays. But the introduction to the dissertation seeed to hint at aesthetic issues in Wolff’s usic. In the three plays Wolff found “a great variety of eleents and qualities often shifting abruptly, contrary, soeties violently opposed.” And in the chapters that folloed, he said, he ould explore ho Euripides’s plots “deonstrate the negation of intended actions.” Wolff’s usic, of course, had increasingly devolved on actions and reactions leading to unforeseen consequences consequences of subtle gestures. But hile his attitude toard Euripides hinted at aesthetic thees in his usic, Wolff’ W olff’ss painstaking intellectual analysis reected the stringency of ethods by hich he and and his Ne York School colleagues often often coposed. Kurt Wolff often traveled to Europe to visit faily and scout for ne authors. In October 1963, as he as alking in Ludigsburg, Gerany, a tanker truck backed into hi, crushing hi against a all. He died three hours hou rs later. The publishing orld laented the loss of a literary pioneer hose Pantheon iprint had recently been sold to Rando House. Helen carried on as an editor e ditor in her on right, chapioning the ork of Karl Jaspers, Uberto Eco, Günter Grass, and other European authors via a ne job at Harcourt Brace. Her reputation gre so uch that by 1977 PEN ould aard her “For distinctive and continuous service to international letters, the freedo and dignity of riters and the free transission of the printed print ed ord across barriers of repression, repre ssion, poverty, poverty, ignorance and censorship.”
christian wolff
38
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
On 1 August 1965, Cage and Tudor drove Jasper Johns’ Johns’ss Jaguar to Veront for a special occasion: on that day, ith a ne assistant professorship at Harvard no in hand, Christian arried Hope (“Holly”) Nash at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Royalton. David Behran played a sall antique organ in the chapel. The daughter of Ray Nash, a ell-knon art professor at Dartouth, Holly had et Christian in the classics progra at Harvard fro hich she had graduated sua cu laude (through Radcliffe) that June. She, like her ne husband, had gron up in a usical hoe, though one entrenched in folk usic, in hich
37
her other, Hope, excelled. The next eek, Holly left Royalton, her hoeton, and helped Christian ove out of his Claverly Hall roo at Harvard and into an apartent in a odest old house on Sparks Street in Cabridge. No,, as both a faily an and Harva No Harvard rd classi classics cs profe professor, ssor, Wolff olff’’s path diverged diverge d even further fro fr o that of his friends John and Morty Mort y. In a 1966 series of one-on-one radio discussions, discussions , Cage and Feldan took stock of their relationship to Wolff Wolff and his ork. Christian’s Christian’s early usic us ic particularly inspired Feldan, Fel dan, ho said that if he looked l ooked at his on usic fro fr o the 1950s, he found it “old hat”: “It’s “It’s
Figure 4. Holly Nash at her edding to Christian Wolff (ith Morton Feldan, left, behind her), 1 August 1965. Photographer unknon. Courtesy of Christian Wolff. W olff.
been around, it’s been digested by yself [as if] having a bone on a plate and you forgot that you ere cheing on it and you go back and you che on it again, you kno.” But if one picked up a piece that Wolff rote as teenager, one found that “there’s certainly nothing old hat about it. . . . the hole continuity of the ork, I ean, is just absolutely extraordinary. It’s not usty, you’re not opening up a tob.” One thing that kept Wolff’s usic fresh, Feldan added, as Christian’s relative aloofness fro the ne usic “scene,” hich alloed hi to rite piece after piece in logical steps ithout having to rite rit e sequels in his on presuptive
style. Feldan said, I don t think y pieces ould have been [old hat] if they eren’t perfored, if they eren’ eren’t eren’tt out in the orld, so to speak.” Cage Cage agreed, adding that Wolff still had “that freedo that e have lost.” He ent on ith a kind of peroration: “I think that that quality of classicis that as in Webern and hich ade his usic useful for people ho anted to change their thinking about usic exists no in the ork of Christian Wolff. I found years ago that if one ere teaching usic and anted to provide a discipline for a student that rst one had to give up teaching harony, next one had to give up teaching counterpoint. No I think one ould have to give up teaching Webern. And I think you’d be at the present oent a fairly good teacher if you ould teach Christian Wolff[’ Wolff[’s] s] usic to a student.” Feldan heartily heartil y agreed: “I’ convinced conv inced
that Christian is and have the place had of Webern in ters of athe ind.” a perormer Up until then, Will olff as had been knon only as pianist, hether playing his on usic, old-orld classics (in his youth), or novelties (as in the Cage-produced arathon preiere perforance of Satie’s Vexations in in Septeber 1963). But Holly incited a ne interest: the electric guitar. Nearly ten years younger youn ger than Chri Christia stian, n, she intro introduce duced d hi to the usi usicc of rock grou groups, ps, espec especiall iallyy British Invasion favorites like the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Kinks, and the Who. Through their recordings he cae to see the electric guitar not so uch as the venerated six-stringed six-stri nged “queen of instruents” but as a highly exible—and portable—electronic portable—electr onic device. His fascination ith the instruent led hi to buy or 1, 2, or 3 that 3 that a lo-priced Fender, hich he played in a 1965 perforance of F of For also featured Cage on boed sa and Alvin Lucier on aplied boed cybal. Electric Spring pieces. After that appearanc appearance, e, Wolff coposed his three three Electric pieces. The notation of these chaber orks—his only copositions during 1966–67—foreshadoed uch of hat ould follo in the 1970s: all instruents and ost pitches ere specied; durations ere as in his recent pieces, except that no eighth and sixteenth notes ere added to the repertoire of values; and there ere no coordination neues. Wolff played in the preieres of all three, ith Holly playing electric bass in one of the.
christian wolff
40
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969 Since 1965, David Behran had been orking as a tape editor on the sing shift at Colubia Masterorks. In the suer of 1967, Behran asked his boss John McClure’s McClure’s perission to produce soe of his friends’ usic for the label. McClure McCl ure agreed agreed,, if Behr Behran an could keep costs don don.. That Nove Noveber ber,, the Colu Colu-bia Records Group shocked Christas buyers by issuing as its entire preholiday classical release seventeen titles, all fro Behran’s Behran’s ne series or fro older odernists like Stravinsky, Webern, and Ives. Aong the as the rst release of a For or 1, 2, or 3 People People played Wolff W olff piece piece on a ajor ajor label: label: F played as a solo by David Tudor Tudor on an oddly prepared organ. Suddenly, the usic of this obscure experiental-
39
ist as being arketed by the largest record copany in the country. Within a onth the rst pressing of 1,500 copies had sold out. But by then Wolff had left the States, taking a sabbatical fro Harvard during the 1967–68 school year to t o live ith it h Holly in London. Londo n. There, Wolff Wolff iediately Silence is rote to Cage, Cage, “the paperback of Silence is everyhere in the bookstore indos here, a kind of elcoe.” Although Europe had often sybolized to Cage and his circle a recalcitrant orthodoxy of post-Webern serialis, the European-bred Wolff W olff had alays been able to nd colleag colleagues ues there ho resonated to his brand of experientalis. Rzeski helped: he had lived in Berlin 1963–66 and then oved to Roe, here he helped found MEV (Musica Electronica Viva), an electronic iprovisational group. In England, that group irrored an acoustic-electronic iprovisational group called calle d AMM (hose initials had a secret eaning), a group consisting of Keith Ke ith Roe, Lou Gare, Eddie Prévost, Laurence Sheaff, and its latest addition, Cornelius Carde, the best-knon and perhaps ost energetic of the British experiental usic scene. Wolff inevitabl inevitablyy gravitate gravitated d to Carde Carde,, ho since 1958 had been prograing, recording, and broadcasting perforances of Wolff’s copositions, then revieing and theorizing about the in British usical journals. Although the to en had et in Cologne in 1960, their professional relationship oered during Wolff’s sabbatical, resetting his usical career in several ays. First, he began to iprovise in earnest, sitting in ith AMM, playing on a nely purchased hollo-body bass, often laid at on his lap like a keyboard, soeties boed or “prepared” ith objects stuck beteen the strings (as Keith Roe did ith his guitar). Generally, AMM played free iprovisations. But Carde soon began to translate his experiences ith AMM into notated scores. The The rst as Tiger’s Mind (1967), a page of prose in to paragraphs (“Daypiece” and “Nightpiece”), hich narrated a ythical tiger’s interactions ith a tree, the ind, soeone naed Ay,, and various Ay various other other aspects aspects of his environent. environent. (W (Wolff olff interpreted interpreted “the tree” Compositions, essentially a at the ork’s preiere.) Its follo-up as Schooltime Compositions, essentially
collation of to dozen sketchy and suggestive pages of ildly diverse notations for a series of “tasks” (rarely specied as usical) that together constituted hat Carde called an opera, in the original eaning of the ord (“orks”). As ith Tiger’s Mind, W Mind, Wolff Compositions. He then olff perfored in i n the preiere pre iere of Schooltime Compositions. He Edges. rote his on on score for AMM: AMM: Edges. Edges Different fro any previous ork of his (and unique in his entire opus), opus), Edges (for an undened nuber and type of players) consisted entirely of tenty-ve sybols scattered scatte red around a single page. The sybols, say the instructions, do not necessarily denote the sounds to be played as such, but rather “ark out a space
or spaces, indicate points, surfaces, routes or liits” around or ithin hich to play.. Yet each sybol play sy bol has its on denition: soe refer to relative relativ e height of pitch, soe to durations, soe to articulations, soe to coordinations, soe to sonic characters (e.g., “bupy,” “intricate”), and so forth. Typically, one plays hat each notation suggests once only, though in no xed xe d order. AMM preiered the ork in May 1968, ith Wolff, Wolff, Rzeski, Michael Michael Parsons, Hoard Skepton, and John Tilbury also sitting in. Rzeski rote to Wolff that suer that Edges that Edges as “a beautiful piece, piece,”” though confessed that he hiself hiself had stayed ith a single notation (“in the iddle”) throughout the hole perforance. The folloing suer, Rzeski had his students playing the piece at one of the United States’s ost conservative and prestigious suer progras: Tangleood. Edges gre If Edges If gre out of Wolff’s ork ith AMM, another ne genre of orks gre fro his guest lectureships in British art schools, hich ere at the tie ore or less the engines that propelled the countercultu counterculture re of the United Kingdo. These schools, ith their quirky ixtures of aesthetic and practical training for advanced high school or college students, proved ore open than usic departents to sonic experientation. The students had varying usical backgrounds; soe could read and play fro traditional notation, notat ion, but ost could not. The students also had access to fe instruents, usually guitars and akeshift percussion. All had voices. During lecturesh lectureships ips at art schools in Bath, Leiceste Leicesterr, and Winchester—the latter arranged by a free-spirited student naed Brian Eno—Wolff decided to involve students as perforers, riting sets of prose instructions fro hich even the least usically literate could ake sounds in an organized ay ith hatever eans ere available. Such prose scores ere indeed in the air, fro the terse verbal directions directions of Fluxus Fluxus coposers coposers such as La Monte Monte Young, George Brecht, Brecht, and Yoko Yoko Ono in the early 1960s to t o the text pieces pie ces that Stockhausen Stockhau sen rote in the spring of 1968, the sae onths that Wolff Wolff as riting his. But hat distinguished dist inguished Wolff’ W olff’ss piec pieces es as that they lack lacked ed the theat theatrica ricality lity of the Flux Fluxus us co coposit positions ions and
christian wolff
42
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969 the conceptualis of Stockhausen’s. Wolff’s text scores (later gathered together Collection) could be seen as the rules to sonic gaes. as part of his set called Prose Collection) They specify certain sound-producing activities activities,, but never specic pitches or rhyths, except, soeties, in relation to others in the group. Soe pieces call for (or allo for) instruental playing, but only such as could be played by anyone, trained or not. Scores dictated ays of playing and relative densities of sound, but little else. (The only “lyrics” appear in the pieces “Crazy Mad Love” and “Song,” “Song,” here the perforers vocalize phrases phr ases and naes for specied nubers of ties.) Overall these scores ight be described as exercises in folloing
41
directions in a group—the nature of all enseble scoring, to be sure, but in this case containing, in icrocos, uch of Wolff Wolff’’s by no ell-establishe ell-established d intricacy of social relationships and utual responses in perforance. John Cage, hen he sa soe of the, said they ere distillati d istillations ons of hat had before been bee n fully, if indeterinately, indeteri nately, notated in Wolff Wolff’’s earlier scores. sco res. When ve of these pieces ere e re published together, Carde revieed the set for the Musical the Musical Times ith ith predictable exuberance: With the conviction that the light embodied in this music should be diffused dif fused throughout the world and its source obliged to continue shining, since great changes would be wrought by a widespread awareness of this new and timeless music—eg what’s rotten would disintegrate leaving our insight into Nature (including humanity) more penetrating and affectionate—a number of Wolff’s English admirers subscribed towards the printing of this collection. . . . Embedded in the prose like the jewels in a watch mechanism mechanism are traces of the beautifully exible musical notation that Wolff has evolved over the past 15 years, delineating vast, sparse areas of possibility with simple and articulate precision.13
But to Wolff Wolff personally pers onally,, Carde rote, “I can’t reeber hen he n I last heard such beautiful usic.” Although Harvard as his ala ater and the hoe of any of his early usical exploits, Wolff had not had the opportunity to teach usic there. But ith so uch of his energy oing into his coposing, copos ing, he failed to rite and publish the kind of scholarly orks the classics departent deanded. So hen he returned fro England in the fall of 1968, he learned that his ve-year teaching contract ith Harvard ould not be reneed. His British friends urged hi to consider a post in England. Cage suggested that Wesleyan, here he no taught, ight have an opening. But as 1969 began—just eeks before Christian and Holly’ Holly’ss rst child, Christian Mayhe (“He”), as born—a classics job opened up at Dartouth. When Wolff ent to intervie, his father-in-la introduced hi to Jon Appleton. At the age of tenty-nine, Appleton had just been appointed appointed chair of
the usic departent and as charged ith iproving departent ’s national ipr oving the departent’ stature. Since Wolff still entertained the divided loyalties that cost hi the Har vard job, Larence Harvey Harvey,, associate associate dean of faculty faculty at Dartouth, Dartouth, arranged arranged to create a special appointent for Wolff in classics and usic, ith coparative literature—the eld of Wolff’s doctorate—thron in. But the school needed letters of recoendation re coendation before an ofcial hire. To To that end, avant-garde avant-gar de coposers fro Stockhausen Stockhaus en to Cage rote on Wolff Wolff’’s behalf. Understandably gloing, gl oing, Cage’s letter included this stateent: He is not known as a student of mine for the reason that I learned more from him than he
from me. . . . Through the association of David Tudor, Tudor, Morton Feldman, myself, and Christian Wolff, American music has developed to the point of shaping new music not only here but in the Orient and in Europe. This is generally acknowledged. It was because of this that last year I was made a member of the National Institute of Arts Ar ts and Letters. It is only my age that has brought it about that I am so distinguished: the truer state would be that such honors go to Christian Wolff. For of the four of us, I am certain that his work is the most regenerative of music.15
Dartouth hired Wolff and thereby at last codied the professional double life he had been leading for years: a scholar of old, canonized orks, ostly in dead languages, and aker of heterodox orks in nely invented languages. Dartouth itself had started to diverge in its personality: aid conservative politics and old-oney society, it no pioneered coputer technology, electronic (and digital) sound synthesis, and progressive courses that included black studies, environental studies, Native Aerican studies, and oen’s studies. A strong anti–Vietna War faction began to gro aong the neer, younger faculty brought in to eet the groth of the student body no that oen ere being aditted. With Wolff’s appearance, the school ould suddenly have an experiental coposer coposer teaching usic in the Hopkins Center for the Arts and classics in Dartouth Hall. But Wolff had to ait before he could start at his ne school. Because, despite having just been denied tenure at Harvard, he on in 1970 one of eight junior felloships at the Harvard-afliated Center for Hellenic Studies in Washington, D.C. In the fall of that year he oved ove d ith Holly and their to children—daughter childre n—daughter Tasen T asen had had been born born that April—to one one of the hoes for residents at the center. For nine onths he orked on to projects in Washington: a ne translaakles (per tion and coentary for Euripides’ Her Euripides’ Herakles (per a contract ith Prentice-Hall) and a study of Euripides’ Helen Euripides’ Helen (hich (hich ould appear in a 1973 issue of Harvard of Harvard Studies in Classical Philology). Philology). 43
christian wolff
44
| Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
Figure 5. Christian and son Mayhe in East Barnard, Veront, Veront, ca. 1971. Photographer unknon. Courtesy of Christian Wolff.
In the suer of 1971, Holly’ Holly’ss father, Ray Nash, retired fro Dartouth as she, she , Christian, He H e,, and Tasen Tasen arrived ar rived in Hanover, Hanov er, Ne Hapshire. They bought the Nash hoe on Main Street, and Ray oved ith his ife, Hope, to their Royalton, Veront, Veront, far, here Holly had been born. Christian began be gan preparing for classes and copleting a large-scale ork naed for a hardy, tangled eed: Burdocks.
4
Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing: 1969–1974
in june 1969, amid his negotiations ith
Dartouth, Wolff W olff had received a letter fro John Tilbu Tilbury ry inviting hi to put oney into— and even join—a ne venture of Carde’s: the Scratch Orchestra, a quasi-anarchic group of trained and untrained usicians ho ould perfor iprovisatory ne pieces and ad hoc renditions of conventional old ones. The group ould ebody Carde’s “ethics of iprovisation ip rovisation,,” hich sa iprovisation as a s a tool to develop virtue and strength through cooperation. “Training” (including “oral discipline”) ould replace “rehearsal,” so that preparing for perforance ould not be like preparing a play so uch as preparing to play a sport. Beyond its idealis, the Scratch Orchestra had an air of novelty that enabled it to quickly Times, begin publish its constitution in the Musical the Musical Times, begin booking concerts, and appear on radio and television ithin its rst year. In late 1968, Carde had nished the rst portion of hat ould be a basic Learning, a assive seven-part setting score for the Scratch Orchestra: The Great Learning, a of the rst chapter of Confucius’ Con fucius’ss text by that nae. Its notation notati on varied ith each section, though ostly used conventional sybols, but ith soe less-deterinate sections and lots lot s of verbal directions. dire ctions. The title suarized hat Wolff Wolff and his artschool colleagues sa as the point of usic no: education via ne instructions. 45
christian wolff
46
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
Wolff explained this in a 1970 article that echoed both Carde’ Wolff Carde’ss “ethics” and Cage’s ebrace of all sounds. A composition (a score) is only material for performance: it must make possible the freedom and dignity of the performers; it should allow at any moment surprise, for all concerned, players, composer, listeners; it should allow both concentrat concentration, ion, precision in detail, and release, or collapse, virtuosity and doing things in the ordinary way. No sound, noise, interinter val, et cetera as such is preferable to any other sound, including those always around us, provided that (a) one is free to move away or towards it, and that (b) sounds are not used deliberately to compel feelings in others; let the listeners be just as free as the players.3
As a venue for for these ideals, the Scratch Orchestra tantalized tantalized Wolff. Although he he
couldn t yet travel to hear the, in the suer of 1970, before heading for the Center for Hellenic Studies, he began a ne piece in the spirit of The Great Learning. That ing. That ne piece—along ith a sall usic festival Wolff rst held in August 1969 on his father-in-la’s Veront far—he titled Burdocks. Written ith the still-unheard Scratch Orchestra in ind, Burdocks as as for “one or ore orchestras”—though the ork’s perforance notes redened “orchestra” to ean as fe as ve players, yet alloed for as any as ten such orchestras to be playing at once. Sound sources ere free, except here specic sounds (e.g., pitches) ere needed. Its overall structure as open: no set nuber of oveents need be played, oveents could be played in succession, siultaneously or in any cobination of overlaps. At the sae tie, an elective political process undergirded the piece: players ere to “gather and decide” or “choose one or ore representatives to decide” hich sections to play and in hat order. In totality it coprised a copendiu of copositional possibilities Wolff had used before. But its patchork patc hork quality also bespoke bes poke Wolff Wolff’’s failial status: having h aving to young children in the hoe he no had to rite ore catch-as-catch-can, jotting don fragents fragents and and keeping hiself hiself as interruptible interruptible as possible. Each oveent of Burdocks had had a distinct identity based on ethods and techniques alays slightly—or hugely—different hugel y—different fro all others (* beside a nuber eans that it contains graphic notation notation along ith the verbal): 1. Five segents, priarily consisting of players responding to one another’ another’ss pitches, articulations and dynaics in various ays. 2.* Soehat loosely articulated block-chord segents. (W (Wolff olff thought of this as the “chorale” oveent.) 3. Each player akes ca. 511 sounds, each different in soe ay ay.. 4. Each player plays 1–3 soft sounds, coordinating the ith every other player in succession.
5.* Six different ultispoked heels, ith different kinds of usical gestures beteen each pair of spokes and different pathays fro heel to heel. (Perhaps the ost coplica coplicated ted oveent in its notation.) 6.* A repeatable, anthelike elody (built fro saller saller,, self-siilar fragents) ith accopaniental gestures. (The elody is the ost conventionally notated aterial in the set.) 7.* A graphic score that sees a radical splaying of the score of section 2 (above). 8.* 100 different short ideas, ost on cleess staves, and all to be played once only. 9. A oderately elaborate plan for having players respond to one another’ another’ss
sounds; a gradual acceleration to the conclusio conclusion. n. 10. A single conceptualis conceptualistt propt: “Flying, and possibly craling or sitting still.” If the Scratch Orchestra provided an iaginary sonic and social odel for soe Burdocks, an of the perforative techniques of Burdocks, an African eld recording inspired the ne ork’s heterophonic textures. In the spring of 1970, Canadian coposer Jack Behrens had invited inv ited Wolff Wolff for a brief residency r esidency at Sion Fraser University Uni versity in VanVan An Antho Anthology logy o Aric Arican an couver. In Behrens’s Behrens’s ofce, Wolff Wolff encountered encoun tered volue 3 of of An Music, Mus ic, part part of the elegantly produced produce d UNESCO series of LPs featuring usic fro the Eastern Heisphere. This LP consisted of fteen tracks of Ba-Benzélé pygy usic: hunt songs, story-telling songs, laents, and entertainents, all ith free, unetered counterpoint and hocketing that soeties alternated beteen singing and histling. The sound provided a fresh sonic soni c odel. It also gave ga ve Wolff, Wolff, as a professor of coparative literature, literat ure, a usical foundation squarely outside outside the the West West-ern canon. His usic could no be “traditional,” but fro a different tradition. Burdocks as as a threshold. t hreshold. It as Wolff’ Wolff’ss rst ork intended for a large enseense ble. It as his rst ultioveent ork in hich each oveent had distinctly different instructions on ho and hat to play. And it as his longest in actual (not just conceptual) perforance. With the Green Mountains as a backdrop, a sextet of Behran, Be hran, Rzeski, Tudor, Tudor, Gordon Mua, Wolff, Wolff, and his brother-inb rother-inla, John Nash, preiered ve oveents of Burdocks at at the second Burdock Festival in id-August id -August 1971 at the t he Nash far in Royalton, Royalt on, Veront. The quintet then traveled to Dartouth to record the oveents for a record to be issued on the Wergo label. A slightly different quintet (hich included Dartouth colleague Jon Appleton) played Burdocks excerpts excerpts the t he folloing January Januar y at Ne York York Universityy to a sall audience that included Cage and Cunningha, the latter of Universit 47
christian wolff
48
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
Figure 6. The cover to the UNESCO recording that inuenced i nuenced Wolff Wolff in ideas of hocket and heterophony heterophony.. Courtesy of Brigha Young Young University Recording Archive.
Park. Meanhile, on 9 Septe ho soon used the piece piece for a ne dance, Borst Park. Meanhile, ber 1971, Carde had ritten to Wolff, apologizing for not being able to attend the V erontOrchestra, quasi preiere p reiere oftoBurdocks but eather but proising to progra orkinith the Veront Scratch in part help the soe groingthe dissent the enseble: “We have had assive upheavals & Burdocks ill bring us together again for lots of ork and pleasure.” What ere those cryptic “upheavals”? In the suer of 1971, Carde had led a faction of the Scratch Orchestra in reading and discussing Mao’s lengthy three-decade-old Yenan Foru speech on proletarian art. The folloing January,, he and other Scratch ebers had becoe dogatic that the orchestra ary or chestra ust
shun the bourgeois trappings of the professional usical orld, including even its avant-garde fringes. When he prograed Burdocks for for the Scratch Orchestra’s next concert, the group angrily divided, ost hard-core Maoists nding Wolff’s piece “contentless,” lacking in political relevance and ass appeal. But Carde surprisingly defended the piece, insisting that they play Burdocks and and give the audience the right to decide its orth. After eeks of rangling, the group played it on 28 March 1972, giving Burdocks its its rst coplete, large-enseble realization. Indeed, they ade a hole evening event of it, ith over sixty people playing the ten sections not once but tice, introduced by Carde’s on political poleic (including the defense he had ade of the piece to his Maoist colleagues) and the to versions separated by a discussion and a fe songs. The second playing of
the piece included the younger orking class’s sonic foundation: electric guitars at rock-concert decibel levels. Shortly before that perforance, Hans Keller of the BBC Music Section asked Carde to rite about John Cage for the Listener agazine agazine to prepare readers for a series of Cage concerts planned for that suer. Carde turned in a savage indictent he titled “John Cage: Ghost or Monster?” Taking the title fro bourgeois types referred to in Mao’s Yenan Foru talks, Carde branded Cage an iperialist coposer purveying a usic ithout content. He analyzed (and ocked) pieces by Cage and ended his essay ith a challenge: “It ay not be all plain sailing, but there’s no reason hy [Cage] can’t shufe his feet over to the side of the people and learn to rite usic hich serves their struggles. struggles.”” When Carde sent Wolff a copy of the article, Christian and Holly discussed it for hours, aking notes on ho to respond to it. Carde’s poleic not only overreached, they concluded, but as “a odel of harshness” ith “distortions” and “over-siplications” throughout. Wolff Wolff aditted aditte d he as troubled trouble d by Cage’ C age’ss separation of politics polit ics fro “life.” But even in a Marxist orldvie, he found odels for brilliant individualis. Above all, Wolff anted “freedo”—including individual freedo—as freedo—as an ideal that usic could portray ithout text or vernacular affectations. He nohad found hiself to choose beteen toential friends entors. Whil While e Cage taught Wolffhaving the unity of usic and experi experiential life,and Carde had fused political polit ical life to t o that unity. All three en e n had coe to adire adir e Mao’s Mao’s teachings. teaching s. But Cage resisted preaching the through usic. Carde, on the other hand, no took the so seriously that he began to reject his on earlier ork, the elitis of the th e avant-garde avant- garde generally, gen erally, and Wolff Wolff’’s entor in particular. particu lar. W Wolff olff looked for a iddle path that honored both friends but alloed hi to ove decisively toard political usic, hich he as beginning to feel as an iperative.
christian wolff
50
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
Christian took until July to rite back to Carde. He thanked Carde for the Scratch Orchestra’s perforance of Burdocks and and for chapioning the piece despite its seeingly elitist origins. Wolff agreed that usic should be for the people, but cited Rzeski that th at “usic for the people is usic in hich the people participate.” If the title, text, or context of a piece held political essages, the usic could only be accopanient: he couldn’t iagine hat “revolutionary character” usic could have outside outs ide of that. He thought Carde’ Carde’ss attack on Cage “harsh” but also “harshly clear and so very useful.” Cage disappointed hi, he said, by attacking capitalis’s capitalis’s brutality in his prose hile donplaying potentially pote ntially political aspects of usic in favor of the erely social. Wolff liked Carde’s idea that one cannot straddle the question of politics—anything politics—any thing less than activis as
49
obstructionis. But he questioned to of Carde s conclusions. First, ho can cause?? And second, did usic one be certain one has chosen the right political cause alays have to be, as Carde put it, “hard hitting and tough”? “Could it also be inltrating, insinuating, subversive?” A eek after riting that letter, Wolff as in Europe lecturing at the center place of the elitist avant-garde coposition Carde denounced: Darstadt, here on 28–30 28–30 July 1972 Wolff lectured in English and Geran Geran for to hours each afternoon. The rst U.S. coposer invited to speak there since Milton Babbitt in 1964, Wolff tread a ne line, prooting the inherent collectivis of his open scores, but not condening the high-art traditions that had nurtured his ork, traditions notably represented by Iannis Xenakis, ho preceded hi a eek earlier at Darstadt; György Ligeti, ho spoke concurrently ith Wolff; Wolff; and Stockhausen, ho spoke the eek folloing. Still, to any at the suer school, Wolff’s relaxed outlook gave a ne freshness and openness, an antidote to the foralis and structural obsessiveness for hich the school had becoe knon, especially in the fourteen four teen years since s ince Cage and Tudor Tudor had appeared there the re and played pl ayed Wolff Wolff’’s duos. duos . The copeting ideologies of Cage and Carde erupted at a perforanc perforancee of Burdocks on on Westdeu estdeutscher tscher Rundfunk Rundfu nk radio—Carde’ radio—Carde ’ss old eployer—hen eployer— hen both the Scratch Orchestra and John Cage ere scheduled for the cultural progra of the Munich Olypics at the end of August 1972. The Scratch Orchestra Orchestra played Burdocks only only after an introduction by Carde ith a Maoist attack on avant-garde “iperialis.” That irritated Cage, Feldan, and Tudor, ho also had an array of coplaints about the orchestra’s rendition, fro a general lack of energy to the reading of a poe in the last section. One portion of the perforance actually drove Feldan to his feet in protest. In Burdocks ’ fth section, as a response to the isolated nuber “7” in the score, Carole Finer chose to sing seven folk
songs ith a banjo. Feldan stood up and shouted it don on the grounds that this as “not the usic of Christian Wolff.” A fe days later, Wolff told an intervie intervieer er fro Belgrade Televisi elevision on that he as “at a “transitional point. point.”” He had had learned learned ho “to rite usic hich is availavailable for a nuber of perforers, hich allos allos the perforers to actively take part in the usic, be responsible for the usic, but hich does not abandon the.” The ne question for hi as ho to cobine his political concerns ith his usic. “I cannot nd a solution to the social probles right no. I ould like to learn uch ore about the [and] I ould like to relate y usic to the as uch as possible.” The intelle intellectual ctual path to that ish as subtle but perhaps inevitabl inevitable. e. Wolff olff’’s parents and any in the Washington Square counity in hich Wolff gre
up leaned toard the Left, though as a boy Christian kne little ore of politics fro the than that Deocrats ere preferable to Republicans. His parents ere antifascist, of course, but a fe of their friends sypathized ith the U.S. brand of Counis that the McCarthy hearings endeavored end eavored to uproot. “Bolshevis” had held up ideals that attracted any people ho ere born in and raised during the Depression. Aericans had even fought on the sae side as Russia in World War W ar II. But as the failures of Stalinis (and Stalin hiself) becae knon and the Cold War began to set in, U.S. Counis had to retrench. Wolff had declared hiself a pacist in 1959. In the early 1960s, Wolff had soeties taught as a volunteer in Harle. In the id-1960s, as both the Soviet Union and the United States dug in their heels, Mao and the People’s Republic of China becae the ne odels for those dran to leftist ideals. As a university professor, even at conservative Harvard, Wolff encountered student rhetoric against the Vietna War and in favor of equality for oen and African Aericans. In acadeia, radical politics as turning into a sall but noisy orthodoxy. In usic, protest and cultural critique abounded in folk and rock. Even in classical usic, so ainstrea a odernist coposer as Luciano Berio had begun to question the social usefulness of this highly cultivated art for: in his bestselling Sinonia, one 1969 Colubia LP of Sinonia, one heard a speaker in the third oveent passionately declare, “all this can’t stop the ars . . . can’t loer the price of bread.” Just after his residency at Darstadt, Wolff got a coission fro Rzeski for a ne piano piece. Inspired by the one-an virtuosity and additive declaations of political text in Rzeski’s on pieces Coming Together and Attica, and Attica, Wolff’s Wolff’s ne ork, Accompaniments, ork, Accompaniments, attepted attepted to break fro the t he “overly introverted feeling in uch of y earlier usic” and counicate ore directly ith an uninitiated audience. Of the ork’s four sections, the second, third, and fourth ere
christian wolff
52
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
instruent al only. instruental only. In the second and third, the pianist played fully ful ly notated angular elodies interspersed ith rhythic lines played on bass dru and high-hat cybal—a nod to cereonial Chinese usic. In the fourth the pianist discarded the percussion instruents for a long contrapuntal piano solo. Only the rst section contained text. For that Wolff took a passage in praise of the Cultural Revolution fro the Pantheon Books edition of Jan Myrdal and Gun Kessle’s China: The Revolution Continued. He divided that passage into units of one to sixteen syllables each (soeties dividing ords). For each unit of text Wolff W olff ade a series series of sixteen four four-note -note chords, all subsets of a larger larger xed-pitch chord. With only a fe constraints on ho to coordinate beteen voice and piano, the perforer ould sing or chant each unit of text syllabically, accopanied by the designated chords for that unit. This resulted in a ritualized declaation declaation of
51
narrative propaganda over a carefully structured but highly exible scaffolding, ith each group of chords faintly echoing echoing the restricted-pitch haronies haronies of his earliest usic. Still, the sonorities ere less the point for Wolff than ere the discipline and “special alertness” that cae ith realizing the piece. In this case, the serious coitent needed to play Accompaniments play Accompaniments atched atched the austerity of the text. Yet the virtuosity one needed undercut any pretense of proletarianis. This as usic usic for a professional professional usician. usician. Wolff olff’’s usical “transiti “transitional onal point” cae not so uch in Burdocks or or political intent, but in a ne approach to elody that began ith a series of piano pieces he rote r ote in 1969–70. 1969–7 0. Wolff had becoe acquainted acqua inted ith the th e ork of U.S. coposers Terry Terry Riley Ril ey,, Steve Reich, Rei ch, and Philip Glass. Gl ass. Their so-called inialist copositionss transgressed coon odernist rhetoric that relied on aperiodic coposition rhyths, angular disjunct elodies and rapidly utating harony, harony, usually hyperchroatic and lled ith constant variation and rapid rates of change—in other ords, all thing thingss one found in Wolff’ olff’ss usic to that point. The ini inialists alists instea instead d favored pulse-oriented rhyths, pandiatonic harony, incessant repetitions of short ideas, and a very slo rate of haronic change. The sonic result lacked odernist ystery, preferring directness, approachability, and instant coprehension. If odernis had ebraced introversion, the ne style as extroverted, ext roverted, holding no secrets fro its listeners, ho it invited to let the static sonorities and kaleidoscopic counterpoint ash over the. Slo, subtle changes no constituted usical rhetoric. Wolff began riting a series of responses to inialis, pieces in hich he focused on elody—not in the abstract sense in hich he had once said that all sounds end up, but in the ore conventional sense: strings of pitches conceived as lines oing through tie. In this ne transitional style, Wolff began ith a
Tilbury, after 1 set of pieces titled Tilbury, after his and Carde’ Carde ’ss pianist friend frie nd John. In Tilbury 1 (1969), Wolff returned for the rst tie in fteen years to continuous staves across the page ith noteheads and rests rest s on a single staff (treble or any other clef, consistently aintained). The pitches cycled and perutated the sae fourteen pitches ithin the range of E3 to F4. In this sense the piece could be seen as an extrapolation of his earliest pieces, but ith a freedo of notation they had not used. There ere only iplicit rhythic specications specications (other than the rests) and the tepo could be odied ad lib. Ebellishents and transpositions ere elcoe. Optional notes appeared in parentheses. The dynaic as generally soft. 3 had a siilar score forat to Tilbury 1, 1, but its nota The sequel, Tilbury 2 & 3 had tion as divisible into to different diffe rent realizations: realizati ons: “2” as for solo instruent, and 1 this score specied rhythic “3” as for ultiple instruents. Unlike Tilbury 1 this
values (though not the coordinatio coordination n aong aong parts), the range as enorous, ith 1 hat, alost tenty years earlier, the lines no very disjunct. It as to Tilbury 1 hat, For F or Piano II had or Piano I. had been to F to For Tilbury pieces If the Tilbury pieces ere inspired by inialis, as Wolff suggests, they diverged fro that style in several ays: they ere not pulse-oriented; the clefs ere indeterinate; they ere not diatonic; and they called for free ornaentation. A ore persuasive hoage to inialis cae in the early 1970 piece Snowdrop, the Snowdrop, the rst coissioned coiss ioned ork Wolff Wolff had ritten ritte n in ten years. years . Scored for harpsichord “and (or) possibly other instruents,” the piece consisted ostly of runs of single- or double-bea double-beaed ed notes (ithout clefs) in various congurations that ere interrupted by frequent pauses. The patterning of these runs seeed as systeatic and coprehensive as soe of his earliest pieces: — one voice running up or down either conjunctly conjunctly,, disjunctly, or both — two voices running up or down—overlapp down—overlapping ing by various amounts and either in contrary or similar motion to the other—with either both conjunct, both disjunct, one conjunct the other disjunct, or mixtures of both
Most of the piece as chroatic chroatic,, but progressed to a very long hite-key passage that as the rst tie Wolff had used overtly diatonic harony. sketch In or these keyboard pieces, hatof traditionally traditionall ould have the been considered precopositional catalog aterials yno becae score. In othera ords, ord s, as in uc uch h of Feld Feldan’ an’s and Bro Bron’ n’ss usi usic, c, the cop coposer oser laid out the ost typical “traditional” aspects of the score, but let perforers ork out the details. When copa copared red to ost ost of Wolff’ Wolff’ss scores of of the 1960s, 1960s, ith ith ore open open scoring scoring Tilbury pieces Snowdrop seeed but coplex rules, the siple layout of the Tilbury pieces and Snowdrop seeed relatively conventional, designed to encourage perforance ithout too any 53
christian wolff
54
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
particular constraints. const raints. Perhaps not surprisingly, critics took to these sipler siple r orks. Times es could Tilbury pieces Donal Henahan of the New the New York Tim could hear the Tilbury pieces “beckoning the listener inside [their] attenuated sounds to hear their essence.” Brian Dennis, Times, es, said Snowdrop as ritingg for the Musical ritin the Musical Tim said that Snowdrop as “an intriguing interplay of scale fragents drifting together and then apart in rando arabesques.” arabesques.” Wolff further rened and regularized his ne interest in elody via the Exercises, a Exercises, a personal genre he ould pursue for years to coe. It began as a set of fourteen concise orks ritten during 1973–74 (ith occasional additions in later years). These pieces ere for an open enseble that ould for a icrocosic society in hich players orked together yet responded to one another heterophonously, all players attepting to play in unison ith one another, yet inevitably spilling over others’ attacks and releases. Although in soe ays these
exercises iicked the loose eaved texture of Old South congregational sing ing (and the Ba-Benzélé usic Wolff adired), they propted Cage to say they sounded like “classical usic of an unknon civilization.” Though each exercise had its on particulars particulars,, the predoinant score layout as a single long string of open or lled noteheads (ith or ithout stes or beas) to be played in the clef or clefs of the instruents involved, ith occasional pauses (represented by sall edges). The players ould collectively adopt a consistent o of notes, ith individual variations alloed, alloe d, so long as unison playing as, acc accordi ording ng to the perf perfora orance nce notes notes,, “the poin pointt of refer reference” ence” to hic hich h a play player er should return. If the score gave a idground beteen reading readi ng and iprovisation, the aking of it as a idground beteen planning and iprovisation: iprovisati on: “to rite ith an at once free free and focused focused iediacy iediacy analogous analogous to a kind of instruental instruental iprovisation, the ritten result of hich ould in turn allo the perforers to play in that sae spirit.” Wolff’s guiding principle as no this: “Let playing be coposition and coposition playing.” The exercise exercisess distill distilled ed Wolff olff’’s recent concerns. They ebodied siplicity and exibility. They also had the educative educati ve conceit suggested sugge sted by the title: ti tle: one as learning ho to behave aong different usical personalities, but free fro the noral dictates of “chaber usic.” For these reasons, the exercises continue to be aong the ost perfored repertoire of Wolff’s career, in venues ranging fro concert halls to clubs to classroos. Just hen Wolff had begun coposing the exercise exercises, s, Feldan nally organized an event about hich he and Cage had been talking for years: the rst concert devoted entirely to Wolff’s usic. To understand its iportance, one ust consider the internal dynaics of the increasingly ell-knon Ne York School. In 1952 Cage had elcoed Earle Bron to collaborate in various ays
Figure 7. The sketch page for the rst of Wolff’s exercises—virtually indistinguishable fro the “nished” score. Wolff Papers. Used by perission.
ith hiself, Wolff, Wolff, Feldan, and and Tudor Tudor.. Feldan, hoever, hoever, “refused [Bron] adittance” into their t heir circle. circle . Feldan “becae very, very angry, angry,” Cage said, and so, “y friendship ith Morty as broken for quite a period.” Wolff hiself tried to intervene and reconcile Cage and Feldan. To help repair the rift, Cage ounted a joint concert of Bron’ Bron’ss and Feldan’ Feldan’ss ork on 11 October October 1963 in Ton Hall. The short-ter benet benet of this concert as to salve their feeli feelings. ngs. But the long long-ter -ter detri detrient, ent, Cage later expl explained ained,, “a “ass that no concert as a s ever given giv en of the ork of Christian Chr istian Wolff. Wolff. And his ork, as a result, is not noticed as uch as Earle and Morty’s.” Morty’s.” In the id-1960s, Feldan and Cage had spoken often about reediating Wolff’s neglect by giving hi his on concert. In March 1970, Cage assessed a Whitney Museu concert of Ne York Y ork School usic in this ay: “I found the entire evening nearly unbearable; [it] bored e so deeply”—except, he said for “y still very keen interest in Christian Wolff’s usic.” Meanhile, Feldan, hen talking about the Ne York School, often referred only to hiself, Cage, and Wolff, leaving out Bron. On
christian wolff
56
| Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing
one occasion in the 1960s, Feldan as asked ho the Ne York School ebers lined up ith those of the Second Viennese School. Cage as Schoenberg, Feldan said, sai d, he hiself as Berg, and Wolff Wolff as Webern. Webern. Soeone asked, hat about Bron? Krenek, Feldan replied. No,, having joined the faculty at SUNY Buffalo, Feldan as able to ount No the long-discussed Wolff concert there on 15 April 1973. It included hat Feldan called “the asterork of that period [the early earl y 1950s],” Nine, 1950s],” Nine, hich, hich, though it had been played once before (Prague, 1962), Wolff still had never heard. “Just iagine,” Feldan said, “here as a coposer ho astonished the Ne York avant-garde at sixteen or seventeen.” Feldan recounted to the audience Cage’s Cage’s rst encounter en counter ith i th Wolff, Wolff, explained that Wolff Wolff’’s iportance iport ance as no no “equal to Webern’ W ebern’s, s,”” called Wolff’ olff’ss usic Cage’s Cage’s “North Star, Star,” and added that “I think of [Wolff] as y artistic conscience.”
55
5
Someth ing More Specically Something “Musical”: 1973–1984
at d a r t m o u t h , w o l f f co n s ta n t ly had had to prepare ne les-
son plans. Throughout the 1970s, he anned three to t o ve courses a year in i n coparative literature, huanities, classics in Greek and Latin (as ell as in translation), Greek tragedy, Hoeric poetry, Marxist literature, liter ature, and special-topics courses cour ses that explored subjects such as Eros, political philosophy, and feinis. During his rst year y ear at Dartouth Dartou th (1970–71), (1970–71 ), Wolff also started s tarted a “Workshop “Workshop in ExperiEx periental Music,” loosely based on his hi s orkshops in British Brit ish art schools. He enrolled orkshop ebers not by audition but by intervies in in hich hich students, students, regardless of their usical training, had to coit to collaborate ith one another in assorted sonic behaviors. Each orkshop varied in enrollent (usually fro telve to tenty-ve) and had students ranging fro usically skilled, abitious young instruentalists to theater and art students. The orkshop’s repertoire featured open scores—Wolff’s on pieces, soe Cage, soe Oliveros, soe Rzeski, et al.—and even the students’ on ne orks. They also played arrangeents of folk tunes and even classical pieces (e.g., piano preludes of Chopin) for hatever instruentss and voices ere available. Halfay through the course, the class colinstruent lectively decided hat they liked to play, assessed hat “orked,” and planned a concert (preferably (prefer ably off capus), collaborating on location, progra, poster design, design , transportation, and so forth.
christian wolff
58
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
Early in 1973 Wolff gave a lecture to the Dartouth faculty in hich he brought together his divided assignents. The lecture, “Plato and the Ne Music,”” as foral and cool-headed but poleical. Wolff explained Plato’ Music, Plato’ss belief belief in usic’s poer to shape character and transfor the soul in ays a good sociPhaedo, the Statesman, the Republic, and ety requires. Citing passages fro the Phaedo, the Statesman, the Republic, and Laws, Wolff the Laws, the Wolff traced Plato’s critique of the “ne” usic that debased a society by freeing elody fro the support of ords, isusing the odes, or needlessly coplicating rhyths. He then pivoted to Mao’s Yenan talks, in hich he sa the odern continuation of Plato’s critique, and praised the Cultural Revolution (though its brutal practices ere not yet knon in the t he West). West). With With Plato and Mao as a foundation, Wolff explicitly echoed Carde in indicting avant-garde coposers—Elliott Carter, to nae one—for their elitis and self-absorbed styles. Nevertheless Nevert heless,, Wolff and Carde’s outlook outlookss gre increas increasingly ingly distin distinct. ct.
57
When on 20 May 1973 Carde ounted a perforanc perforancee of Wolff Wolff s Accompani ments (alongside Attica and (alongside Rzeski’ Rzeski’ss Attica and Coming Together ), ), Carde rose to attack not Wolff’ W olff’ss usic usic,, he said, but Wolff’ olff’ss choic choicee of subjec subjects: ts: pollut pollution ion and the popula population tion explosion, to of the causes that had eerged in the U.S. counterculture in the late 1960s alongside along side civil rights, right s, oen’s oen’s rights, econoic justice, justice , and resistance to the Vietna War ar.. Carde considered environentali env ironentalis s and birth control contro l the “great red herrings” of the U.S. intellectual elite. No Wolff had shon hiself “an erring brother” duped by the pseudocollectivis of the acadeic bourgeois. He and Rzeski had created “confusion” by their elitis dressed up as proletarianis. The point of his offering this Wolff-Rzeski Wolff-Rzeski concert, Carde said, as “to bring these ideological and political lines out into the open and take a conscious stand against the and criticize the.” Carde anted to court the proletarian asses on a grand scale. Wolff anted to create a coeorative, nondogatic body of personal narratives of orkers’ struggles for justice. John Tilbury—friend of both coposers—sa another distinction: Carde “sacriced all on the altar of revolution.” But Wolff’s orks, even the earlier ones, he found to be already “a projection into the future, a utoare political. pian paradig; they are political. The usic-aking they generate gener ate is collaborative, collaborative , self-consciously giving giv ing and taking, non-judgental, respectful, attentive, sharing, individuality, not cherishing the quotidian, here individuality, not ‘individualis,’ is nurtured. In short, it is strongly anti-authoritarian, ‘deocratic.’” Fro Wolff’s Wolff’s perspective per spective,, Carde had “a kind of proselyting prosely ting streak, stre ak,”” hereas “the ai [for e] is not to say ‘This is hat you ust think,’ but to get people to look at things and think about the.” If Carde as an evangelist, Wolff as—not surprisingly—a professor.
In that he folloed Cage’ Cage’ss teacherl teacherlyy exaple. Yet Wolff continued to spar gently ith Cage about overtly political usic. In January 1974 Cage rote to Wolff W olff to question the ephasis Wolff Wolff no placed on the idea of “poer” “poer” in his usic. Cage began, in effect, by revising his on history, saying ho he ould have stopped riting usic altogether in the 1940s ere it not for the rejuvenating essage of Asian thought, hich could be suarized as: stop trying to control. Even though Cage’s faith in that dictu is arguable, he claied no to take delight in “not exercising poer over sounds.” But he had coe to the conclusion that such an approach to usic could not change society. He had to ask, “What is right action for usicians to bring about the revolution?” To onths later, Wolff replied ith a brief letter that heartily quoted Ives: “The future of usic ay not lie entirely e ntirely ith usic itself but rather in the ay it encourages and extends, rather than liits, the aspirations and ideals of the people,” etc. Attached to this letter ere iscellaneous notes and usings by
Wolff on Wolff on the subject of of usic usic and and politics, politics, along ith his his notes to “Plato and the the Ne Music,” hich he had no delivered in various utations tice ore (at UC Santa Cruz and Sith College). That suer, Wolff as invited back to Darstadt. During the last full eek of of July 1974, he held class there each each eekday eekday afternoon afternoon for an hour hour,, treating the social concerns of usic and introducing the latest usic of Aerican coposers in his iediate circle (as ell as, notably, Philip Glass). The Darstadt students questioned the intent, durability, and peranence of uch of this usic, sipleinded as it seeed by Darstadt’s usual standards: beat-driven, redundant, odal, and conventionally “elodic.” Even the texts of soe of the Attica—struck usic—especially usic—especi ally Rzeski’s Rzeski’s Attica —struck Darstadt hearers as too blatant, too vernacular.. Wolff’ vernacular olff’ss replies to his critics, hoever hoever,, seeed less less iportant iportant than the the ere fact of their location: he had carved out a place for inialists and political usic in the heart of serial orthodoxy. Ho one ight easure the success of the ove is difcult to say. But he as not invited back for tenty-four years. Wolff increasingly relied on “pick-up groups” of friends for preiers. He had alays had a core cor e of coposer-perforer friends frie nds (Tudor, (Tudor, Rzeski, Behran, Carde, Cage, et al.) as ell as a fe virtuoso instruentalists ho adired and played his ork (trobonist Garrett List, for exaple, or French horn player Kurt Schertsik). To To frequently preiere ne orks ith regular cohorts actually becae in his ind a part of “socially conscious” usic: the bonding of a sall collective of utually reliant players ebodied the cooperative political life he iagined through his texts and techniques. 59
christian wolff
60
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
But beyond the social consciousness of his perforance collective, Wolff turned to a ne technique: the veiled ebedding of old ol d orker’s orker’s songs and politipoliti cal tunes in the fabric of his counterpoint. “Veiled” in that he transfored the tunes largely by techniques e discuss belo. This constituted a kind of cryptography that harked back to the Middle Ages, privileging the associative poer of tunes tied to specic ords. It as an esoteric act of devotion to an idea, one presuing an initiated init iated and sypathetic sypathe tic body of hearers. heare rs. Wolff olff’’s ne usic derived derive d fro old orker songs as an allusive hoage to the struggles of the Industrial Age, in hich hich the original aterials ere, in effect, elted elted don and recast. To ake the hoage clear, though, Wolff often presented the songs directly at the Jones, and Variationss pieces’ openings (e.g., Bread and Roses, Death o Mother Jones, and Cello Variation on “Hallelujah, I’m a Bum” ) or encouraged the players to play the songs in their original for before playing the ne, derived pieces. He dre his tunes ainly fro three sources. One as a 1973 Dover Books
Work and reissue of the 1960 anthology by Edith Foke and Joe Glazer: Songs o Work Protest, hich Protest, hich included any ilitant and huorous songs. Another as Pete Folksinger, hich Sion Seeger’s hefty autobiography-songbook The Incompleat Folksinger, hich and Schuster had published in 1972. The third as John J ohn Loax and Alan Loax’s Loax’s Folk olk Song U.S.A., U.S.A., rst venerable F venerable rst published in 1947 ith the usical editorship editorship of Charles Seeger and his ife, Ruth Craford Seeger. With only a fe exceptio exceptions—ainly ns—ainly ne folk songs, such as Holly Near’ Near’ss “Hay Una Mujer Desaparecida”—Wolff dre fro such anthologies the songs that ould pereate his usic for the reainder of his career: During the 1970s– 1970s – 80s alone, he used as source aterial these political and folk songs found in the aforeentioned aforeention ed three books alone (listed here in the order he used the): There Once Was a Union Maid Hallelujah, I’m a Bum Bread and Roses John Golden and The Lawrence Strike The Preacher and the Slave Moorsoldaten (Peat-Bog Soldier) Rock About Abi Yoyo Po’ Lazarus Big Rock Candy Mountain Acres of Clams Hey Ho, Nobody Home The Sun Is Burning
Mary, Don’t You Weep O Freedom Set Down, Servant Ain’t No More Cane in Dis Brazis Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho The Grey Goose All the Pretty Little Horses Cindy
His earliest and ost overt use of one of these songs led to an alost legendary oent in experientalist lore, one that drove a teporary edge in his relationship relations hip ith Cage. Since 1964, Merce Merce Cunningha had staged stage d hat he called siply “events.” An “event” as a perforance by his dance troupe in hich old choreographies ere spliced together into edleys underlaid ith fresh usic. In the fall of 1975, Cunningha coissioned Wolff Wolff for soe ne usic for his hi s next event. Wolff responded ith four ne exercises (nos. 15–18). The rst to
exercises of this ne set—one for piano, the other for unspecied duet—derived Maid. The fourth (open instruentation quartet) derived their aterial fro Union Maid. The Hallelujah, I’m a Bum. Bum. Cunningha fro Hallelujah, fro Cunningha used these ne exercises exercise s to accopany one of the events Cunningha held during the rst eek of Deceber. Before playing the Exercises, Wolff’s players raucously sang Union Maid itself itself “because e ere er e in sypathy sy pathy ith it h its it s sentients.” Wolff Wolff recalls: “The audience, ost of ho routinely had encountered and tolerated the ost advanced kinds of usic, audibly gasped in shock.” s hock.” While a fe audience audie nce ebers (and even dancers) spoke ell of it, ost disissed it. Even Holly thought it beyond the pale and told Christian so. Cage turned aay fro Wolff, visibly disturbed. To eeks later, Wolff rote Cage to apologiz apologizee for the “trouble “troublesoe soe diversion” he and his group had caused. He explained that it as a “fair risk,” given the itty, even coic, choreographic tone (and juxtapositions) Cunningha often used. But part of the proble, proble , Wolff explained, as that Cage claied to to have renounced renoun ced “intentions” and Wolff Wolff could not do the sae. “Perhaps I should shoul d let go of the sounds; I can’t see to let the intentions go. But I see no to be deterined to continue to try to bring the together. I don’t kno hat else to do.” Earlier that year Neely Bruce coissioned Wolff to rite his rst choral piece. Bruce as one of a sall but active group of Aerican coposer-perforerscholars (any of the forer students of Charles Ha at the University of Illinois) ho studied tentieth-century Aerican vernacular usic, coposed usic that abstrusely referenced its idios, and perfored both vernacular and
christian wolff
62
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
experiental usic. (Bruce and the siilarly Aericana-inded Willia Willia Brooks, HPSCHD at for exaple, both played pl ayed in Cage’ Cage ’s HPSCHD at Illinois in 1969.) In a sense, they continued a line begun by the Charles and Ruth Craford Seeger (hose children and stepchildren included Pete, Peggy, and Mike Seeger, all icons of the folk revival). No teaching at Wesleyan—the university that had published all of Cage’s books—Bruce anted Wolff to rite a ne ork for his student and counity chorus. For source aterial, Wolff turned to to principal sources. One as the autobiography of Bill Hayood, leader of the so-called Wobblies—ebers of the IWW union (Industrial Workers of the World)—a group ell-knon for its Songs ideological of socialis anarchis. The otherilitant source and as coic o Work andstraddling Protest, hich Protest, hich containedand any of the Wobblies’ songs. With these as textual foundations, Wolff rote a strongly didactic ultioveent ork for chorus, keyboard, and to unspecied solo-line solo- line instruents, using ostly siple elodies and deployent of text, favoring unison syllabic
61
declaations and vocal hocketing, Music, began ith a kind of exposition via The piece, siply titled Wobbly Music, began the straightforard singing of three orkers songs: “Bread and Roses,” “John Golden and the Larence Strike,” and “The Preacher and the Slave” (aka “Pie in the Sky”). A choralelike instruental interlude prepared the listener for the four oveents to follo. The rst of these set to usic portions of the 1908 preable to the constitution of the IWW, using hocketed voices occasionally interrupted by bass gurations. The second oveent loosely arranged “John Golden” ith “unison” (i.e., heterophonic) singing over ad lib. accopanient. The third took a text fro Arturo Giova Giovannitti nnitti’’s closin closingg state stateent ent at the Lar Larence ence Strike trial in 1912 and set it ith chanting, recitatives, and chordal accopanient. The fourth used a text fro a Bill Hayood speech (1913), (1913) , setting it ith a narro,, Exerciselike tune in vocal hocket ith occasional instruental narro inst ruental doublings and percussion-chord interjections (à la Accompaniments la Accompaniments ). ). The hole set seeed to convert early tentieth-century strikers’ rhetoric into a kind of liturgy t for declaatory, ritualized delivery. Wolff ould later call it “y ost successful
piece in that line.” Rzeski as ore denitive: “I consider [it] a asterpiece of odern choral literature.” Wobbly Music crossed crossed several thresholds for the coposer. It as his rst choral ork (and (and indeed one of his fe vocal pieces pieces at all). It put forth forth for the rst tie hat ould becoe his canon of usico-political sources: the orker’ orker’ss usic chapioned by folk revivalists of the 1950s and 1960s. It exploited a technique that had long fascinated hi: hocket, the edieval practice of dividing a single
line aong different players (a technique Webern too had used in his celebrated Musical al Oe Oering ring ). orchestration orchestrat ion of the Ricercare fro f ro J. S. Bach’s Music ). Here the political usefulness of vocal hocketing becae clear. Wolff could present a text prisatically by refracting its coponents (ords or pairs of ords) in various vocal parts. That kept the text seantically seantically intact but shifted shifted its its colors colors and and spatial spatial placeent (i.e., fro one group’s position on the stage to another’s). Modernist coposers (e.g., Berio) and experientalist coposers (e.g., Kenneth Gaburo) had tended to treat texts as phoneic objects ready to be disantled and recobined, recobined, often in thick nets of counterpoint. Wolff’s onophonic-heterophonic hocketing in Wobbly Music alloed alloed hi to present the text ith no obscuring of eaning, yet yet still “developed.” usically As Wolff began to receive ore coissions, his old ethods had to give ay ay.. In the 1960s he had intended ne orks to be played and playable by untrained perforers—or rather, perforers hose training required only the skills needed for his idiosyncratic scores. In that ay—true to a certain deocratic politics—
conventional virtuosi had little if any advantage over beginners in perforing a conventional Wolff W olff coposition. coposition. But fro the id-1970s id-1970s on, old styles of notation and and technique took fresh root in Wolff’s riting. As he explained in 1980, in pieces such as Burdocks “there “there is a sense in the background of nature and of people (including children) playing.” But in the later orks “there is soething ore specically ‘usical’ and a kind of expression that is ore evidently usical—that is, closer to historical continuities” cont inuities” of hat has been be en called “usic.” He no believed that “usic can function function better socially if it is ore clearly identied ith hat ost people recognize as usic.” way he Soe of the changes in the way he rote gre fro changes in his household. In fall 1975 Holly got a roo near Harvard so she could retreat several days a eek to ork ork on her her doctor doctoral al disserta dissertation, tion, a copa coparativ rativee study study of of narra narrative tive strucstrucOdyssey, and ture in three epic poes (Gilgamesh, ( Gilgamesh, the the Odyssey, and Beowul ). ). As his acadeic and parental duties expanded, Wolff’s ethod turned ore and ore pieceeal. He likened it to “journal entries” or, ore coonly, “quilting.” By the forer, he eant short, occasional notations of pitch, rhyth, for, and so forth, usually one concise page (or portion of a page) at a sitting. By “quilting,” “quilting,” he eant ho he ould brose ould brose through through the the “journ “journal al entry” entry” pages pages,, pick pick those those that seeed seeed to ork ell togethe together—ho r—hoever ever juxtapo juxtaposition sitionally— ally—and and asseb asseble le the into larger larger fors. fors. “I think of Cage’s notion of ‘sounds for theselves,’” he later rote, “each sound its on center, then alays possible interpenetrations; but instead of just the single sound or sound event, I also, and ostly, use various longer continuities of sounds. This is not not unrelated unrelated to, say say,, Satie or Stravin Stravinsky sky (or (or Frescoba Frescobaldi). ldi).””
christian wolff
64
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
His usic courses also seeed to use a siilar “quilting” technique. Consider the Music 3 course he taught ith it h Malcol Goldstein in the inter ter ter of 1977. The course began ith ith revies of rhyth, elody elody,, acoustics, acoustics, and and perception. It proceeded to electronic usic, folloed by “for and continuity,” Beethoven, African Africa n Aeric Aerican an usic, Japane Japanese se usic, Renais Renaissance sance usic, and nally “politi “political cal and popular usic.” The students not only read fro an eclectic library of titles Silence, Charles Blues, Leonard Meyer’s Emotion (including Cage’s Silence, Charles Keil’s Urban Blues, Leonard Meyer’s Emotion and Meaning in Music, and Music, and Carde’ Imperialism, to nae a fe) Car de’ss Stockhausen Serves Imperialism, to but also rote and perfored to ne copositions apiece. One can scarcely reconstru reconstruct ct the ethods Wolff used to copose any indi vidual piece piece fro this this era (and (and beyond). beyond). Even Even Wolff Wolff hiself hiself seldo recalls. Fe “sketches” or drafts exist. Although he tended to be systeatic ithin liited fraeorks, he stayed open to breaching his ethods at ill. Moentary instinct could alays override a syste. Most pieces ere sen together fro fragents. As for the fragents theselves, to shift the etaphor, etaphor, Wolff’ Wolff’ss construction of
63
the resebled glassbloing: glassbloing: the glassbloer either blos a usable shape or discards the aed results. As Wolff rote each prospective portion of a piece he considered it, then either kept it or thre it aay. To constants in the usic of this period are the tersene terseness ss of his gestures gestures,, a trait that pervades his usic fro its earliest to latest incarnations, and throughthroughcoposed fors, hich he felt necessary to ebody progression, a constant oving forard, never back. At the sae tie, no one copositional method char characterizes Wolff’s political usic. Not only did each piece constitute a quilt of fragents, but the pieces taken together ade up a larger patchork of copositions. Because Wolff Wolff resisted the exact e xact repetition of copositional coposit ional ethods fro piece to piece, his style constantly, though subtly, realigned itself. Although unilling to fully subit sounds to predeterined plans, Wolff still harnessed instinct ith nueric controls and, soeties, archaic contrapuntal procedures. That latter phrase alludes in part to his treatent of pitch as series of “points,” individual tones that he often took fro the rst fe notes of a folk tune by systeatic transpositions. He principally principally used to ethods to do so: 1. Quasi-seri Quasi-serial al etaorphosi etaorphosiss of a folk incipit: This consisted of applying the sae interval of transposition—either up or don—to each note of the rst fe notes of a folk tune. This could take place in any layers. He ight transpose each note up or don a half step, then the resultant tune’s pitches up or don another half step, etc., gradually transforing the original fragent by sli degrees. Or he ight transpose each note up or don either of to intervals—a half step or a ajor third, for exaple—and then do the sae to the resultant
elody, repeatedly. Or, again, he ight transpose each note up or don a half step; then, on a second pass (either to the original tune or the resultant one) up or don a hole step; then, again, up or don a inor third; then a ajor third; and so forth, through all the intervals to a preset liit (generally a tritone); then, possibly, reverse direction (fourths to thirds, to seconds). 2. With or ithout the technique in no. 1, he ight spontaneous spontaneously ly change (or allo the player to change) the clef, perutating any of the tune’s interval qualities (e.g., half and hole steps). Beyond these pitch-only transforati transforations, ons, he used various anipulations of pitch + rhyth. One of these is a siple additive technique. In one version of it, Wolff W olff unfolds a tune by playing playing its rst note (i.e., pitch and and rhyth cobined), cobined), then the rst and second s econd (1 + 2), then (1 + 2 + 3), then (1 + 2 + 3 + 4), and so forth Pan(siilar to the entire perforance process of Rzeski’s 1969 Les 1969 Les Moutons de Panurge). urge ). Since such a process is so transparent, transp arent, Wolff Wolff uses it i t sparingly. A ore interinte resting and durable version of the technique involves separating the paraeters:
Wolff uses Wolff us es the pitches in their t heir original order but unfolds the rhythic values additively (and thus ore sloly, hile the pitches go on independently). Thus: Original Pitches 1 2
3 4 5 6 etc.
Original Rhythms 1 1 2
1 2
3 etc.
A reverse of this procedure is, of course, also possible: the original rhyths appear in order, but the pitches additively. Wolff could also adopt another, ore elaborate technique that he calls loops on a grid: a quasi-isorhythic technique illustrated via the exaple of gure 8. In this exaple, Wolff begins ith three pitches in the treble clef (A4, B4, D4) and three in the bass clef (C4, E3, F3). To the treble clef he assigns the nuber series [3.4.0.1.12]; to the bass [5.2.2.10.1]. He then arks off a series of thirty-six units—not beats or easures, per se, but siply spaces, or hat e ill, for the purposes of this description, de scription, call “slots,” “slots,” into hich he ill place each note. In the treble clef he starts by placing A4 in the rst slot, skips three slots, places A4 in the next slot, skips four slots, places A4 in the next slot, then another in the next slot (i.e., has “0” slots intervening), skips 1 slot and places another A4, then 12 and places yet another, copleting the series [3.4.0.1.12]. Next, he skips 3 fro the last A4 and places a B4 in a slot, skips 4 and places another B4, folloed by one ore in the next slot (i.e., “0” slots intervening), intervening), hich is the last slot of the 36. At this point he “loops” to the rst slot, skips it (i.e., “1”) and places another 65
christian wolff
66
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
Figure 8. A saple of Wolff’s “loops-on-a-grid” sketch technique. Gift of Christian Wolff W olff to authors.
B4, skips 12 and places another. He then skips 3 slots and places a D4, skips 4 and places another, and so forth. He follos the sae process in the bass clef, using its respective pitches and nuber series. This produces a constant kaleidoscopic reconguring of the six pitches as solo notes or siultaneities. With that done he translates the recongura recongurations tions into siple easures and rhyths. The result resebles the kind of ork he did ith liited pitch pieces in his earliest years, only no ore systeatic in procedure. All these procedures can be ixed ithin the sae passage, juxtaposed ithin the sae piece, or abandoned at ill. Strangely, they bespeak an abivalence to the politically charged source aterial they transfor: one can rarely recognize ore glipse glipses s of the songs hos e texts ean s o uch so thean copose coposer The loops than on a grid techniq technique ue that Whose Wolff olff developed develop ed hints that hetohas iplic itr.faith iplicit in their latent counicative poer, but needs to refract the through a lateodern sensibility. Well-trained in translating archaic languages into English or tracing single thees across genres in literature, he no translated folk usic into experiental usic ith this technique. By apping one syste onto another, he converted the coon or deotic usical language into an arcane and hier-
atic one. But hat attered ore than procedures ere the results. In the latter half of the 1970s, 1970s , one could see a reneent—even renee nt—even a kind k ind of taing—of Wolff Wolff’’s usical rhetoric. To see that, consider to of the virtuosic piano pieces he coDesaparecida. posed during those years: Bread and Roses and Hay and Hay Una Mujer Desaparecida. Both orks gre fro solo piano genres that both Carde and Rzeski had ebraced. Carde rote his neoroantic Thälmann Variations in in 1975; Cage and others thought the piece “19th century salon usic.” In the sae year, y ear, Rzeski had ritten hat for Wolff as the ideal coposing-out of variations on one of South Aerica’s Aerica’s ost beloved political politi cal chants or songs (equivalent (equivale nt in iconic poer to the civil rights r ights oveent’ ove ent’ss “We “We Shall Overcoe”). Rzeski’s Rzeski’s The People United Shall Never Be Deeated sprang sprang fro “grand anner” traditions quite at odds ith the kind of virtuosity virtu osity in Wolff Wolff’’s earlier piano orks. ork s. The piece as populist popul ist in its appeal to historic pianis but progressive not only in its leftist allusions but in its huge variety of styles. Wolff folloed suit in the piano orks he rote in the late 1970s (often for Attica and ogether r had Rzeski to play). Just as Rzeski’ Rzeski’ss Attica and Coming Togethe had inspired Wolff
to use textual declaations over siple accopanient, The People United inspired inspired hi to rite in long variation fors for solo piano ith no text, only the usical foundation of political poli tical song. And no, no, hereas his early solo piano orks or ks had been atoistic, these ne ones ere aphoristic. They relied not on odular points or oents but on strong, terse gestures strung into an abstract narrative. His earlier conventionally notated solo piano orks had been shaped neither by dynaics nor articulations. They ebodied a strictly Apollonian constructivist spirit, teetering on the precipice of unplayability unplayability.. In their pianistic oratory his ne orks seeed see ed far ore Dionysian. And the variation genre seeed an apt vessel for his ne style: it t perfectly ith his idea of quilting but gave a controlling foral concept. Wolff rote Bread and Roses (piano (piano version) for Rzeski in 1976. In the notation, as ith ost of Wolff Wolff’’s pieces fro f ro then on, there is i s little on hich to reark. rear k. He clearly deterines pitches and rhyths, except for rests, hich appear only as breath arks. The ork consists of a variety of textures, hich, according to the progra note, are “freely stitched together”: huge, multiregistral chordal fanfares (most of them technically unplayable as actual simultaneities) the tune, simply stated and harmonized solo compound melodic lines in sixteenth notes a treble-only, quarter note oriented solo-line variation two-voice running sixteenth notes in counterpoint solo-line fragments
67
christian wolff
68
| Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984
The piece relies on long-breathed lines, either solo or in to-part counterpoin counterpoint. t. These often aou aount nt to unidi unidirectio rectional nal arpeg arpeggiati giations ons that, as they spira spirall off, yield to tice- and thrice-repeated thrice-repeate d notes that see to provide provi de points of polarity. The long strings of equal note values (usually sixteenth notes) conjure faint echoes of the Baroque. But although the notes are generally ritten in (unetered) (unetered ) conventional notation, the tepo, dynaics, and “ays of playing” pl aying” are, in Wolff Wolff’’s ords, “free and variable.” This creates a densely de nsely thicketed thick eted rhapsody that, in Rzeski’s Rzeski’s ords, listeners “see to begin to enjoy only after they’ve t hey’ve heard it a couple of ties.” ties.” Hay Una Un a Mujer Desaparecida Desaparecida (1979) By contrast, contrast, Hay (1979) seeed doesticated, its Roses, it textures cobed out. With the sae conventional notation as Bread and Roses, it provided a lean, ore accessible set of character variations that ere in any ays classicistic, ith a uch sloer turnover of the total chroatic. The lines ere no constrained, far fro the ferocious disjunctures of interval and register in Bread and Roses. It Roses. It even used barlines, though at irregular distances, to establish partitions beteen successive textures and rhythic patterning. Throughout, it hinted at the populist vocabulary of other leftist coposers fro Copland to Carde.
Beteen Wolff olff’’s riting of these to pieces—aid any other instruental orks—the ever-entrepreneurial Cage ade plans ith Wesleyan in 1977 to publish his earlier political correspondence ith Wolff in his next book, Empty book, Empty Words. Wolff Words. Wolff eshed out his earlier notes and drafted a ne letter surveying his usico-political beliefs. He adopted a gentler tone, donplaying the possibility of usic ever changing the orld or solving its probles. Nevertheless, through collective action and revolutionary revolut ionary usic, “I’d like to help, at least, to ake yself and others less nervous at the prospect of real change”— change”—including including “disantling “disantling capitalis.” In the end, Cage’s editor cut the correspondence fro the book. “I a both sorry and relieved,” Cage rote, “as I iagine you are too.” If there as a sequel to this proposed publication, publication, it cae in 1980 ith Wolff’ Wolff’ss essay in the inaugural issue of Pozzi Escot and Robert Cogan’s journal, Sonus: A Journal o Investigations into Global Musical Po Possibilities. ssibilities. Titled Titled “On Political Polit ical Texts Texts and Ne Music,”” it continued hat Music, hat had begun as “Plato “Plato and the Ne Music.” Music.” Wolff sur veyed the political connotations of his earlier open-score untexted orks, then Music. These gave detailed descriptions of his texted Accompaniments texted Accompaniments and and Wobbly Music. These ere, in in effect, the ne pillars pillars in his post-Carde post-Carde opus. Wolff rote that essay aid ne events in his faily and career. In 1978 Holly nished her dissertation and got her doctorate in coparative literature. In 1979, she gave birth to their third child, Nicholas (“Tico”), and, in 1981, their fourth, Tristra T ristra.. In 1978 Christian had nally nally been granted tenure at Dartouth—far Dartouth—far later than he had expected. Although he taught courses in language and literature, literature ,
W Wolff’ dual career dual had tiltedatalos alost t entirely en tirely toard usic. usic Allon through throu gh the 1970s heolff’s hads obtained residencies usic schools, lectured on .his copositions, and attended concerts of ne orks—or even concerts devoted entirely to his Music, usic in London, West Berlin, Milan, and Budapest. In his 1981 Modern 1981 Modern Music, Paul Grifths discussed “The Cage Group,” devoting one score excerpt apiece to Wolff W olff,, Feld Feldan, an, and Bro Bron n (in that order order)) and lucid lucidly ly expla explaining ining Wolff’ olff’ss pione pioneerering scores. Intervies ith Wolff Wolff and articles about his usic appeared in Europe and the United States. Recordings cae out on any labels, including Wergo, Vox, V ox, Elect Electrola, rola, EMI, and CRI. But throu throughout ghout the entir entiree decad decadee he had only three acadeic paper readings and to journal articles in classics (1973 and 1979). Still, Wolff pursued opportuniti opportunities es and responded to invitations related to his avoed scholarly passion. Having developed a ide circle of friends in the eld (soe forer students ho had gone on to positions in classics at various universities), he could give public addresses on Euripides’ and Sophocles’ plays during 1980 and a fe years thereafter at conferences and guest lectureships at Sith, Bron, Princeton, and Oxford. He even took a brief stint as a visiting professor
in the Harvard Classics Departent. In 1984 Wolff turned fty. It is tepting to call hat Wolff had already been riting for the previous decade decade as soe for of “late style,” style,” in hich hich his scholarly aptitude for antiquity drove a technique that, at least on its surface, harked back to venerable traditions of expression and o, despite its unbridled chroaticis. His usic certainly had retrenched fro his ost radical experients, those scores for hich he as (and is) best knon. One cannot ell predict hat shifts in style ight yet coe. “Late style” alays depends on longevity. Still, as he passed through his hyperpolitical stage, Wolff renegotiated the radicalis of his usic fro its open-ended scoring to an ad hoc traditionalis. It as as though, in denying the ultrapopulis of Carde, he turned to a style that honored the discipline and polish of perforers ho, ore ith each passing year, asked that he rite for the. For the rest of the tentieth century, that style branched out in a genealogy of personal genres and titles, soe of the attached to a ediu that had long eluded hi: the syphony orchestra.
69
6
Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
in november 1982 john cage turned seventy seve nty.. By then, books
and articles generally ge nerally labeled labe led Wolff Wolff as Cage’s Cage’s disciple, ith little litt le reciprocal inui nuTriQuarterly, he ence iplied. iplied . In a Cage birthday tribute tribut e Wolff Wolff rote for TriQuarterly, he tried to adjust the historical lens. He conceded that Cage had hugely inuenced hi. After After all, they had et hen Wolff as an ipressionable sixteen-year-old. Nevertheless, he said, Cage’s real inuence on hi and others as his “discipline, uncoproisingness, asceticis, at the sae tie as his untiring declarations of support, cheerfulness, discovery and counication pleasure. His call for the use of intelligence intellig ence and conscience.” conscie nce.” But no one could iitate Cage’ Cage ’s usic: “you ould no ore try to iitate it, if you had any sense, than you ould try to duplicate a thunderstor or the groing of grass.” Just so, it ould be difcult to iitate Wolff’ olff’ss usic. Although it had utated fro its earliest and arguably ost radical techniques, it folloed a certain continuu. As e’ve noted, Cage described descr ibed Wolff Wolff’’s exercises as “classical usic of an unknon civilization.” In 1997, Dartouth usic chair Jon Appleton said that Wolff’ W olff’ss usic as “often unrelated to any knon tradition traditions. s.”” The folloing year Rzeski described de scribed Wolff Wolff’’s usic fulsoely: fulsoe ly: “Weird “Weird little lit tle tunes, tune s, sounding as if they the y had been beaed at soe reote point in the universe and then bounced back again as a kind of intergalactic utant usic; recognizable elodic and rhythic
patterns, soeho sen together in onstrous pairing, soeties reiniscent of the deons of Hieronyous Bosch, coposites of anials, sh, oers, and coon household objects: there is order, but also constant interruption, intrusions of disorderly reality upon regularity and lafulness, cobining to create an effect of both failiarity and strangeness. . . . not reproducing failiar fors, but revealing, behind these, life’s unpredictability.” By the year of Cage’ Cage’ss seventie seventieth th birthday, Wolff had crossed the threshol threshold d into his (presuably) last style period, hich encopassed a large body of pieces for diverse players, fro solos (fro ute to contrabass) to orks for chaber groups of any sizes and cobinations, though alost no “standard” ensebles. What dened the style of this large body of orks? Perhaps its ost iportant—if seeingly supercial—trait is this: alost every score differs differ s in its design and layout fro every other. One nds in Wolff’s late style a seeingly endless nonredundancy, an avid attept to keep reixing notational styles and instructions. While he focuses intently on each segent of a piece hen riting it, he keeps and revises only segents that please hi or see rich in possibility, then assebles those segents intuitively. “Stick it together and see hat happens,”
he later said. This is not ere fatalis. It appeals both to his earliest principles of ebracing discontinuity and a desire to avoid forula. His abition? “Not to do soething I’ve already done.” Cage had urged against aiting for ideas to percolate before going to ork. Rather, he advocated orking diligently and consistently. Wolff did the sae, as uch as possible aid his acadeic duties, failial obligations, and even far chores (after Ray Nash passed aay in 1982, Christian and Holly oversa the far and tended to other Hope’s needs). Copositional craft as fundaental, a kind of duty one oed to the ra aterial of sound. It also provided a kind of personal therapy for depressed oods: “Work is the only reedy I’ve found,” he rote to Rzeski, though it alays had to be ork that soeho felt “ne.” Larry Polansky Polansk y, a Dartouth colleague colle ague of Wolff Wolff’’s since 1990, 1 990, described hat he observed about abo ut Wolff Wolff’’s riting process: proce ss: “He has a sall notebook that t hat he carries, carrie s, pretty uch all the tie—he ust have hundreds of these t hese things—and generally his copositional process is to siply rite it, and then recopy it. His originals are done in pencil, and then he sits at his kitchen table and recopies. He’s alays riting, and he’s very, very, very prolic, prolic, ith a lot of little and big copositional copositional systes that he uses so that, as a coposer, he’s rearkably free of copositional angst in a ay. That is, he can keep riting pieces all the tie ithout any kind of riter’s block. Because he has evolved for hiself so any systes that he can put to use and recobine re cobine in lots of ays and produce pieces.” Thus, looking back
christian wolff
72
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
at the usic of the 1980s–90s, Wolff had ostly hazy eories of their aking: “I often don’t reeber ho I ade those pieces. pieces . I ean I look at [one and say]: ‘Where the hell does this coe fro?’ I ish I kne, because people ask e and I’ a little ebarrassed to say that I just cannot reeber.” To analyze the resultant scores is difcult. They often contain no easure nubers or explicit tie fraes for parsing or coparison. They run the full notational spectru fro siple, unannotated coon-practice coon-practice notation (see Bratislava, 1995) Bratislava, Song, 1988). Beteen 1995) to ostly coordination neues (see Digger Song, 1988). those to poles one nds the ajority of his scores: coon-practice notation interleaved ith utations of Wolff’s no “classic” ne notations and instructions, though never in the sae proportions or, indeed, ith the sae instructions or decisions delegated to perforers. This as Wolff’s ne trope on atoistic construction, no anifest not ithin single pieces alone but across the span of his entire opus, each piece loosely disconnected fro the others. In these later orks, one feels a ne urgency urgency.. Wolff no sees ore ipatient ith and even ebarrassed by silence. Musical passages in hich one ight have expected gaps no get lled ith notes. The usic often doesn’t breathe so
71
uch as gasp. Wolff no longer let sounds oat but ade it push forard. In his early orks, he had associated silence ith editation, conteplation. But politics required activis. Political usic couldn’t couldn’t eather the inertia inerti a that gaps of silence alloed. That usico-political activis continued in pieces not overtly ove rtly political. “notey” Forusic, a long he tie Wolff had privileg privileged ed individual lines, not that chords. In his later tried to ake those lines all “of a character if they ere to happen all by theselves, ith absolutely nothing else going on, they ould still have a good usical presence”—in other ords, not just textural te xtural ller. By striving to aintain the quality of individual lines, Wolff felt that the eerging counterpoint ould have the proper density and integrity. The lines that populate these later orks tend to be long, tisting threads of pitches, ith or ithout values attached, lines of varying lengths ith little rhythic pacing or design that connoted incept, developent, or cadence. Soeties the pitches are “all over” in register, but at other ties notably constrained (as in the exercises) by the staff, a grid that attracts notes into its abitus. These elodic lines ost often consist of running sixteenth notes divided by edge shapes for indeterinate pauses (the length of these could vary idely fro player to player). The frequent coagulacoagulations of iediately repeated pitches (or pitch repetitions in close proxiity) create sall pockets of polarity, in hich the listener sees to hear a “center” eerging—a center that quickly dissipates. This late usic soeties sees a
species of sound design: no apparent underlying structural fraeork aside fro atois, à la Webern, yet highly ornaental. Many solo pieces could convert to heterophonic enseble pieces via ritten instructions, instructio ns, for exaple, “playable for one or ore” of a given instruent; instruent ; or ith optional additional instruents alloed. As ith the exercises (a personal pers onal genre to unison becae hich hic h he he continue continued d to add fro the 1980s 1980s throug through h the the 1990s), 1990s), the unison becae the point of reference for each solo or enseble e nseble piece: feel free to diverge slightly, slightly, but alays return to synchronicity ith the other player or players. By this tie Wolf W olfff had or orked ked it ith h ever everyy sor sortt of ins instru truent ent and co cobin binati ation on of ins instru truents ents via his earlier open-instruentation scores. Hearing and taking part in perforances of those scores for any years had attuned hi to instruental techniques and idios. Still, he continually returned to his on instruent, the piano. On 16 Septeber 1979, Rzeski had ritten a letter to Wolff congratulating hi on the birth of his ne son s on (though “I couldn’t couldn’t ake out his nae,” nae,” Rzeski added, noting that Wolff’s handriting—a professorial scral—as “alost as illegible as y other’s.”) More pressing as his request: “I’ badly in need of ne piano pieces.” Rzeski, no a professor at the Royal Conservatory in Liège,
regularly toured the continent playing his on and his friends usic, including Music. After his Septeber Wolff’ W olff’ss Bread and Roses and and Braverman Music. After Sept eber letter, let ter, Wolff sent Hay Una Mujer Desapar Desaparecida ecida and Rzeski Hay Rzeski and proised to rite ore piano usic. In the eantie, Ursula Oppens (ho had coissioned coissi oned Rzeski’s Rzeski’s The People United Will Never Be Deeated ) and Russian pianist Yvar Mikhashoff both asked Wolff for ne pieces. This conuence of requests by virtuoso pianists led Wolff Wolff into a three year period period (1980 (1980–82) –82) in in hich hich he rote for alost alost nothin nothingg but piano. piano. All of these ne orks used Wolff olff’’s “notey” style and four of the—Exercises 19–20 (to pianos) and 21–22 (piano four hands)—heavily favored octave (or larger) siultaneities and to-note treolandi that evoked nineteenth-centu nineteenth-century ry parlor usic, though ithout its tonal oorings. Preiered by Oppens and Rze ski, Exercises 19 and 20 (subtitled “Haron “Haronic ic Treors” and “Acres of Clas”) ere ritten on a singl singlee grand staff for to piano pianos; s; Wolff instru instructs cts that player playerss can distribute aterial ater ial beteen pianists at ill, that is, dividing or doubling hatever they ant. Nevertheless, Wolff gives very specic instructions on the division of labor and interactions in a piece, as in this paragraph fro the perforance notes in the score to Exercise 19: On pages 5 and 6, three sections of seven measures each are marked by double bars (after which, following the double bar with a fermata over it, there is the last section). After these three sections have been played, any one or more can be repeated. The players should agree 73
christian wolff
74
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
before hand whether or not they will repeat and how many sections they will repeat (so that they can meet to play the last section); but, if repeating, re peating, each player decides independently which of two (if it was decided to repeat two) she or he will repeat or in what order (if it was decided to repeat three) (i.e. different parts par ts of different sections may be combined); and whatever section a player may repeat he or she should only play one aspect of it, the melody line(s), the gurations, or the tremolos.12
Like virtually all of Wolff’ olff’ss pieces fro this period, ones sense of usical progression derives largely fro the evolution of activity and textures fro beginning to end. Exercise 19, for exaple, begins ith an alost chorale preludelike stratication of half notes in one line and, in the other, sixteenth notes grouped in nontriadic arpeggio groups gr oups of ve, ith occasional rests. By the end, the texture has utated to an equally dense and active pair of lines increasingly laden ith treolos. The ost poerful (and probably durable) of his ne piano usic fro these years as the set he rote for Mikhashoff, a book of eleven preludes Guide ould call “quite siply aong the (1980–81), hich the American the American Record Guide ould ost unusual and fascinating piano pieces of the second half of our century.” Alost every one of the preludes is a study in a particular texture, character, or
pianistic technique. As is typical in this period of Wolff’s usic, they contain no tepo or dynaic indications (although he instructs that tepi can change within preludes). at double bars, i.e., within preludes). All of the preludes are self-contained and have specic (overlapping) starting and ending dates of coposition given as postscripts. A scheatic of the set gives a nice précis of the kinds of techniques typically juxtaposed juxtapose d in Wolff’s Wolff’s late style: 1. One or to lines on bass staff throughout, though ith generous ledger lines (the highest note = D5); no barlines and ostly continuous sixteenth notes; epty spaces can be oitted, lled ith silence, or lled ith iprovisation. 2. Intersect Intersecting ing loops of fragents that gradually disasseble disasseble;; any dyads, though ith increasing nuber of octave siultaneities; a ide range of rhythic values, fro thirty-second notes to half notes. 3. The full range of the piano explored ith continuous very disjunct eighth notes until a double bar; thereafter, thereaft er, less disjunct continual conti nual sixteenths, sixteenths , punctuated by occasional eighth- or quarter-note rests. 4. Constant cross-cutting aong types of behavior behavior,, including tepi (alternating beteen 80 and 120), soeties as close as a bar apart; “x” noteheads used to indicate noises chosen by perforers. 5. A repeatable one-syste chorale of six- and seven-note chords in free
duration, ith iprovised histled or hued elody in unison rhyth ith the chords. 6. Continual sixteent sixteenth-note h-note runs (or eighth notes in the iddle section), ostly one extree register at a tie, increasingly increasingly oving fro single notes to dyads to to-part counterpoint to treolos. 7. Mostly sixteenth notes (or sextuplets and septuplets) in to-voice counterpoint (lines occasionally occasi onally in octaves), ade sporadic by feratas and other dividiv isions interrupting the otion. 8. Rhyth stratied at the start: elody in long values in right hand ith lo eighths and sixteenths running in the left hand; after a double bar, the left hand slos don to quarters and halfs, then both hands take up ostly disjunct note-to-note counterpoint counterpoint in eighths and soe sixteenths. (The longest prelude of the set? cf. no. 10.) 9. Very short, ith brief treoloes alost constant in the right hand, the left hand ostly aintaining a constant eighth-note otion ith any dyads and trichords for a rich loer texture. 10. Fe accidentals throughout, ostly disjunct eighths (then soe quarters) in an extreely disjunct three-voice counterpoint that ust be carefully divided
beteen hands; the last syste a hoorhythic four-part chorale in eighths and quarters. (The longest of the set? cf. no. 8.) 11. Starts ith a three- and four-voice chorale (based on the tune “Acres of Clas,” hich ith ne ords had lately been used for the capaign against a nuclear poer plant being built in Plyouth, Ne Hapshire); this appears in hole notes (hole note = 30–80; not clear hether each hole note can have a different duration or if a tepo in this range ay be chosen for the passage); the chorale consists of a gradually shifting, enlarging, and contracting E b ajor pentatonic chord produced by the accuulating of the notes of the t he “Clas” tune; the rhythic chronoetry then accelerates into alost constant thirty-second notes, ith longer notes (essentially the “Clas” tune ith soe octave shifts) occasionally resonating against the, long notes cued to appear each tie the next note of the “Clas” tune appears. His nonkeyboard solo orks of this period—incl period—including uding orks for ute, contrabass, electric guitar, snare dru, and koto—tended toard the jagged, halting lines one found in the piano pieces. At the sae tie, his duos, including any ith it h pia piano, no, oft often en had the giv give-an e-and-ta d-take, ke, shi shiftin ftingg rela relatio tionsh nships ips of to to-vo -voice ice Bar Baroqu oquee usic, though ith his hyperchroatic pitch vocabulary typically tied to epigraatic series of equal-note values. Moreover, he continued hat had no seeed 75
christian wolff
76
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
necessary traits of his ensebles: in ost situations involving ultiple players, Wolff Wolff had either specic or optional contingencies for ho players ould relate to each other.. These often involved soe for of heterophony, other heterophony, the perforers playing their parts as ritten but not attepting to align or synchronize beats or attack points. In larger cobinations, fro trios to octets, ixed instruental groups abound, standard cobinations (e.g., string quartet, brass quintet) never appear, hethe he therr due to the co cois issio sionin ningg art artist istss or a con contin tinuin uingg fas fascin cinati ation on it ith h het hetero erogegeneity. Unusual trios appear (e.g., ute-percussion-cello, saxophone-electric guitardouble bass); quartets and larger groups typically feature one or to inds, one or to brass, one or to strings, soeties piano, soeties percussion. pe rcussion. Meanhile, fro 1980 to 1999, there ere only to orks for open instruentation: Exercis instruentation: Exercisee X, for seven or ore players (1993), and his next ork, Or 4 People (1994) X, for People (1994) for one to four players—and an expected duration of eight to thirty-ve inutes. Inspired by orks of Iannis Xenakis, Wolff frequently used percussion in these late-century late-cent ury orks, an instruentation atypical of his earlier years. years . In retrospect, retrospect , percussion had three obvious attractions. First, it as in a idground beteen er as xed and open instruentation: the type of play of player as deterinate, but often could orchestrate at ill (ithin loose paraeters). Second, Wolff could bypass issues
of pitch—alays vexing in this late hour of Western haronic vocabulary—and focus on rhythic counterpoint. Third, percussion brought a sense of political ilitancy into his usic. Although long given to the non-pulse-driven textures coon in late odernis, he anted no to turn to strong, decisive gestures and otives that characterized uch usic of the asses. Assertiveness, rather than passivity lled uch of the political usic he adired. Percussion helped infuse that trait into his ne orks. A distinct personal genre Wolff developed in these years is hat he calls the “peace arch,” hose nae stes fro a conventional for of antiar protest in the 1960s–70s, in hich the quasi-ilitary act of arching becae an antiilitary stateent. This genre began ith a solo ute piece (based on “Hey Ho Nobody Hoe”) coposed after he and faily ebers had arched against the buildup of nuclear ars during 1983–84. This and later peace arches featured bold declaatory gestures, gestur es, oving forard in a archlike ay ith instruents—especially percussion—obliquely suggestive of ilitary bands. Yet Wolff alays varied the paraeters of these pieces. Consider, for exaple, to of the ritten in succession succession:: Peace March 2 (ute, clarinet, cello, piano, percussion) and Peace March 3 (ute, cello, percussion). The latter obviously eploys a subset subse t of the instruents in the forer, but, typical of Wolff, subtly odies the instructions, as seen in table 2.
Comparison o Score Specifcations in Peac Peacee Marches 2 and 3 Peace March 2
Peace March 3
Tempo exible within given range
Tempo ree
Dynamics ree (to be determined by players)
Dynamics given
Pitch specifed
Pitches may be bent
Rhythm specifed (though see below); sixteenth- and thirty-second notes dominate
Given rhythms may be “bent”; no values shorter than eight-notes (grace notes excepted)
Playable on its own
Should be played with another Peace March
Other: (1) I any part is too difcult, it may be modifed (2) barlines may be construed as pauses
Other: (1) Play reely “as though getting out rom under pressure” (2) Play “angry,” i.e., “ocusing anger, in order to make it useul”
A peace arch could be a free-st free-standing anding piece, a piece contingent on another piece, or, indeed indeed.. a oveent of a larger ork, o rk, as in the Bowery Preludes (1985–86). (1985–86).
This set of ve preludes as ritten for the Boery Ensebl Enseblee in Ne York: ute, trobone, percussion, piano. They typify Wolff’s concerns and techniques fro this period as he ostensibly connects to social causes but obscures ith technique ost of the connections. Preludes 1, 3, and 5 are based on songs (see belo); the last of these preludes p reludes Wolff Wolff (in his progra notes) not es) called a peace arch. ar ch. Preludes 2 and 4, hoever, are not based on old songs but return to the open scoring of earlier pieces. Each prelude differs in character and notation fro the others. Prelude 1 unfolds in agitated block-chord fanfares alternating ith contrapuntal duos that anser each other (ute-trobone against percussion-piano). Prelude 2 ethodically coordinates to different synchronized pairs of instruents (ute-piano and trobone-percussion) trobone-percussion ) in their rhyths, registe registers-tibres, rs-tibres, and, unusually for Wolff, W olff, dynaic dynaics. s. Prelude 3, priari priarily ly a single line played heteropho heterophonicall nicallyy ad lib, is the ost iediately disjunct and expansive in register, covering ve octaves in its rst three easures. Prelude 4 provides an interlude, interl ude, a brief to-part invention for piccolo and trobone. The nal prelude is essentially a quodlibet ith added unpitched sounds and free lines ebroidering the ain tunes. The songs fro hich he derives elodies in the Bowery Preludes link link the piece to the civil rights oveent. With one exception (“Picket Line Song”),
christian wolff
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
78
Figure 9. Sketch for the third of the Bowery Preludes. Wolff Preludes. Wolff Papers. Used by
77
perission.
they have African Aerican origins or allusions: “Mary, Don’t You Weep,” “O Freedo,” “Set Don, Servant,” Se rvant,” and “Ain’t “Ain’t No Mo’ Cane in Dis Brazis.” Brazis .” As had becoe his custo, Wolff largely obscured the source tunes through esoteric ethods of transforation. Beyond that, he encrusted the results ith quasi-severe techniques fro the Middle Ages and and the Renaissanc Renaissance: e: hocket, hocket, ornaented cantus rus, and a general intereaving of lines, either stratied in soe ay (by character, norative rhythic values, register) or equal voiced. Wolff further transfors his aterial by directing the players to interact in various ays beyond the ere note-to-note note -to-note playing. Overall, the tones of the original tunes becoe seed crystals that Wolff gros (or allos to gro) in different directions direct ions fro oveent to oveent— and, siilarly, fro piece to piece. The seeds have political associations via their titles, texts, and social contexts. But the crystalline groth Wolff generates hides those associations, leaving leaving to titles and progra notes their interpretation. Wolff tended to specify dynaics less than other paraeters paraeters.. This cae partly fro his afnity ith the Baroque, particularly his on keyboard playing
of Bach and Frescobaldi. As in those cases, Wolff anted his usic not to have one xed iage that depended on a certain dynaic schee. In other ords, dynaics should be the last thing that shaped a coposition. In early keyboard usic, dynaics ere siply deterined by the instruent being used (e.g., harpsichord, organ). And in ensebles, historically hist orically,, density deterined dynaics. dy naics. The nuber of players playing deterined deterined loudness or softness. But for Wolff, the larger the enseble he chose, the less cofortable he felt leaving issues of balance to balance to the players, especially given his constant ixing of vastly different differe nt types of instruents. One solution as to deterine players’ dynaics ith respect to one another (“louder than the other players”) or to the spectru of possible dynaics (“as softly as possible”). Nevertheless, he tended to use at dynaics only only, leaving diinuendo sens e. ,But hatcrescendo to do ithoran orchestra?to the individual players’ expressive sense. Turning to the orchestra, of course, potentiall potentiallyy eant Wolff ould have to upend his earlier use of “orchestra” for any sall enseble and to return it to t o its traditional eaning, hich iplied instruental failies, hoogeneous groups of tibres or conventional doublings and tibral blends. He also needed to lean aay fro the utual cuing of his chaber groups toard soething ore decisive and autocratic, including the shaping of group dynaics through con-
tutti, that ventional sybols. sybols. One big question question ould be be that of the tutti, that unique trait large ensebles possess to overhel the listener ith the sheer ass of sound. That had been alost alost anathea to Wolff, ho relied on on spare, spare, copact gestures juxtaposed, juxta posed, ones hose relati relative ve unass unassertivene ertiveness ss spurn spurned ed stereot stereotypica ypicall oder odernis. nis. Wolff had not studied orchestrat orchestration ion and had no odels of large-scale ultitibral craft that ould guide a ne orchestral coposer. He rarely thought chordally or in long, developental oveents. oveent s. Rather, Rather, he favored independent lines superiposed in iniatures. On the other hand, fro his study ith Cage, Wolff W olff kne ell Webern’s op. 21 Syph Syphony ony.. It exepl exeplied ied spare orches orchestral tral inter inter- eaving of lines as ell as brevity, especially especially in the sall variation segents of its second oveent. Wolff olff’’s earliest orchestral pieces took tentativ tentativee steps into this ne doain. Roses) (1983) He rote the rst, Exercise rst, Exercise 23 (Bread and Roses) (1983) for a copetition. copetit ion. It didn’t 24, returned in and reains unpublished unpublished and and unperfored. unperfored. Its sequel, Exercise sequel, Exercise 24, returned to the sae folk-song source via an orchestration of his four-hand piano piece, Exercise 22 (“Bread and Roses or John”). John”). This This ork adapted the piano piece for a very sall orchestra (single inds, ith horns, trupet, trupet, piano, piano, and percussion), percussion), although the nature of the original alost deed any sense of elody or acco24 ore or less “colorizes” Exercise 22 by refraction, panient. Instead, Exercise Instead, Exercise 24 ore “colorizes” Exercise 22 by
christian wolff
80
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
splitting lines and gestures into different (though usually blended) instruental instruental hybrids of color. Wolff also had another issue to contend ith: the desynchronization of piano parts called for in the earlier ork. He attepted a fairly literal translation of the effect by, at the proper ties, having the players subdivide into to groups that ould be conducted independently, though not straying too far apart in tepo. Etceteraa In Deceber 1986 Cage traveled to Japan for the preiere of his his Etceter 2/4 Orchestras, coissioned Orchestras, coissioned by the Suntory International Progra for Music Coposition. The Suntory beer bee r copany, copany, hich had given its nae to a concert conc ert hall in Tokyo, had begun coissioning ne orchestral pieces, each of hich becae the centerpiece for a progra at the hall. That progra ould include the piece, coissioned choicecoposer of “older”ho classicalcoissioned orchestral pieces, andthe orchestral usic coposer’s by another living the coissioned coposer regarded as congenial to his ork. When coissioned, Cage chose Wolff to fulll that latter role. At the tie Wolff only had 24. So he ade a second one to the one short orchestra piece to offer, Exercise offer, Exercise 24. So a. This go ith it, titled ith the African ord Liyashisw ord Liyashiswa. This brief ork for ediusized orchestra (oodinds in pairs, but including harp and to percussionists) alternated sections of aterial siilar to his Peace Marches ith elodic lines
79
hocketed and cued fro one instruent to the next via coordination neues. By the id-1980s the Ne York School had begun to ove fro the fringes of odernis into the Western historical canon. Fro Wolff’s ftieth birthday (1984) onard, retrospective concerts and preieres of his ne orks sharply increased, ost proinently in Ne York, York, London, Gerany, Gerany, and Japan (although (althoug h ad hoc perforances of his ost indeterinate orks, particularly Edges particularly Edges,, the Prose Collection and Collection and the Exercises the Exercises ere ere harder to t o track). In 1988–89, Wolff Wolff received receiv ed four paid coissions—the ost he had received in that span of tie so far. He also began to receive frequent grants fro the Meet the Coposer organization. In 1990 a section of Burdocks appeared appeared in anthology intended for university usic classes. In 1993 and 1995, intervies ith Wolff appeared in to books of con versations ith iportant iportant living living coposers. coposers. But the Ne York School had also begun to erode after the unexpected death of Morton Feldan at the age of sixty-four in 1987 and the death ve years later of John Cage (eeks shy of his eightieth birthday). Wolff olff’’s ideas had affected Cage’ Cage’s, s, as e have seen. But Wolff olff’’s earliest music had decisively inuenced Feldan’s late usic. Though Wolff had long since abandoned his earliest pitch-restricted techniques in sall pieces, Feldan had resurrected the. Both Bunita Marcus and Orlando Jacinto Garcia recall Feld-
an in his last years speaking adiringly of Wolff’s Duo for Violins. The evidence of its inuence on Feldan is persuasive: tie and again, Feldan begins a ork ith ore than to inutes of a three- or four-pitch set, progressively varying its rhyths rhyths and tibres. tibres. For or Christian Wol In his last year, Feldan rote a four-hour duo titled titled F (1986), hich he begins ith a set of four half-step related pitches deployed aong octaves and played in short polyrhythic gestures for the ork’s rst to pages—nearly ve inutes of usic. Although Although he did not learn of the piece or Christian until after Feldan died, Wolff hiself could not iss the point of F of For Wol: “the Wol: “the connection ith e as that [it] referred back to soe of y earliest pieces, hich ere characterized by having a very sall nuber of pitches. . . . For a long tie, that’s all you get is these pitches shifting back and forth. It’s a gesture or recollection of the kind of usic that I did early on.” Wolff, in turn, rote a piece for Feldan’ Feldan’ss death, death, F For or Morty, Morty, part of a groing list of pieces pie ces naed for one or another friend, entor, or hero, ho as often connected ith politics or political usic. By the id-1990s these included F included For or Cornelius [Carde] [Carde] (quartet, 1983), Rosas 1983), Rosas [Luxeburg [Luxeburg and Parks] (duo, 1989– Emma [Goldan] 90), Emma 90), [Goldan] (trio, 1989), Ruth 1989), Ruth [Craford [Craford Seeger] Seege r] (duo, 1991), Malvina 1991), Malvina For or Si [Kahn] Peggy [Reynolds] (solo, 1989; then duo, 1992), F [Kahn] (quintet, 1992), Peggy or [Seeger] (solo or duo, 1993), and Merce and Merce [Cunningha] [Cunningha] (1–9 players, 1993). F 1993). For
Morty used three instruents that evoked Feldan’s Morty used Feldan’s often delicate ringing chords: vibraphone, glockenspiel, glockenspiel, and piano. Through uch of the piece, the resonant ultiovertoned tibres cobined ith echanistic rhyths to create a usic box texture, texture , though often a usic box as if designed designe d by Webern. Webern. The piece opens ith unch uncharac aracteristi teristically cally pand pandiaton iatonic ic (i.e., “hi “hite-key” te-key”)) count counterpoin erpoint, t, alo alost st neoRenaissance in its siplicity. Accidentals gradually increase, unleashing the texture fro odality. The usic thins and fades, succeeded by a section consisting of strongly asserted siultaneities (ostly trichords and tetrachords), the ulticolored but siple-rhythed s iple-rhythed kind that abounded abo unded in Webern’ Webern’ss usic. A brief, alost indifferent, solo line eerges, and then the piece ore or less reprises the earlier aterial. The piece ends ith a run of sixteenth notes over a chord of silently eldman (F, depressed piano keys spelling the usical letters in F in Feldman (F, E, D, A). Wolff had anted to ake a piece for Cage’ Cage’ss eightiet eightieth h birthday in 1992. He had copleted only about half ha lf of it hen Cage died. Then, in 1996, an orchestral coission fro the Donaueschingen Donaues chingen Festival Festiv al revived the piece in Wolff Wolff’’s ind. But on 13 August 1996, four years and one day after Cage, David Tudor died. In copleting the ork during the next to years, Wolff ade it into a cobined eorial titled John, titled John, David.
christian wolff
82
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
It had been preceded a year earlier by a kind of orchestral stepping-stone,
Spring. In February 1995 the Ne Hapshire Syphony Orchestra (a young Spring. In rival to the old Ne Hapshire Philharonic) had offered Wolff to hundred dollars to rite the a ne ork. Paid coissions still being a luxury, Wolff Spring, an coplied ith Spring, an eighteen-inute, three-oveent piece for Beetho venian orchestra (oodinds (oodinds in pairs, sall sall string sections) but ith three percussionists. It exeplied Wolff’s reuse of aterials, not just in its derivation of gestures fro old elodies, but in its holesale contrafacture (as in the Baroque): Baroque ): the rst oveent essentially orchestrates the third of Wolff’s Black Song Organ Preludes of of nine years earlier. The second oveent is a collage of fragents, soe intact, others revaped via ell-established late-period techniques. As usual, the brevity of gestures gest ures bespeaks not so uch pointillis pointill is as ellipticality, as though continuities, continuitie s, extensions of ideas, and transitions beteen the had been oitted, oitted , bypassed, or excised. It seeed at ties alost a kind of sloganeering—or picketsignage—turned into usic. Only the third oveent delves into int o the contingent perforance practice practi ce of the 1970s, ith ultiple chaber groups superiposed, super iposed, players playing independently inde pendently or interdependently. inte rdependently. The autocracy of the conductor-tutti surrenders surre nders to the ore progressive prog ressive (and no coon) Wolfan Wolfan odel: deployent of “chaber usics coexisting.” John, David each The to parts of the eightier eightier John, each refer to its respective dedi-
81
catee and each use different ethods. The “John” part originally as to have eighty “songs” in it, each containing fro one to t o eighty notes, not es, respectively respective ly.. Their order, procedure (onophonic, (onopho nic, heterophonic, or hocketed), and even superposisuperposi tion ould then be deterined by chance—one of the fe ties in his later ork that Wolff used chance procedures, an overt hoage to Cage on his birthday. Every set of ten songs ould also have its on particular particu lar traits (1–9 = loud; 10–19 = short durations; and so forth). Before Cage’s death Wolff had copleted only thirty of these songs, of hich sixteen ere superiposed on other songs. Meanhile, the “David” part connected to Tudor ore obliquely. When Wolff had told his percussionist friend Robyn Schulkosky about this coission, she urged hi to be careful of the orchestra, questioning their ability to handle his kind of scoring. “Probably your yo ur safest bet,” Wolff recalls her saying, saying , “is to rite r ite a concerto, becau because se then you ill be assured that at least the soloist has prepared their aterial beforehand.” So he devised an elaborate solo part for percussion for her. He conceived of it ith the virtuosity vir tuosity of David Tudor Tudor in ind. The “David” John, David has of John, of has four distinct sections, the rst three of hich consist of short, scherzolikee episodes. The rst derives fro the edieval scherzolik ediev al English song “Westryn “Westryn Wind”; Wi nd”; the second uses (in the chord chordal al passa passages ges of inds and brass brass)) several shape-
note hyns; the third spins its lines fro the Depression-era song “Hallelujah, “Hallelujah, I’ a Bu.” Throughout these sections, as is typical of Wolff’s orchestral usic, the orchestra is treated in a pieceeal ay. But in the fourth section, everybody takes up an uncharacteristic (for Wolff) tutti of sustained sounds, producing a kind of ailing that one ay hear as the foral laent of this eorial piece. This last section uses a uniquely Wolfan version of recapitulation: he returns to a certain point in the piece, then collects pitches (not pitch classes, but pitches in their specic register), and begins playing the all again siultaneously: all E ats, for exaple, in their original durations, all Ds in their original durations, C sharps, Cs, and so on. Such a recapitulation begins extreely thickly, of course, but gradually thins as the different quantities and durations of pitches are used up. In this case, the end coes hen only three pitches reain. Fro so rigorous an additive procedure these long-held notes in all registers coe across as a assive, but plaintive, ail of grief. Moents such as this—hoever Apollonian the systeatic eans that generated the—differ so uch fro hat surrounds the that there sees to be, for the rst tie in Wolff’ Wolff’ss usic, a roantic sensibility sensibility.. But as draatic as the effect ight be, Wolff insists that his original intent as ore surprise surprise than draa. He surrenders the piece, in a ay, ay, to a echaniechanical procedure as part of his personal resistance to anything that sees like illful rhetoric, a convention that bothers hi in ost usic since Beethoven: “It
strikes e as rather overblon or popous. It has a certain kind of holloness to it. If it’s really ell done it can be very poerful and oving, but it needs to have soe kind of ystery about it—here it’s coing fro and ho it’s acting. And that’s that’s hat I try to do. do.”” John, David at As for the perforanc perforancee of of John, at Donaueschingen, Wolff described it in ters one often hears aong conteporary coposers: the orchestra as underrehearsed, the players indifferent, and the rendition “passable, but not a very happy experience. experience.”” The year 1996, Wolff olff’’s tenty-fth at Dartouth, began ith a university syposiu and usic usi c festival in i n his honor, titled “Christian Wolff: Wolff: The Coposer and the Classicist”: concerts, lectures, panel discussions, and even a booklet ith a ne retrospective essay by Wolff (“Sketch of a Stateent”), a list of orks, a discography, cography brief collation of stateents byedand about t he the coposer-classicist. The title ,ofand theaevent uncharac unch aracterist teristical ically ly treat treated both prongs pron gs of his care career er equa equally lly.. One panel discussion featured his colleagues in classics speaking of his contributions as a teacher te acher and Greek scholar, particularly particularly of the plays of Euripides. Pressed to identify the link beteen his Greek scholarship and adventurous usic, Wolff balked. They ere utterly separate. But as there a connection ith the politics
christian wolff
84
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
that fueled his ore recent usic? One of his colleagues thought Wolff sa in
Euripides a protofeinis that resonated ith Wolff’s on. Wolff hiself, of course, in his rst year at Dartouth, had used Plato to connect politics to ne usic. Only years later ould he nd a deeper connection: “Grappling ith that past, those tragic texts and their possible theatrical realization, real ization, in their difference, recalcitrance, and opaqueness, akes for a sense of openness and possibility.” Even so, one could be forgiven for not recognizing the Cageian experientalist in Wolff’ W olff’ss 1996– 1996–97 97 facu faculty lty produ productivi ctivity ty repor report, t, in hic hich h his goal goalss inclu included ded “On “Ongoing going research on the social, political and legal history of Athens in the latter part of the fth century BCE ith a vie to a book length study hich ould contextualize as fully as possible the draatic treatent of the yth of Orestes’ and Electra’s revenge (on their other and her lover for their father’s death) in Sophocles’ Electra, Electr a, ith ith additional literary contextualization in the surviving body of Attic tragedy (notably Aeschylus’ and Euripides’ versions of this ythic aterial).” The year closed ith the announceent that Wolff had on the third biennial $50,000 John Cage Aard given by the Foundation for Conteporary Perforance Arts. He folloed in a line of recipients clearly tied to Cage: the rst, Tudor, T udor, and the t he second, Takahisa Takahisa Kosugi, ho since 1977 had been a resident coposer-perforer ith Cunningha’s dance troupe (the next recipient after Wolff W olff ould be Earle Bron). Asked hat he ould do ith this sudden indfa indfall, ll,
83
Wolff rearked, Wolff rearked, I ve got to kids kids on the ay to college. Need I say ore? ore? In 1998, MusikT MusikTexte exte published the rst collection of Wolff olff’’s ritings, a hefty softbound bilingual book ith Geran on the left and English on the right. Though Wolff Wolff deeed any contenders for inclusion “uniportan “uniportant” t” and “not Cues, gathered necessary” for such a book, the nal collation, Cues, gathered together thirty-eight articles and intervies about his on and others’ ork (though only one essay fro his ork as classicist), fty-six progra notes, his verbal scores (ainly the Collection), a preface by Rzeski, and a ork list that ended ith Pulse, Pulse, entire Prose Collection), the trupet and piano duo that folloed John, folloed John, David. Copositionally,, Wolff seeed to reach a ne level of consolidation and Copositionally reneent in Pebbles (1999), (1999), a duo for violin and piano ritten alost forty years y ears after Wolff Wolff’’s previous duo d uo for those instruents. ins truents. The title as an acknoledgent acknol edgent that this is another collection of iniatures—though this tie in hoage to frequent iniaturist György Kurtág, ho Wolff Wolff had coe to kno and adire in the 1990s, calling hi “that ost poetic of coposers.” Wolff found the instruentation infelicitous, though. As he as riting the piece, he rote to Rzeski that he as “going crazy trying to rite for piano and violin!” But ve days after that coplaint, it as nished, though “hether or not it’ll ork I’ve no idea. idea.””
His strategy: an extree paring don of aterials. The piece presents an
elaborate dialogue-narrative dialogue-narrative in hich the listener proceeds through tenty-four tableaus, ranging roughly fro fteen seconds to four inutes in putative clock tie. Throughout the piece, the to instruents, as if speakers in a long, deepening conversation, continually restructure their relationship. For exaple, the piece begins ith a kind of introduction in hich each instruent sees to stake out for itself a distinct anner: the piano a orid solo bass line, the violin a brief pizzicato declaation. They then play in tande, the piano in running sixteenth notes, the violin against agains t it in boed dotted d otted eighths. eight hs. Soon, in the piano’s piano’s only to voice utterance, the keyboard assues both roles, after after hich the violin plays a long disjunct rhapsodic line above burbling groups of bass-clef sixteenths in the piano. In the sections that follo, e nd long responsorial passages ith piano and violin closely iitating each other in narro-ranged stuttering eighth notes (and later in the piece, sixteenth notes); both instruents playing terse gures in siilar otion; long soliloquies by the violin (rst a prosaic arco, then, just before the ork’s nal section, a chattering page of pizzicato); occasional short onologues onologu es by the piano; and so forth. Given the alost skeletal leanness of the lines and interactions beteen bet een the, after the rst four sections of the piece each subsequent one sees a transforation of one (or ore) that preceded it. The spacious constellationlike closing page sees, paradoxically, both a culination and a coda: by resebling none of the previous sections in gesture or texture, it
sees an arrival at a ne plateau and, at the sae tie, a digressive afterthought. Pebbles, his By the tie Wolff rote Pebbles, his virtuoso usic of the previous to decades had been perfored throughout Europe, Asia, and North Aerica. In the 1990s alone he had ritten thirty-seven thirty-s even ne orks, alost all of hich Peters had quickly put into print. Digital technology no alloed for inexpensive audio reproduction and, via copact discs, idespread diffusion of ne usic and nearglobal aareness of even the Ne York School’s ost adventurous usic. Thus, in the 1990s, 1990 s, fourteen different diffe rent labels labe ls issued Wolff Wolff recordings, recordi ngs, including Wergo, Wergo, Vox, V ox, EMI, and the ne labels HatArt and Mode, both of hich specialized in recordings of avant-garde and experiental orks. But the surprising coda to all this activity cae ith Wolff’s crossover into rock. Century, In 1999, the alternati alternative ve rock band Sonic Youth recorded Goodbye 20th Century, an albu of experiental “classical” pieces that as conceived and coproduced by ne usic usi c percussion percussi on virtuoso virtuos o Willia (Willie) Winant Winant and included i ncluded Wolff Wolff’’s Edges and Burdocks. Those and a oveent fro Burdocks. Those open scores ould allo the group (augented by Winant, Takehisa Takehisa Kosugi, Christian Chris tian Marclay Mar clay,, and Wolff Wolff hiself) his elf) to ork the pieces up in the studio, as rock groups typically did ith their on
christian wolff
86
| Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999
usic. Recording, of course, had alays transgressed the intended variability of indeterinate scores, xin xing g one version into takes an iplicitly rendition of an “open” ork. At the sae tie, ultiple and tapeauthentic splicing had alloed players and even coposers to construct an articial, sei-idealized recorded perforance fro a variety of actual in-studio perforances. While not accustoed to playing Wolff Wolff scores, score s, Sonic Youth Youth could provide soe s oe of the best iking, editing, and astering Wolff had encountered. Although the albu as hardly a ass-arket success, it becae soething of a cult favorite as Sonic Youth (and Winant) toured estern Europe playing Century. This set a ne standard for the the strange repertoire of Goodbye 20th Century. This adjective “alternative” in alternative rock. And suddenly Christian Wolff (as ith Varèse V arèse hen prooted prooted by Frank Frank Zappa in the 1960s) becae becae a inor inor rock star, star, ith fresh nae recognition aong the college crod of his children’s children’s generation—hile at the sae tie his on generation reained ostly indifferent to this usic that Rzeski had aptly said revealed “life’s unpredictability.”
85
7
Among Friends, in a Private World
on 2 july 2002, earl e brown died. That event eve nt left Wolff
in a ne role: he as no the last surviving eber of the so-called Ne York
School of coposers. For any that ade hi the last abassador for a latter-day tradition that Cage had constructed and hose rst generation as no about to conclude. Four decades earlier earlie r Wolff Wolff had foreshadoed the t he creative box in hich he ight no nd hiself: in his dissertation he explains that he ould sho “the various expressions expressions of the notion of of survival, its raications raications and conditions, conditions, in [Euripides’] later plays.” “Private survival, surv ival,”” he notes, “conicts ith efforts to save a counity,” counity,” that group that provides pr ovides “a sense of o f order” to living. living . But aid this dialectic, Euripides suggests, life is still “a for of exile hich is resolved only aong friends, in a private orld.” For Wolff, surviving his Ne York School colleagues—or, ore to the point, soe of his closest friends—had its professional detrients. He ight be pegged as a erely recherché artist, artist, a relic of an outoded era. Consider the underlying or 1, 2, or bias in revies such as this fro the New the New York Times in in 2008: Wolff’s F Wolff’s For 3 People People as as “a static hodgepodge of iscellaneous avant-gardiss avant-gardiss [that] felt like listening to the party bore ho entertains only hiself.” The groing disissal of experiental coposers such as Wolff Wolff partly reected re ected the press’ press’ss aning attenatten tion to “classical” usic itself, as ell as the gradual overheling of odernis oderni s
christian wolff
88
| Among Friends, in a Private World
by neoroanticis, postodernis, and, generally gener ally,, greater “listener friendliness” than, even in his ore deterinate and less overtly political usic, Wolff could offer. At the sae tie, the bad press ay have reected the soeties cavalier perforances of Wolff’s earlier usic. He had said in 1993 that “I a not . . . unduly anxious about the specic identity of any given piece, though soe eleent of recognition, especially if cobined ith eleents of surprise, is usually a pleasure.” Since soe of those orks had no entered the ne-usic canon, ore and ore players ho Wolff didn’t kno played the pieces under ciror 1, 2, 2, or 3 People People perforance custances he couldn’t oversee (the case in the F the For perforance critiqued above), leading to interpretations far looser than the scores’ instructions required. This proble had begun at least as early as 1974, ith the Julius Eastan–led perforance of Burdocks in in Carnegie Hall, hose slapstick histrionics and sonic “tiddles and taddles” provoked sustained chuckling fro the audience for fteen inutes. On the other hand, survival offered its laurels. In 2005 he as inducted into the Aerican Acadey of Arts and Sciences. Ne recordings kept appearing, one Wire agazine of hich Wire agazine noted on its list of the fty best albus of 2006. W Wolf olfff ’s ne alost patriarchal status got hi ore attention than hen his Ne York School colleagues thrived and he still orked as a professor. His “last-survivingeber” status headlined his billing at various events, for hich he received an increasing nuber of invitations. Intervies and retrospective articles pro-
87
liferated as he becae the archivist and even archaeologist of not only his on, personal, history but that of U.S. experiental usic. Meanhile, as a bona de elder statesan of the avant garde, he could guest lecture fro the ost eclectic usical sources he ished. Consider his reading list for the Soe Music Issues class during his 2006 visiting professorship at the California Institute of the Arts: four books by Arthur C. Danto, to books apiece by Theodor Adorno and Alain Badiou, one each by John Ashbery, T. J. Clark, Nicholas Cook, Carl Dahlhaus, John Deey, Deey, George Leonard, Leonard, Meyer Shapiro, Shapiro, “anything “anything by John Cage,” Cage,” and a recent collection of essays on, yes, the Ne York School. He also received ore requests and coissions for ne orks. The rst decade of the tenty-rst century turned out to be the ost prolic of Wolff’s career: fro 2000 though 2010 he rote alost sixty ne orks—nearly half the nuber he had ritten during the previous prev ious forty years. Finding ore tie to copose, he consistently orked on one piece hile planning or entally outlining to or three ore. But though he as unquestionably an American an American experiental experientalist, Wolff Wolff had alost alays found ore receptive audiences abroad. He routinely traveled long distances to preieres, the large ajority of the in Europe.
Wolff the orld traveler seeed the coplete alter ego of the Wolff of does tic private life. Each suer, one could nd hi helping bring in the hay and doing other chores on the Royalton far (both of Holly’s parents having passed aay, she no anaged the far). An avid faily an, he had alays helped the children ith hoeork (especially in foreign languages), even through their college years. years . Aid paying bills, gardening, and cooking, he had gone ith Holly and their four children to countless theater, dance, and usical perforances, including, to the kids’ occasional chagrin, those sparsely attended, puzzling ne usic concerts ith Christian’s on usic on the progra. The children noted his broad curiosity about sound in everything fro testing the tone quality of car parts to expounding on usical craft in sho tunes by Richard Rodgers. He freely voiced to his children his vies on current current events but kept uch of his poleicis to hiself—though, according to daughter Tasen, “bad political nes is one of the fe things that can ake hi visibly upset.” His fatherly inuence on all four children as, by all accounts, kindly but deep. Tristra explains that he learned fro both parents the value of “the good ork, the good ght [and] being part of a tradition, or being a nexus of any traditions, hose coon thread is change.” The orchestral pieces Wolff rote in the opening decade of the tenty-r tenty-rst st century aply display the ultiplicity and diversity, coplication and juxtaposition of techniques and structures that ere no second nature. The provocateur of these large-scale orks as the Czech-born coposer and conductor Petr
Kotik, hodecades. had knon and chapioned the usic of Ne York School co Nine in posers for Although he had preiered Wolff’s Wolff’s Nine in 1963 in Prague, he had a particular fondness for the “interactive” scores of Wolff ever since he hiself had played at the Burdocks Festival in 1972. The director of the S.E.M. Enseble in Ne York since 1970, he also began the Ostrava Days Festivals in the Czech Republic in 2001. Held in odd-nubered years, they have featured Wolff W olff as guest coposer and lecturer each tie. As of this t his riting, Wolff Wolff has ritten four orchestral orchestral (or ultiorchestra ultiorchestral) l) pieces for Kotik. Gruppen For an event in 1999, Kotik had decided to progra Stockhausen’s Gruppen for three orchestras, augented his regular Czech orchestra in order to perfor it, and booked perforances in Prague and Berlin. Since he had the setup for Gruppen is three orchestras—including orchestras—including three conductors and three stages—and Gruppen is only around tenty inutes long, he asked Wolff and Alvin Lucier to copose ne three-orchestra pieces. Suddenly assive instruental forces becae available to Wolff. But, investing the tie required for such a ork, Wolff anted to copose one that ould have a life beyond its preiere. (He also anted it not
christian wolff
90
| Among Friends, in a Private World
David.) Returning to the spirit of Burdocks, Burdocks, Wolff to reseble John, reseble John, David.) Wolff coposed Ordinary Matter, a Matter, a ork hose title celebrated the sall percentage of cosic aterial perceptible via the huan senses. This piece has, he said, “hardly any score at all.” all .” Only one section as scored for all players, the other fourteen scored for subsets of the orchestra, or available to any players. Soe sections he called parasitic, in in that each requires another section to be played ith it. Gruppen’s To enhance clarity, Wolff reduces the nuber of players fro Gruppen ’s 109 to 80, cutting the nuber of percussionis percussionists ts in half and oitting cellos altogether Passion perforance ithout cellos he had recently heard). (based on a St. Matthew Passion perforance He then akes the orchestras a ell of possible textures. The counterpoint results ainly fro loose, indeterinate parts, yielding juxtapositions or superpositions of tangled sound asses. asse s. Yet even ith its it s ultiple ensebles, ense bles, hich ould typically provoke extree polyphony, Ordinary Matter contains contains any passages here the usic nds rhythic and textural niches in hich to linger for longer stretches than in any of his other orks. There are fteen sections, hich in soe cases overlap and span a spectru fro all three orchestras playing siultaneously to a transparent duo for harps. On one hand, a selection of players (up to the hole orchestra) ay ake very long sustained quiet sounds. On the other hand, all three orchestras ay have very exact rhythic procedures to follo, but the pitches reain unspecied (other than by a line to sho relative height). Players ust observe only the elodic contour. One section has a short stretch of solo aterial for everybody in the
89
orchestras: eighty lines of aterial ith theline instruction that each player ust play his or her tentyorsolo tenty-ve-second anyhere ithin the allotted three inutes. Wolff expects each instruentalist to execute that task ith keen alertness to the hole: “If they have a little bit of a conscience they ill try not to destroy soething that’s going on quietly, or try to play quietly ith it . . . the ay you ould ould in iprovisation. iprovisation.”” Various types of controls dearcate the sections. The rst section, extrapolated fro a solo-line solo-l ine piece he had ritten rit ten for Alvin Lucier’s Lucier’s seventieth seventi eth birthday, has elodic aterial adding up to seventy notes. The hole orchestra reads the aterial in the instruents’ on clefs and transpositions. This yields a variety of canonic transpositions and thus haronic density, richly deployed over the span of three orchestras on the stage—ith trupet 1, for exaple, being dozens of yards aay aay fro fro trupet trupet 3. 3. Rhyths tend to be free, ith soe soe note values preprescribed, but relative tepi left open; durations of breaths soeties constrain the length of phrases; the techniques of coposing these lines derive fro coon Wolfan W olfan schees (especially the loops-on-a-grid concept). concept). The The second section
presents a variation on the rst (again ith seventy notes); a later section, hich opens ith the elody of a Shaker hyn, is scored for violins alone; to sections consist of prose instructions only; another section consists of four chords, each ith fteen notes, played by thirteen instruents (strings play double stops); and so forth. The hole piece, hoever, is odular: the conductor ay use as uch or as little of the collection as he or she ants. With the unlikelihood of arshaling three orchestras for ore than this one occasion, Wolff anted to minimum ensure that soe portions of the ork could survive beyond it. Thus, a minimum perforance could, in fact, be just the harp duet. Each of the sections reains relatively consistent, yielding a ore or less self-contain self-contained ed piece. The folloing year Kotik invited Wolff to rite a saller ork for his S.E.M. chaber orchestra orchest ra in Ne Ne York. York. For this, this , Wolff returned retu rned to his peace arch genre, hich as no an alost reexive act of his usical personality—esp personality—especially ecially ith 8, said the backdrop of the second Aerican ar in Iraq. The title Peace March 8, said Wolff, W olff, refers to “the better choice, choice, hich ust ust be declared declared (‘March’). (‘March’). And especially hen the other ot her choice is about acquiring (yet ore) poer, because of, say, oil, hich is despicable, at assive cost, not least of huan life, not to ention huanity.” The ork unfolds as a kind of concerto grosso, a gallery of quasibravado oents replete ith assertive repeated-note fragents, soe dran fro peace songs. Within an eclectic pitch vocabulary vocabul ary,, it echoes vernacular bands (even fe and dru corps), cor ps), anthes, and chorales via sall ensebles, ensebl es, duos, even solo passages. The last section presents a variation on Hanns Eisler’s four-part
round, Song for Peace, ending ith a long oboe duo—this occurred to Wolff at the last inute, he said. Soeho, the piece needed a severe stripping don after tenty inutes of so uch activity—especially the dense Eislerian round and the orid solo sections, said Wolff, hich ade the nal duo “a nice, contrasting (siplifying, clarifying) conclusion.” It as “a bit like a nal chorale.” The coposer and the conductor sparred, though, on atters of notational deterinacy. Wolff anted the open procedures left ore spontaneous; Kotik, as conductor, anted ore planning and up-front decisions. “The ‘culture’ of a standard orchestra or chestra doesn’t sit ell el l ith contingency, contingency,”” Wolff rote. rote . “It’s “It’s all about hierarchical control.” That tension lingered into 2005, hen Wolff produced his ost iposing one-orchestra ork yet ith the hypergeneric title Orchestra: Pieces. It is another suite of sall oveents (ve), each characterized by its Pieces. It on texture (or textures): the rst opening ith free-oating inds and strings (feratas over every note); the second ith fast, loud, terse fanfaring folloed by large juxtaposed blocks of sonority; the third, a violin solo ith sparse chaber accopanient; the fourth, ostly aphoristic calls and responses, including
christian wolff
92
| Among Friends, in a Private World
soe of his densest ultioctave doubling doubling yet; and the fth sloly evolving into another Tallis-inuenced sound ass. Rhapsody for In 2009 2009’’s Rhapsody for three chaber orchestras, orchestras, the title anifests itself in the ood sings of its bold juxtapositions rather than in the sustained lyricis the title ight iply. What ost stands out in the ork, though, is Wolff’s ultiate tutti: ore than thirty easures (189–221) in hich all three orchestras play a single, ostly conjunct, treble line in unison. This passage—one of any here ultiple doublings thicken an abling line via roantic-style blended tibres— appears quite suddenly in the idst of his typical patchork quilt of textures and oods. And for the rst tie in his ork, a long solo line arguably becoes the draatic center of the piece. What is least accessible about these four orchestral orks is their angularity of line and elliptical phrasing. What is ost accessible is their iniaturist sectionalis, reiniscent of, say, the second oveent of Webern’s op. 21. In any case, they have ade ore inroads into orchestral prograing in Europe than in the United States, constrained as the latter is by conservatis and a preference for ashy, coloristi coloristicc textures or overtly ov ertly neoroantic neoro antic thees. Wolff Wolff’’s relative ausa usterity in these orks refutes the current trends in his on (adopted) hoeland. Music historians often gravitate toard large-ensebl large-enseblee pieces, as if size of forces constituted usical eight. But one cannot overlook Wolff’s tenty-rstcentury orks for saller groups, gro ups, even solos. He frequently returns, for exaple, to the piano. After a nuber of shorter pieces or collections of iniatures in the early 2000s, 2000s , Wolff received receiv ed in 2004 a coission to rite rit e a piece of approxiately approxiat ely
91
an hour in duration, but not using ultiple oveents. Wolff, hoever, did not United. ant to craft a set of variati variations, ons, even one as eclecti eclecticc as Rzesk Rzeski’ i’ss The People United. So in Long in Long Piano, Wolff Piano, Wolff constructed hat ill probably be his largest solo piano piece, a virtuoso anthology of ninety-ve fragentary sections, ost of hich see to echo (or even quote) a portion of soe earlier piano piece of his. More a copendiu than a quilt, this ork is perhaps the closest thing e have to an encyclopedia of late-Wolff habits and predilections: long, widely spaced compound solo lines two-voice counterpoint in synchronized equal note values (usually eighth notes) stuttering repeated-note lines hocketed lines spread across registers rhythmically stratied two-voice counterpoint (i.e., longer notes against shorter notes) block chords in syncopated quasi-chorales restricted-pitch segments (e.g., no. 27) that closely resemble his earliest works
Such textures and arrays unfold ostly in conventional notation notation (though often ith edges for indeterinate rests, as had becoe Wolff’ olff’ss custo). The ain breach ith conventional notation is the ork’s opening, hich begins ith a set of neues for ngers, not keys. (This as tagged on as a kind of prelude after he had ritten the rest and found that the piece as still too short in clock tie.) The sections favor hyperchroatic pitch vocabulary, vocabulary, though interspersed ith alternative pitch collections—even diatonic ones (e.g., the hite-key section, no. 31). While the coposition and ordering of the segents as ainly intuitive, in at least one area of the piece he used an 11×11 agic square to set up the proportions and durations of eleven sections of the piece. Whatever the ethods, the effect is grandly prisatic: one detects faint echoes of Rzeski’s textural and United, the “all-over” jaggedness of Stockidioatic encyclopedis in The People United, the e, the hausen’s Klavierstücke, hausen’s Klavierstück the broad canvases of late Feldan, and eeting allusions to Schoenberg, Schoenbe rg, Ives, Glass, and, of course, cours e, Wolff Wolff’’s on teenage te enage usic. us ic. Rzeski’s Rzeski’s response to the piece as siple: “right up y alley.” If his orchestra orks aspire to the tutti and piano orks to the solo virtuosic, Wolff’ W olff’ss chaber orks—of hich dozens ore appeared in this decade, soe again for open instruentation—usually instruentation—usually return to hat listeners and players kno best about his ork: a hyperconscious reactivity aong perforers propted by his notations and instructions. The original set of fourteen exercises (1974) had initiated a ne strategy of chaber usic upon hich subsequent subsequent exercises expanded. The set of tenty-to Microexercises tenty-to Microexercises (2006) (2006) distills dist ills Wolff Wolff’’s ethods of coaxing usic fro avid perforers.
Generally, no ore than one hundred sounds ere to be ade ithin each icroexercise. The ost coon notational layouts are onophonic (solo) lines line s or to-voice counterpoint. The ost coon variables are tepo, dynaics, order of events, and nuber of players, ith open clefs and octave doublings or transpositions left to the players. A fe icroexercises, though, stand out: one a slo elody ith percussion accopanient; a four-part round; a to-voice hocket; and four that uses the tie notations he had not used for ore than forty years. The copositional copositional ethods he used for these distilled pieces include ethodical transposition of pitches in folk elodies, partial rhythic iitation, recycling and perutation of notes in previous pieces in the set, general reorking of previous pieces in the set, and systeatic gestural reordering: reordering : that is, taking a series of terse gestures, nubering the (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) and then recasting the t he both ends en ds against the t he iddle (1, (1 , 9, 2, 8, 3, 7, 4, 6, 5), possibly ith it h soe free reordering (he calls these pattern breaks) along the ay (e.g., 1, 9, 2, 93
christian wolff
94
| Among Friends, in a Private World
8, 3, 7, 5, 4, 6). Except for soe genuinely free intuitive counterpoint here and there, Wolff usually uses soe sort of calculative process to arrive at his choices or constraints, even if he later forgets hat they ere. That alloance of forgetting, indeed, he values as a ay of not feeling bound by attepts to avoid selfrepetition: not knoing if you’ve already used a ethod allos it to see fresh in your ind each tie. After all these years, has a distinctive Christian Wolff “voice” eerged? English critics soeties speak of “thubprints,” “thubprints,” as in, “so and so’s so’s thubprint is evident in this or that ork.” A thubprint is the kind of expressive presence that iediately identies say, Shostakovich, or Stravinsky, or Ives, or others. Wolff happily recalls that David Behran said to things about Wolff’ Wolff’ss usic: it as honest and and y. What it as unn as unny. What accounts for f or the “honesty, “hones ty,”” Wolff believes bel ieves,, is a lack of pretens pr etense. e. The usic is unassuing, unassuing, even unipressive. unipressive. It contains contains little obvious rhetoric, rhetoric, lacks the “in-your-face” assertiveness that characterizes odernis. Wolff Wolff puts it bluntly: “I notice that hen I go to a concert and y usic is there ith soebody else’s, I think, ‘Boy, look at that piece. It akes y usic look as if I don’t kno hatt I’ doi ha doing, ng, or that I coul could d use so soee co coposi position tion lesso lessons ns or so soethi ething. ng.’’ I don don’’t ind that at all, but it is quite striking, in soe cases the contrast beteen very elegantly constructed pieces full of ash and color [hile] ine sees very drab.” As for the “fun “funny” ny” aspec aspect: t: “I on’ on’tt set set out out to be funny funny,, but if soeth soething ing coes out huorous I’ quite pleased ith that; I’ll let that be. And in soe ays it’s a ne quirky, I line. It’s peculiar—or quirky, I guess, is a good ord for it.” Certainly Wolff olff’’s orks ake one-ay trips. He avoids projectin projectingg reinis-
cences or recurrences for their on sake. For Wolff, progressive usic needs to reject recapitulation recapit ulation and, indeed, any sense of “arch” “arch” in the trajectory of the for. (Bartók’s arch fors, he rearked, seeed to “run against the grain of usic hich oves through tie.”) tie.”) Although Wolff’s classic (i.e., best-knon) ork relies on concept, perforance practice, or political essaging, the large-scale late orks depend ore and ore on montage, montage, the the aesthetic friction of juxtaposing sall contrasting oveents. By the tenty-rst century it becae clear that Wolff’ W olff’ss long pieces ould be osaics, profuse suites of shorter oveents, often iniatures, played ithout interruption. Still, in the latest orks, Wolff sees to ork intuitiv intuitively ely toard and achieve soe sort of organicis, hoever tenuous. It is true that, in soe ays, organic consistency pereated even the earliest orks. In those orks, by severely liiting pitch, no atter hat presued discontinuity he injected into the ordering orde ring of sections, the result seeed highly coherent. By paring don his aterials he could stay condent that sense ould eerge. “I approach pieceeal aterial ith the
greatest attention, guring that, if it’s as ell ade as I can ake it, each bit for itself (and using usually individual systeic procedures), the stitching together of these bits ill soeho add up.” Despite his habitual copositio copositional nal routines and their prolic results since 2000, Wolff Wolff says he has yet to nd his “groove”: “groove ”: “I adired the late Feldan F eldan and Cage because it looked, fro the outside, like they got into these grooves here they just turned out asses of usic. I haven’t been able to do that yet, so every piece is a struggle. The pieces do see to keep coing, you kno, three, four, or ve a year. But it’s still hard ork.” The restlessness inside soe of his pieces is irrored in the restlessness beteen pieces. “It’s this hope that I ill think of soething ne to do. . . . I usually don’t, but just having that as a possibility” propels hi forard. The evolution of Wolff’s style has irrored that of style periods, generally: to paraphrase Dahlhaus’ Dahlhaus’ss forulation, one nds ore extree stylization at the front end, ore eclecticis at the back end. Perhaps unsurprisingly, in his later years Wolff has taken ore and ore endings. While interest in endings. While sections of a ork often end unresolved, the hole ork ust have in Wolff’ Wolff’ss vie a decisive ending beyond the ere cessation of sound. “What coes out (hat turns out to be) the end of a piece gets (fro the listener, as ell as coposer and perforers) pe rforers) a particular kind of attention, att ention, siply by virtue of being at the t he end, the last thing you hear/do hear/ do at that point.” One sees that ipulse in the striking endings of ost of the orchestral pieces or of Long Piano, ith Piano, ith its brief nal quotation of a traditional round (“Dona Nobis Pace”). Nevertheless, to end a piece is not to dee it nished. Wolff often recalls Cage’s
teaching hi that no piece is coplete until it has been perfored. In aking ne usical objects, one ay accuulate piles of sketchbooks and scores. But they still require playing to “exist” fully as pieces as pieces o music. ludens, “Man the player, Wolff ay be the exeplary homo ludens, “Man play er,”” as Johan Huizinga Huiz inga labels our species, s pecies, play being its i ts object and design. As a young an, Wolff Wolff recalls, “I asn’’t reall asn reallyy into books books.. I as a jock. jock.”” As a doctoral student he chose to study the plays of Euripides. As a coposer he created alost theaterlike gaes, interplays of perforers’ roles and behaviors. The idea of “playing” ansered to of Wolff’s deepest concerns: freedo and learning. Even hen guided by rules, playing is freedo. The ter experiment sees sees to connote soething ore rigorous and goal driven. But as Huizinga faously rote, “Let y playing be y learning, and y learning be y playing.” That playing-as-learning dened one fundaental of hatt had co ha coee to be kno knon n as expe experi rienta entall us usic. ic. Just so, Wolff’ olff’ss os ostt pote potent nt gift to the orld of coposition coes in those scores in hich he insists that players play,, ith all the ord’s hints of gaesanship, strategy, deftness, and attention. play
christian wolff
96
Figure 10. Christian Wolff W olff at the University University of Northern Colorado, March 2010. Photo by Joseph F. F. Haefeli. Haefeli. Used Used by perission.
| Among Friends, in a Private World
95
So to end this survey of Wolff s life and ork e give a nal nod to Wolff the player—ith apologies for the verbal redundancy to ake a point: one thinks back to his tie at Friends Friend s Seinary, playing duos ith David Lein, Lei n, then to his continual playing in his on and others’ orks through the years, his ad hoc playing during his experiental usic courses and, in turn, in guest residencies at other schools, playing ith Carde and the AMM in the late 1960s, ongoing playing (and recording) recording ) ith British friends fr iends such as Eddie Prevost P revost and John Jo hn Tilbury, Tilbury, and his private (and occasionally public) playing ith Dartouth colleagues Larry Polansky and Kui Dong. Most of this playing has been, in soe ay or another, iprovisational. Iprovising has invigorat invigorated ed the coposer as he approaches his eightiet eightieth h year. He iprovises regularly on piano and elodica, vocalizes in various ays, akes delicate noises on available surfaces, alays draing fro his private lexicon of ideas. If one can listen profusely, Wolff sees to do so just that, inserting ostly tentative, fragentary, onophonic gestures into the texture. Or consider this
“it’s gotten gotte n very loud and y feeling is that it’s it’s too loud, l oud, it’s it’s too uch. strategy: if “it’s . . . I’ alloed to stop playing entirely, or play very, very quietly, nearly inaudibly, until soeone can hear hat I’ doing.” He approaches the task of iprovisation ith an enorous store of developental strategies and previously ritten fragents in his ind and hands. “When he iprovises,” says Willie Willie Winant, “it’s “it’s like he’s playing his on usic.” Even so, uch of his iprovisation, particularly ith Polansky and Kui Dong, attepts a blank slate: sl ate: “It’s “It’s better not to kno [hat you’re going to do]. And it’s ipossible to rehearse. In soe ay that’s an attraction. You just have to sort of jup in and see hat happens.” Iprovisation keeps usic in hat ay be its ost fragile, even vulnerable ode. “The glory of it and the disaster of it,” he says, “is that you do it and it’s gone.” That speaks to our ties, Wolff Wolff believes: “The state of the orld is alar
ingly tentative, than ever on brink. Can usic be anything else?” Reecting Reecti ngsees on Wore olff, Polansky saidthe that “because of Christi Christian’ an’ss huility, he ay get the short end of the stick, ore so than soeone ho’s put on a lot ore airs. But he’s just one of the band, really, and that’s all he really ants to be: just a usician playing usic. He doesn’t pretend to be anything other than that.” In the end, that ay be the ystery behind Wolff’s achieveents as a scholar and coposer: it is all a kind of profound playing in both the prial and advanced senses that Huizinga articulated. And for the “last surviving eber” of the Ne York School, the ability to keep playing ay be the greatest blessing. Life, as Wolff detected in Euripides, reains “a for of exile hich is resolved only aong friends, in a private orld.” But ithin that private orld of friends, Wolff W olff concluded, concluded, “survival is for for happiness and and pleasure.” pleasure.”
97
notes
Introduction 1. Since riting riting this, e gratefully itnessed the appearance of the rst scholarly book on Wolff’s usic, a handsoe collection of essays (to hich one of the present authors contributed): Stephen Chase and Philip Thoas, eds., Changing the System: The Music o Christian Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2010). 2. Christian Wolff, Cues: Writings Writings and Conversations Conversa tions (Köln, (Köln, Gerany: G erany: MusikT MusikTexte, exte, 1998), 104. 3. Cole Gagne, Soundpieces 2: Interviews Inter views with American Composers (Metuchen, (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecro Press, 1993), 447. 4. Wolf olff, f, Cues , 154. See also the discussion in Mark D. Nelson, “Social Dynaics at the Heart of Coposition: Iplications of Christian Wolff’s Indeterinate Music,” Contem porary por ary Music Forum 1 (1989): 3–14. 5. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, 10 October 1985, in Wolff’ olff’ss personal archive, hich he kindly shared ith the th e authors. Hereafter cited as Wolff Papers.
Chapter 1. Orpheus in Tennis Sneakers 1. Kurt Wolff quoted by Helen Wolff (at in. 6:32) in the Richard Kaplan docuenta docuentary ry l The Exiles (Connoisseur (Connoisseur Hoe Video, 1989). 2. Kurt Wolff quoted in Michael Erarth, ed., Kurt Wol: Wol: A Portrait Portrait in Essays and Letters, trans. Deborah Lucas Schneider (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 19. 3. Kurt Wolff quoted by Helen Wolff (at in. 1:49:16) in The Exiles. 4. For the Wolff faily chronology, see Günter Grass and Helen Wolff, Briee 1959– 1994, ed. Daniela Heres (Göttingen, Gerany: Steidl, 2003), 555–61. 5. On the history of Pantheon, see Steven John Schuyler, Schuyler, “Kurt Wolff and Herann Broch: Publisher and an d Author in Exile” (PhD (Ph D dissertation, Harvard University, 1984). 6. Helen Wolff (at in. 1:00:36) in The Exiles. 7. Barbara Weidle, “Hard Work—Deterination, ork—Deterination,”” (intervie in in Geran ith Christian Wolff), Wolff), in Barbara Weidle, ed., Kurt Wol: Ein Liter Literat at und Gentleman (Bonn, Gerany: Weidle W eidle Verlag, Verlag, 2007), 169–79 (Hicks’ (Hicks’ss translation). tran slation). Other inforation here is also fro Weidle. W eidle.
christian wolff
100
| Notes to Chapters 1 and 2
8. Wolff to Michael Hicks, eail 29 April 2008. 9. Ibid.; Calvert Watkins, intervie by Michael Hicks, 3 June 2008. 10. Christ Christian ian Wolff, “Music— “Music—Experi Experient—Ed ent—Education ucation,” ,” Sonus 26, 26, no. 1 (Fall 2005): 200 5): 20. Wolff’ W olff’ss visits to jazz clubs are detailed in Watkins, Watkins, intervie by Hicks. 11. Wolff, intervie by Hicks, 27 March 2010. 12. Watkins, intervie by Hicks. 13. “Morton Feldan Slee Lecture, April 15, 1973, 1973,”” ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/ usic/spcoll/feldan/fslee326.htl (accessed 21 February 2006). 14. Jean-Jacques Nattiez, ed., The Boulez-Cage Correspondence, trans. and ed. Robert Sauels (Cabridge and a nd Ne York: York: Cabridge University Press, 1993), 56–57. 15. Ibid., 55. 16. Wolff has talked often about the assigne assignents nts Cage gave hi. See, for exaple exaple,, Cole Gagne, Soundpieces 2: Interviews with American Composers (Metuchen, (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecro Press, 1993), 444–45; Willia Duckorth, Talking Music: Conversations with John Cage, Philip Glass, Laurie Anderson, and Five Generations o American Experimental Composers (Ne (N e York: York: Schirer Books, 1995), 185–86. 17. Christian Wolff, “Experiental Music around 1950 and Soe Consequences and Causes (Social-Political and Musical),” American Music 27 27 (Winter 2009): 426. 18. David Patterson, “Cage and Beyond: An Annotated Intervie ith Christian Wolff,” Perspectives Per spectives o New Music 32 32 (1994): 61. 19. Kyle Gann explains nicely the the appeal of gauts: “Liitation of sonorities aids in creating the identity of a piece, and allos the coposer to create eaning ithout relying on syntax analogous to the tonal syste. It can also be a kind k ind of second-order coposing, orking ith ore evolved sonorities instead of individual notes, hich can get kind of tiring.” Reply to “ALS,” 14 July 2008, in coent thread for Gann’s “Wheels Turning,” .artsjour .artsjournal.co/po nal.co/postclassi stclassic/2008/07/ c/2008/07/heels_tur heels_turning.htl ning.htl (accessed 5 October October 2008). 20. Five orks orks ritten ritten in the telve telve onths after the the Duo for Violi Violins ns have been ithithdran orviolin), lost by an Wolff: Wolff: Song (forfor v oice, voice, trupet Four Parts ute and untitled ork ute, clarinet,and andtrobone), violin (not Suite to be in confused ith(for the
99
Serenade fro this period), In the Beginning (for (for to percussionists), and It Being Being Christmas Christmas (for percussion). One of note fro this period, recently published but seeingly unrelated to any of these other orks in its technique is the Madrigals for for three voices, hich abandoned specied pitch altogether: Wolff specied the rhyths and phonees, but represented pitch only by distance above or belo a center line representing a cofortable idrange for each respective singer. 21. The coposition of that trio is discussed in David Nicholls, “Getting Rid of the Glue: The Music of the Ne York York School,” in Steven Johnson, ed., The New York York Schools o Music and the Visual Visual Arts (Ne (Ne York: Routledge, 2001), 39–41. 22. Nattie Nattiez, z, Boulez-Cage Correspondence, 108. 23. This and the folloing quotes in this paragraph are fro Cage, Silence, 71–72. 24. Wolff to Michael Hicks, eail 25 Septeber 2008. 25. John Cage to David Tudor, undate undated d letter (ca. Octobe Octoberr 1951) 1951),, David Tudor Papers Papers,, Getty Research Institute, Special Collections. 26. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 9 March 2006.
John Cage (ith handritten note by Christian Christian Wolff), suer 27. Pierre Boulez to John 1951, in Nattiez, Boulez-Cage Correspondence, 97. 28. Wolff also refers to nine dynaics and nine “rhythic congurations,” though these see less apparent. 29. Morton Feldan, Give My Regards to Eighth Street: Collected Writings Writings o Morton Feldman, ed. B. H. Friedan (Cabridge, Mass.: Exact Change, C hange, 2000), 119. 30. F For or the Birds: Birds: John John Cage in Conversation Conversation with Daniel Charles (Boston: (Boston: Marion Boyars, 1981; originally published in French, 1976), 31. Austin Clarkson traces the English publication history of the I Ching in in David Bernstein and Christopher Hatch, Ha tch, eds., Writings through John Cage’s Music, Poetry and Art (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 84–86. 32. Duckorth, Talking Music, 188. 33. Richard Kostelanetz, cop. and ed., John Cage, Writer: Previously Uncollected Pieces (Ne York: Lielight, 1993), 72. 34. John Cage to Helen Wolff, “12.E.17” [1954], reprinted in Musik Texte 106 (August 2005): 48–49. 35. “A Chance Encounter ith Christian Wolff” (Intervie ith Frank J. J. Oteri, 11 January 2002), .neusicbox .neusicbox.org/35/interv .org/35/intervie_olff.pdf ie_olff.pdf (accessed (acc essed 21 February 2006), sec. 3 (“Interpreting Indeterinate Music”). In the sae source: “I still had those paraenters, and I still had to go to school during the day and stuff like that! So to that extent, clearly e ere in a slightly different orld.” orld.” 36. Feldan, Give My Regards to Eighth Street, 16.
Chapter 2. Situations o Too Extreme Difculty: 1951–1959 1. See “T “To o Coposers on Aerican Music at Mid-Century: Walter Piston in Con versation ith Wilfrid Wilfrid Mellers, 1962, 1962,”” American Music 28 28 (Spring 2010): 123–24. Piano 2. For an overvie of W olff’ss piano olff’ riting, see Philip Pianist:The TheMusic Solo Music,” in Stephen Chase and Philip Thoas, eds.,Thoas, Changing“For the System: o Christian Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2010), 51–91.
3. Those brief brief essays appeared in the short-lived short-lived Ne York journal Trans/ormation (1952). Wolff’s contribution is reprinted in Christian Wolff, Cues: Writings and Conversations (Köln, (Köln, Gerany: MusikTexte, 1998), 20–22. 4. “T “Tudor udor Tries Hand at Experi Experientin enting,” g,” New York Times, 2 January 1952, 20. 5. “J. B.,” “Look “Look,, No Hands Hands!! And It’ It’ss ‘Music,’” New York Times, 15 April 1954. 6. Steven John Schuyler, “Kurt Wolff and Herann Broch: Publisher and Author in Exile” (PhD dissertation, Harvard University, 1984), 79. 7. David Tudor to Karlheinz Stockhausen, 4 Noveber 1955, in Ike Misch Misch and Markus Bandur, Karlheinz Stockhausen Stockhausen bei den Internationalen Ferienkursen Ferienkursen ür Neue Musik in Darm stadt 1951–1996 1951–1996:: Dokumente Dokumente und Briee (Kürten, Gerany: Stockhausen-Stiftung für Musik, 2001), 115. Hereafter cited as Misch and Bandur, Dokumente und Briee. 8. Wolff to John John Cage, 5 February [1956], John Cage Collection, Northestern Uni versity Library. Library. Hereafter cited as Cage Collection. 9. John Cage to Wolff, 28 March 1956, Wolff Papers; Wolff to Cage, 8 April 1956, Cage Collection.
christian wolff
102
| Notes to Chapters 2 and 3
10. “Frederic Rzeski Visits Aerica: A Conversation ith ith Frank J. J. Oteri @ Nonesuch Records, NYC on John Cage’s Birthday (Septeber 5, 2002),” 2, at http://neusicbox .org/43/rzeski_intervie.pdf .org/43/rzeski_intervie .pdf (accessed 11 February 2011). 11. See his coents in “On Deceber 1952, 1952,”” American Music 26 26 (Spring 2008): 1–12. 12. “Christia “Christian n Wolff Seinar (an excerpt).” Fro Ostrava Days 2003 Report at at .ocnh.cz/days2003_lectures_olff.ht (accessed 11 February 2011). 13. Ibid. 14. There is soe uncertainty on Wolff’s part as to the chronology here, i.e., to hat extent the “prototype” piece he prepared ith Rzeski for perforance in spring 1957 actually as or becae the Duo 1 score hose fair copy is dated (and as preiered) in Deceber 1957. 15. John Holzaepfel, “Reiniscen “Reiniscences ces of a Tentieth-Century Pianist: An Intervie ith David Dav id Tudor,” Musical Quarterly 78 (1994): 636. 16. Tudor rites about an “incident” beteen Cage and Boulez on this issue—an episode of the groing breach beteen the to coposers—in a letter to Stockhausen, 12 March 1957, in Misch and Bandur, Bandur, Dokumente und Briee, 162. 17. John Cage to Wolff, 18 April 1960, Wolff Papers Papers.. 18. “Intervie “Intervie ith Roger Reynolds, 1962,” in Elliott Schartz and Barney Childs, eds., Contemporary Composers on Contemporary Music (Ne (N e York: York: Holt, H olt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967), 340. 19. John Cage, A Year Year rom Monday (Middleton, Conn.: Wesleyan University Un iversity Press, 1969), 136. 20. John Cage, Silence (Middleton, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), 38. 21. “Intervie ith Roger Reynolds, 1962, 1962,”” 340. 22. “John Cage and Roger Reynolds: A Conversation, Conversation,”” Musical Quarterly 65 (October 1979): 582–83. 23. For a discuss discussion ion of Tudor’ udor’ss score preparation, preparation , see John Holzae Holzaepfel, pfel, “David Tudor Tudor and Perforance Aerican dissertation, n, Citythe University of NeofYork, 1994).Experiental Music 1950–1959” (PhD dissertatio 24. Holzaepfel, “Reiniscences of a Tentieth-Century Pianist, Pianist,”” 636.
101
25. Carolyn Bron, Chance and Circumstance: Twenty Years with Cage and Cunningham (Ne York: Knopf, 2007), 39. 26. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, letter 9 August 1959, Wolff Papers, original ephasis. 27. Frederic Rzeski Rzeski to Wolff, letter 21 August 1959, Wolff Papers. 28. Doris Hering, quoted in Bron, Chance and Circumstance, 253, ephasis on the ord sparsely added. 29. Cornelius Carde Carde,, “Notation: Interpretation, Etc., Etc.,”” Tempo 58 (Suer 1961): 21–23. 30. Cornelius Carde quoted in John Tilbury Tilbury,, Cornelius Cardew (1936–1981): A Lie Unfnished (Essex, (Essex, U.K.: Copula, 2008), 89. 31. Wolff to John Cage and Merce Merce Cunningha, July [date ater daaged, but 1959], Cage Collection.
Chapter 3. Vast, Sparse Areas o Possibility: 1960–1969
1. Burdet Burdette te C. Stap Stapley, ley, “T “To o Who It May Conc Concern,” ern,” letter 20 April 1961, Wolff
Papers. 2. Originally published in Geran in Die Reihe 7 (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1960), then in English in the sae issue published in London, 1965. 3. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, letter 13 Noveber 1964, Wolff Papers. 4. Reprinted in Christi Christian an Wolff, Cues: Writings and Conversations (Köln, (Köln, Gerany: Musik Texte, T exte, 1998) 52–54. 5. Christi Christian an George Wolff, “Aspect Aspectss of the Later Plays of Euripides Euripides”” (PhD disserta dissertation, tion, Harvard University, 1963), 1–2. 6. PEN quoted in Günter Grass and Helen Wolff, Briee 1959–1994, ed. Daniela Heres (Göttingen, Gerany: Steidl, 2003), 560. 7. See John Cage and Morton Feldan, Radio Happenings (I–V, (I–V, recorded at WBAI, Ne York York City, July 1966–January 1967). At http://.radio.org http://.radio.org (accessed 25 Noveber 2011) These have also been transcribed and published as Radio Happenings I–V: Conversations/Gespräche (Köln, Gerany: MusikTexte, 1993). For the contexts, iplications, and detailed citations of all these quotations, see Michael Hicks, “‘Our Webern’: Cage and Feldan’s Devotion to Christian Wolff,” Wolff,” in Stephen Chase and Philip Thoas, eds., Changing the System: The Music o Christian Wol Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2010), 3–5. 8. For ore ore on this, see Michael Hicks, “Mass Marketing the Aerican Avant Garde 1967–1971,” unpublished paper delivered at the Open Space Festival of Ne Music, 25 March 2010, University of Northern Colorado; an earlier earlier,, shorter version as delivered at the Society for Aerican Music Annual Meeting, 19 March 2009, Denver, Colorado. 9. Wolff to John Cage, 2 October 1967, John Cage Collection, Northestern University Library. Library. Hereafter cited as Cage C age Collection. 10. The 1960 eeting occurred hen Carde lived in Cologne, assisting Stockhausen, and Wolff Wolff took a leave fro his ary post to visit Cage and Cunningha, Cun ningha, ho ere then visiting Cologne. 11. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, letter 16 July 1968, Wolff Papers; Wolff to Hicks, 31
May 2008, Wolff Papers. 12. See the detailed explanation of this collection in Cleens Gresser Gresser,, “Prose Collection: The Perforer and Listener as Co-Creator,” Co-Creator,” in Chase and Thoas, Changing the System, 193–209. 13. Cornel Cornelius ius Carde Carde , revie of Prose Collection by Christian Wolff, Musical Times 110, 110, no. 1521 (Noveber 1969): 1171. 14. Cornelius Carde to Wolff, letter 31 August 1969, Wolff Papers. 15. John Cage to Noran Doenges (then chairan of of the Departent of Classics at Dartouth) letter 11 April 1969, Wolff Wolff Papers. 16. Wolff to Michae Michaell Hicks Hicks,, eail 10 June 2010. With an infant and a toddler, Wolff recalls, there ere “lots of excursions to the zoo.”
103
christian wolff
104
| Notes to Chapters 4 and 5
Chapter 4. Let Playing Be Composition and Composition Playing: 1969–1974
1. John Tilbury to Christ Christian ian Wolff, letter 23 June 1969. Wolff Papers Papers..
2. Originally published in the Treatise Handbook (1971), this docuent is no available free online at http://.scribd.co/doc/32913735/Cornelius-Carde-Ethic-of-Iprohttp://.scribd.co/doc/32913735/Cornelius-Carde-Ethic-of-Ipro visation (accessed 11 February 2011). 3. Christian Wolff, Cues: Writings Writings and Conversations Conversat ions (Köln, (Köln , Gerany: MusikT MusikTexte, exte, 1998), 86. 4. The albu as An Anthology o o Arican Music , vol. 3, Ba-Benzélé Pygmies (Bärenreiter (Bärenreiter Musicaphon BM 30 L 2303, 1965). 5. Cornel Cornelius ius Carde to Wolff, letter 9 Septe Septeber ber 1971, Wolff Papers. 6. Cornelius Carde, Stockhausen Serves Imperialism Imperial ism and Other Articles (London: (London: Latier Ne Diensions), 40. 7. The quotations are fro a page that bears the heading “Fro notes ade in the Suer of 1972, occasioned by Cornelius Carde’s Marxist-Maoist criticis of John Cage’s usicHolly (no Wolff.” reprinted in C.C.’s ith W olff.” Wolff Papers.book Stockhausen Serves Imperialism) and by conversation 8. Aong the any sources that treat treat this division, see especially Wolff, “Moral Issues Issues and Musical Practices” (1992), Cues , 392–94. 9. On this hole area of Wolff’ olff’ss career, career, see David Ryan, “Changing the Syste: Indeterinacy and Politics in the Early 1970s, 1970s,”” and Stephen Chase, C hase, “‘There Is Alays a Tie’: Words W ords,, Musi Music, c, Polit Politics ics and Voice, oice,”” both in Steph Stephen en Chase and Phili Philip p Thoas Thoas,, eds., Changing the System: The Music o Christian Wol Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: U.K.: Ashgate, 2010), 143–69 and 170–89, 170– 89, respectively. 10. Wolff to Cornelius Carde, Carde, letter 21 July 1972 (ith annotat annotations ions by Carde), Wolff Papers. 11. The authoritative authoritative source source here is Ay C. Beal, “Christian Wolff in Darstadt, 1972 and 1974,” in Chase and an d Thoas, Changing the System, 23–47. 12. For one account of fello fello coposers’ irritation and Feldan’s Feldan’s outburst see John John Tilbury,, Cornelius Cardew (1936–1981): A Lie Unfnished (Essex, Tilbury (Essex, U.K.: Copula, 2008), 605.
13. Reprint Reprinted ed in Wolff, Wha Whatt Are We Doing? Cues , 98. 14. Perforances notes to Accompaniments , in Wolff, Cues , 498. 15. Pantheon’ Pantheon’ss 1970 edition of Jan Myrdal and Gun Kessle’ Kessle’ss China: The Revolution Continued as as the rst U.S. edition, translated translated fro Sedish by Paul Britten Austin. 16. Donal Henahan, “Four Conteporary Piano Pieces Add Ne Tone to the Whitney,” New York Times, 25 March 1970, 37. 17. Brian Dennis, “Music in London: Druing, cpe,” Musical Times 113, 113, no. 1550 (April 1972): 382. 18. John Cage quoted quoted in Frederic Frederic Rzeski, “The Algebra of Everyday Life, Life,”” the preface preface to Wolff, Cues, 10. 19. This and the preceding quotation are fro Wolff, “let the listeners be be just as free as the players,” Cues , 80. 20. See Richard Dufallo, Trackings: Composers Speak with Richard Duallo (Ne York: Oxford University Press, 1989), 231–32. This episode is also discussed by Cage and Wolff Wolff
in Willia Duckorth, Talking Music: Conversations with John Cage, Philip Glass, Laurie Anderson, and Five Generations o American Experimental Composers (Ne (Ne York: Schirer Books, 1995), 16 and 187. 21. Wolff talks about about this this in in David Patterson, “Cage and Beyond: An Annotated InterInter vie ith Christian Wolff, Wolff,”” Perspecti Perspectives ves o New Music 32 32 (1994): 72. 22. Dufall Dufallo, o, Trackings , 121–22. 23. F For or the Birds: Birds: John John Cage in Conversation Conversation with Daniel Charles (Boston: (Boston: Marion Boyars, 1981; originally published in French, 1976), 136. The concert is revieed in Henahan, “Four Conteporary Piano Pieces Add Ne Tone.” 24. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 9 March 2006. Krenek as idely held to be a second-tier telve-tone coposer coposer.. 25. Feldan in Morton Feldan, Give My Regards to Eighth Street: Collected Writings o Morton Feldman, Feldman, ed. B. H. Friedan (Cabridge, Mass.: Exact Change, Ch ange, 2000), 118–19. 26. In “Morton Feldan Slee Lecture, April 15, 1973, 1973,”” http://ublib.buffalo.edu/ http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/ libraries/ units/usic/spcoll/feldan/fslee326.htl (accessed 30 Noveber 2011).
Chapter 5. Something More Specifcally “Musical”: 1973–1984 1. Wolff gave versions of this address address at least three ore ties at other schools during during the 1970s. While full reading copies have been lost, e rely on the set of notes he sent to Cage in 1974 (full citation belo) as ell as Wolff’ Wolff’ss detailed recollections of the speech. 2. Fro the conclusion of Carde, “A Report on the Concert” (20 May 1973), reprinted in Chapter 3 of his Stockhausen Serves Imperialism. 3. John Tilbury, “Chris “Christian tian Wolff and the Politic Politicss of Music,” notes to Christ Christian ian Wolff: Long Piano (Pea (Peace ce March March 11), NeWo NeWorld rld Records 80699 and available online at http:// .neorldrecords.org/uploads/le9CQrs.pdf (accessed 11 February 2011). 4. John Cage to Wolff, letter 17 Janua January ry 1974, Wolff Paper Papers. s. 5. Wolff to John Cage Cage,, letter 15 March [1974], Wolff Papers Papers.. 6. According to to David Bernstein, “Soe of Wolff’s transforations of source elodies elodies bring to ind techniques used by Cage in Cheap Imitation (1969), Apartment House 1776 (1976), Quartets I–VIII (1976), (1976), soe of the Harmony o the Maine (1978), and Hymns and
Variations (1979)” (1979)” (eail to authors, 1 July 2011). 7. John A. Loax and Alan Loax, F Folk olk Song U.S U.S.A. .A. (Ne York: York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, Pearce , 1947). 8. Christ Christian ian Wolff, “Music “Music—Exper —Experient— ient—Educat Education,” ion,” Sonus 26 26 (Fall 2005): 29. Cage, though, it should be added, also disliked the trobone solo that Garrett List played (Exercise 17), hich Cage thought too overtly expressive. 9. Wolff to John Cage, letter 17 Deceber 1975, Cage Collection. Collection. 10. Quoted in Daon Krukos Krukoski, ki, “Chri “Christian stian Wolff,” Bomb 59 (Spring 1997), available online as http://bobsite.co/issues/59/articles/2060 (accessed 19 Deceber 2011). See also the detailed description Wolff gives of Wobbly Music in in an article prepared for Sonus (1980), reprinted in Christian Wolff, Cues: Writings and Conversations (Köln, (Köln, Gerany: MusikTexte, MusikT exte, 1998), 138–46. 11. Frederic Rzeski to Fred Berthold, Berthold, Jr Jr.,., letter 9 April 1978, Wolff Papers. 105
christian wolff
106
| Notes to Chapters 5, 6, and 7
12. Wolff to John Cage Cage,, letter 22 Janua January ry 1980, Wolff Papers Papers.. 13. Wolff to Heinz Heinz-Klaus -Klaus Metzger, letter 7 Februa February ry 1978, printe printed d in Wolff, Cues , 352. 14. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 24 April 2007.
15. Wolff to Michael Hicks, eail, 11 May 2006. 16. See John Cage and Geoffrey Barnard, Conversation without Feldman (Darlinghurst: Black Ra Books, 1980), 9. 17. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, letter 24 February 1979, Wolff Papers. 18. Wolff to John Cage Cage,, letter n.d. [Octob [October er 1977], Wolff Papers Papers.. 19. John Cage to Wolff, letter 3 Nove Noveber ber 1977, Wolff Papers Papers..
Chapter 6. Not to Do Something I’ve Already Done: 1982–1999 1. Christian Wolff, “Under the Inuence,” in Cues: Writings and Conversations (Köln, (Köln, Gerany: MusikTexte, 1998), 52. 2. Cage quoted in Rzeski, “The Algebra of Everyday Life, Life,”” preface to Wolff, Cues, 10. Dartmouth, 3. Jon Appleto Appleton n quoted anouye,, “Quirk “Quirkyy Music Wins Prof. $50,0 $50,000 00 Aard, Aard,”” 13 January 1997.in Erik Tanouye 4. Rzesk Rzeski, i, “Algebra of Everyda Everydayy Life,” 10. 5. For an overvie of this period, see Christopher Fox, “Exercisi “Exercising ng the Enseble: Soe Thoughts on the Later Music of Christian Wolff, Wolff,”” in Stephen Chase and Philip Thoas, eds., Changing the System: The Music o Christian Chris tian Wol Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: U.K.: Ashgate, Ashgate , 2010), 125–39. 6. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 24 April 2007. 7. Ibid. In this sae source, Wolff estiates that 80 percent of each piece ends up ith segents in the order he rote the, th e, ith the other 20 percent reordered or nely ritten. 8. Wolff to Frederi Fredericc Rzesk Rzeski, i, letter 21 July 1999, Wolff Papers Papers.. 9. Larry Polansky Polansky,, intervie by Christian Asplund, 20 May 2008. 10. Wolff, interv intervie ie by Hicks Hicks.. 11. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, letter 16 Septeber 1979, Wolff Papers. 12. Perforance note to Wolff, Exercise 19 (Haronic Treors), Edition Peters, 66948 (1983). 13. Ameri American can Recor Recordd Guide revie quoted in Jack Vaitayanonta, Vaitayanonta, “Wolff “Wolff Syposiu Begins
Today,,” Dartmouth, 8 January 1996. Today 14. The ost thorough source on on Wolff’s orchestral usic thus thus far is Jaes Saunders, “Mutual Effects: Organization Org anization and an d Interaction in the Orchestral Orch estral Music of Christian Wolff,” Wolff,” in Chase and Thoas, Changing the System, 93–124. 15. Stuart Saunders Sith and Thoas De Lio, eds., Words and Space: Anthology Antholog y o TwenTwentieth Century Musical Experiments (Ne (Ne York: York: Roan and a nd Littleeld, 1989). 16. Cole Gagne, Soundpieces 2: Interviews with American Composers (Metuchen, (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecro Press, 1993), and Willia Duckorth, Talking Music: Conversations with John Cage, Philip Glass, Laurie Anderson, and Fiv Fivee Generations o American Experimental Composers (Ne York: York: Schirer Books, 1995). 17. Bunita Marcus to Michael Hicks, eail, 9 Deceber 2005; Orlando Jacinto Garcia to Michael Hicks, eail, 13 Deceber 2005. 18. In Feld Feldan’s an’s Three Voices (1982), (1982), for exaple, Feldan uses only the half-step related # pitches C 4/D4/E b4/E4 for the entire rst page (and to later long passages). The rst
to and a half inutes of Three Voices consist consist only of these four pitches. A year later, Feld# b an’ss Second String Quartet (1983) opens ith these sae pitches (C /D/E an’ /E)—back in the duo’s original octave—played ostinato for the rst to and a half inutes. And in his
For or Bunita Marcus (1985), solo piano ork F (1985), Feldan uses only C #, D, and E b, deployed in various octaves, for the rst seventy-to seventy-to easures (again, about to and a half inutes). 19. “Christian Wolff: Intervie by Jason Gross (April 1988),” .furious.co/pe .furious.co/perfect/ rfect/ christianolff.htl (accessed 21 February 2006). Perhaps a nal n al nod to Wolff’s Wolff’s violin duo cae in Feldan’s last piano ork, Palais de Mari (1986). (1986). There, in . 7–13, Feldan # oscillates aong the pitches D/D /E—all in the duo’s duo’s original soprano octave. As though it ere an isolated but obligatory citation of Wolff, nothing like it occurs in the nearly tenty-ve inutes of usic that follo. follo. 20. Wolff took inspiration fro György Kurtág for hat he called these “individual declarations of friendship” in usic. Wolff Wolff to Michael Hicks, eail 11 May 2006. 21. Wolff in Jaes Saund Saunders, ers, ed., The Ashgate Research Companion to Experimental Music (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2009), 364. 22. Wolff, interv intervie ie by Hicks Hicks.. 23. Ibid. 24. Wolff in Saund Saunders, ers, Ashgate Research Companion, Companion, 363. 25. “Christian Wolff Wolff and Classics,” a docuent prepared for and sent to Hicks on 5 Deceber 2010 2 010 by Wolff Wolff’’s friend and an d colleague colleag ue Jaes Tatu, Tatu, reecting back on that t hat Wolff Wolff syposiu. 26. Christ Christian ian Wolff, “Cross “Crossings ings of Experi Experienta entall Music and Greek Tragedy, ragedy,”” in Peter Bron and Suzana Ograjensek, eds., Ancient Drama in Music or the Modern Mod ern Stage (Ne York: Y ork: Oxford, 2010), 304. 27. Wolff, 1996–97 faculty productivity report for Dartouth, copy in authors’ possession. 28. Wolff quoted in Tanouy anouye, e, “Quirk “Quirkyy Music Wins Prof. $50,00 $50,0000 Aard.” 29. Wolff in his liner notes to Christian Wol: Wol: Complete Music or Violin and Piano, Mode Records 126 (2003). 30. Wolff to to Frederic Rzeski, letters 16 and 21 July 1999, Wolff Papers. 31. Aong the orks are a fe revisions or arrangeents of earlier orks.
Chapter 7. Among Friends, in a Private World 1. For the quotations quotations and general discussion, see Christian Wolff, “Aspects of the Later Plays of Euripides” (PhD dissertation, Harvard University, University, 1963), 158, 161–64. 2. Vivien Sche Scheitzer, itzer, “Copo “Coposers sers of a Certai Certain n Age Receiv Receivee a Makeov Makeover, er,”” New York York Times, 24 May 2008. 3. Fro his “Sketch of a Stateent,” Stateent,” ritten in April 1993, distributed privately then published in the progra booklet Christian Wol: Wol: The Composer and an d the Classicist Symposium
and Music Festival Dartmouth College, January 8–10, 1996, Wolff Papers. 4. See Harold C. Schonberg, “Ne Music, Soe Cute, Soe Serious, Serious,”” New York Times, 12 April 1974. 5. See Liz Ellison, “Music Prof Gains Recognition ith Experiental ‘Exercises,’” Dartmouth, 31 January 2007.
christian wolff
108
| Notes to Chapter 7
6. Steven Johnson, ed., The New York Schools o Music and the Visual Arts (Ne (Ne York: Routledge, 2001). 7. Tasen Wolff to Micha Michael el Hicks Hicks,, eail 7 June 2006. 8. ristra Wolff to Micha Michael el olff Hicks, Hicks , eailr,””9Ostrav May 2006. 9. T “Transc “T ranscript ript of Christ Christian ian W Seinar, Seina Ostrava a Days, 2001, at http:/ http://.ocnh /.ocnh .cz/days2001_transkript_olff.ht (accessed 13 February 2011). 10. Wolff discusses this piece, along ith other recent orks, in Stephen Chase and Cleens Gresser, “Ordinary Matters: Christian Wolff on His Recent Music,” Tempo 58, no. 229 (2004): 19–27. 11. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 24 April 2007. 12. Fro the ork’ ork’ss progra note, available at http://.ocnh.cz/biographies_ol http://.ocnh.cz/biographies_olff ff .ht (accessed 20 Deceber 2011). 13. Wolff to Michael Hicks, letter 18 February 2011. 14. Wolff in Jaes Saunde Saunders, rs, ed., The Ashgate Research Companion to Experimental Music Mus ic (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2009), 363. 15. See the square and a discussion of it in Stephen Chase and Philip Thoas, eds., Changing the System: The Music o Christian Wol Wol (Surrey, (Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate, 2010), 79–81. 16. Frederic Rzeski to Wolff, eail 31 March 2007, Wolff Papers. 17. Wolff, interv intervie ie by Hicks Hicks.. 18. Ibid. 19. Wolff to Michael Hicks, letter 18 February 2011. 20. Ibid. 21. See Carl Dahlhaus, “Ne Music as Historical Category Category,,” in Schoenberg and the New Music (Cabridge: (Cabridge: University of Cabridge, 1987), 1–13. 22. Wolff to Hicks, 18 February 2011. 23. Wolff, intervie by Michael Hicks, 26 March 2010. 24. See Christophe Christopherr Thoas Miller, Games: Purpose and Potential in Education (Ne York: Y ork: Springer Science and Business Media, 2008), 19. 25. “Iprovisation, Heterophony Heterophony,, Politics, Coposition: Panel Discussion ith Christian Wolff, Larry Polansky, Kui Dong, Christian Asplund, and Michael Hicks,” Perspectives o New Music 45 45 (Suer 2007): 138. 26. Willie Winant, intervie by Christian Asplund, 20 May 2008.
107
27. “Iprov “Iprovisatio isation, n, Hetero Heterophony, phony, Politic Politics, s, Copos Coposition,” ition,” 138. 28. Fro a lecture-discussion by Wolff at the University of Northern Colorado (Greeley), 25 March 2010 (notes taken by Michael Hicks at the event). 29. Wolff in Saund Saunders, ers, Ashgate Research Companion Companion, 361. 30. Larry Polansky Polansky,, intervie by Christian Asplund, 20 May 2008. 31. Wolff, “Aspec Aspects ts of the Later Plays of Euripide Euripides,” s,” 164.
for further rea din ding g
A reader re ader ost often encounters references to Christian Wolff Wolff in orks about John Cage. The catalog of such s uch orks is relatively vast, too t oo uch so s o to recapitulate here. We’ve noted belo a fe ites either ore particular to Wolff or ore general about his colleagues and their techniques. Cues (see (see in the By Wolff Wolff section) anthologizes all of the best published aterial by Wolff through 1998. Changing the System (see System (see in the About Wolff section) contains iportant articles by nine scholars as ell as the ost coplete (and annotated) Wolff orklist through the early 2000s. By Wol Cues: Writings and Conversations. 1998. Köln, Gerany: MusikTexte. “Music—Experient—Education.”” 2005. Sonus 26, “Music—Experient—Education. 26, no. 1 (Fall): 18–36. “Experiental Music around 1950 and Soe Consequences and Causes (Social-Political and Musical).” 2009. American Music 27 27 (Winter): 424–40. “Crossings of Experiental Ex periental Music and an d Greek Tragedy Tragedy.” .” 2010. In Peter Bron and Suzana Ograjensek, eds., Ancient Drama Drama in Music or the Modern Stage. Ne York: Oxford.
Interviews with Wol Duckorth, Willia. 1995. Talking Music: Conversations with John Cage, Philip Glass, Laurie Anderson, and Five Five Generations Generations o American Experimental Experimental Composers. Composers. Ne York: Schirer Books. A Chance Encounter with Christian Wol: Friday, Friday, January 11, 2002, 4:33 PM at the Greenwich House Music Schoo Schooll (New (New York, NY). 2002. Intervie ith i th Frank J. Oteri, 11 January, January, .neusicbox.org/35/intervie_olff.pdf (accessed 20 Deceber 2011). “Christian Wolff Wolff Seinar (an excerpt). ex cerpt).”” 2003. Fro Ostrava Days 2003 Report at at .ocnh.cz/days2003_lectures_olff.ht (accessed 20 Deceber 2011). 109
christian wolff
110
| For Further Reading
About Wol Wol Chase, Stephen, and Philip Thoas, eds. 2010. Changing the System: The Music o Christian Wol. Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate.
On the t he New York York School Schoo l Johnson, Steven, ed. 2001. 2001 . The New York Schools o Music and the Visual Arts. Ne York: Routledge. Gresser,, Cleens. 2004. “(Re-)Dening the Relationships beteen Coposer, Perforer Gresser Perforer and Listener: Earle Bron, John Cage, Morton Feldan and Christian Wolff.” PhD dissertation, University of Southapton. Bron, Carolyn. 2007. Chance and Circumstance: Twenty Years with Cage and Cunningham. Ne York: Knopf.
On Indeterminacy and Experimental Music Behran, David. 1965. “What Indeterinate Notation Deterines.” Perspectives o New Music 3, 3, no. 2 (Spring–Suer): 58–73. Salley, Roger. 1969–70. “Soe Aspects of the Changing Relationship beteen Coposer and Perforer in Conteporary Music.” Proceedings o the Royal Music Association 96:73–84. Holzaepfel, John. 1994. “David Tudor and the Perforance of Aerican Experiental Music 1950–1959.” PhD dissertation, City University of of Ne York. York. “Iprovisation, Heterophony, Heterophony, Politics, Coposition: Panel Discussion ith Christian Wolff, W olff, Larry Polansky, Polansky, Kui Dong, Christian Asplund, and Michael Hicks.” Hick s.” 2007. Per spectives o New Music 45 45 (Suer): 133–49. Ki, Rebecca Y. 2008. “In No Uncertain Musical Ters: The Cultural Politics of John Cage’s Indeterinacy.” PhD dissertation, Colubia Cardew (1936–1981): A LieUniversity. Unfnished. Essex, U.K.: Copula. Tilbury Tilbury, , John. 2008. Cornelius Saunders, Jaes, ed. 2009. The Ashgate Research Companion to Experimental Music. Surrey, U.K.: Ashgate.
recordings
While a ne Wolff Wolff discography appears in Changing the System—and System—and e defer to it as a aster list—it is in soe ays obsolete. That is not just because Wolff discs have continued to appear but because discographies as such ean less and less in an era of blogs, le sharing, bootleg recordings, YouT YouTube, ube, and other eans of transission that, as e rite this, can only be iagined. Throughout the book e refer to any of Wolff olff’’s recordings recordings.. In the 1960s there ere to LPs, one on a ne independent label (Mainstrea, (Mainstr ea, 1963) and the other on Colubia’s budget label (Odyssey, 1968). The latter of these included or 1, 2 or 3 People People played the piece F piece For played by David Tudor. What is best about that recording is that it ould be the rst of several for a piece that thrives ainly on its reiagining. No one recording could convey the piece’s essence; each ne recording utterly redenes the ork’s sound and shape. In the 1970s four ne Wolff W olff recordings appeared, to of the on fairly stable European labels (W (Wergo, ergo, or 1, 2 or 3). 3). Odeon). In the 1980s, four ore appeared (including another of F of For It as not until the 1990s that the ease of producing and anufactu anufacturing ring copact discs (hich contain ore clock tie and dynaic range than LPs) enabled any ore Wolff recordings to eerge. The Hat Hut label alone gave
us six Wolff CDs in that decade, including an archival disc of Tudor and Cage playing to versions vers ions of Wolff Wolff’’s Duo for Pianists 1 in 1960. In the 2000s the t he Mode and Matchless labels gave us seven CDs beteen the. Add these to an array of independent pressings on saller labels, and e no have ultiple recordings or 1, 2 and 3, Edges, Edges, and of fundaental Wolff orks, including F including For and the exercises. A fe archival CDs of various Wolff perforances (including orchestral orks) circulate in the usic-collecting underground. On the Art of the States ebsite (http://artofthestates.org/cgi-bin/piece.pl?pid=214) one ay hear Wolff’ Wolff’ss Trio Trio III (1996). The Dartouth ebsite http://digital http://digitalusics.dart usics.dartouth.edu/~larr outh.edu/~larry/trio/ y/trio/ trio.index.htl features recordings of trio iprovisations (1999–2009) by Wolff,
christian wolff
112
| Recordings
Kui Dong, Dong , and Larry Larr y Polansky Polan sky.. YouT YouTube ube harbors h arbors dozens of recordings reco rdings of Wolff Wolff pieces (soe involving i nvolving Wolff Wolff hiself as perforer). pe rforer). At least one l (Who ( Who Gets to Call It Art?, Art?, a 2006 docuentary about Henry Geldzahler) Geldzahl er) includes Wolff Wolff’’s 1950 Serenade in its i ts soundtrack—a soundtrack —a fact that even ev en Wolff Wolff didn’t kno until e told hi. hi . These latter entries are little ore than suggestive of hat one encounters in the postcorporate recording orld. Wolff hiself feels little territoriality about realizations of his ork, although soe he prefers to others. others . The player-friendly nature of any of his scores suggests an access-friendly proulgation proulgation of their sound.
111
index
“Abi Yoyo,” 60 “Acres of Clas,” 60, 75 Aeschylus, 84
Boston, 19 Boulder, Colorado, 20 Boulez, Pierre, 10, 14, 15–16, 20
“Ain’t No More Cane in Dis Brazis,” 61 “All the Pretty Little Horses,” 61 Aerican Acadey of Arts and Sciences, 88 American Record Guide, 74 AMM, 40–41, 96 Anthology o Arican Music , 47 Apostel, Hans, 9 Appleton, Jon, 42, 47, 70
Boery Enseble, 77 “Bread and Roses,” 60, 62 British Invasion, 39 Bron, Carolyn Rice, 17, 28 Bron, Earle, 84, 87; indeterinacy of, 23, 27, 53; as Ne York School eber, 15, 17, 20, 54–56, 69; record producer, 33; Wolff on, 31 Bron University, 69 Bruce, Neely, 61, 62 Busch, Adolph, 7
Babbitt, Milton, 3, 22, 29 Ba-Benzélé, 47–48, 54 Bach, Johann Sebastian, Se bastian, 7, 63, 79, 89 Bartók, Béla, 9, 15, 19, 94 Bath, UK, 41 Baynes, Carolyn, 17 BBC, 49 Beatles, 39
Cage, John, 8; and an d Cornelius Carde C arde,, 49, 67; and Merce Cunningha, 28, 47–48, 61; death of, 80–81; disputes ith Wolff, Wolff, 61; and Morton Feldan, 54–56; gauts, 12; inuence on Wolff, W olff, 8–12, 17, 70, 80; as perforer, perforer,
Bechet, Sidney, 8 Beethoven, Ludig van, 64, 83 Behrens, Jack, 47 Behran, David, 22, 38, 40, 47, 59, 94 Belgrade Television, 51 Beowul , 63 Berg, Alban, 8, 56 Berio, Luciano, 33, 51, 63 Bernstein, Leonard, 19 “Big Rock Candy Mountain, Mountain,”” 60 Bollingen Foundation, 6 Bosch, Hieronyous, 71
21, 25, 27, 39, 59; prepared piano, pian o, 14; prootion of Wolff, 80; publications and recordings of, 32–33, 40, 68, 88; square-root-for, 13–14; on Wolff, 38–39, 42–43; Wolff’s inuence on, 14–15, 17, 27; and Wolff’s parents, 17–18 California Institute of the Arts, 88 Cabridge, Massachusetts, 38 Capbell, Joseph, 15 Caus, Albert, 6 Carde, Cornelius, 53, 64, 68, 81, 96;
Index 114
copositions of, 40–41, 45–46, 67; politics of, 48–50, 58–59, 69; on Wolff, 29, 42, 48 Carnegie Hall, 88 Carter, Elliott, 3, 19, 58 Cedar Tavern, 18 Center for Hellenic Studies, 43, 46 Cherry Lane Theater, 20 China, Peoples Republic of, 51 China: The Revolution Continued , 52 “Cindy,” 61 Cogan, Robert, 68 Collage, 37 Cologne, Gerany, 29 Colubia Records, 40 Colubia University, 9 counis, 51 Confucius, 45 Copland, Aaron, 68 Coell, Henry, 8, 9, 15, 23, 33 CRI, 69 Cultural Revolution, 52 Cunningha, Merce, 15, 17, 28–29, 47, 61 Dahlhaus, Carl, 95 Dallapiccola, Luigi, 22 Darstadt, 22, 25, 27, 50, 51, 59 Dartouth, 2, 38, 47, 50, 68, 70, 71; character of, 43; Wolff professor at, 42–45, 52–58, 64, 83–84 Deocrats, 51 Dixieland, 8, 9, 24 Donaueschingen Festival, 81, 83 Dong, Kui, 96, 97
Faber de Faur, Curt von, 6 Feldan, Morton, 20, 25, 50–51; copositions of, 20, 23, 53, 81; death of, 80–81; as Ne York School eber, 15, 17, 33, 43, 54–56, 69; on Wolff, 10, 16, 18, 38–39, 56; Wolff’s inuence on, 80–81 Festival of Harvard Coposers, 21 Finer, Carole, 50 Flaubert, Gustave, 7 Florence, Italy, 5, 22 Fluxus, 41–42 Folk F olk Song U.S.A., 60 Fort Sa Houston, 27 Foke, Edith, 60 Frescobaldi, Girolao, 63, 79 Friedberg, Carl, 9 Friends Seinary, 6, 7, 8, 15, 96 Gaburo, Kenneth, 63 Garcia, Orlando Jacinto, 80 Gare, Lou, 40 George, Stefan, 6 Gide, André, 6 Git rom the Sea, A, 21 Gilgamesh, 63 Giovannittie, Arturo, 62 Glass, Philip, 52, 59, 93 Glazer, Joe, 60 Goldan, Ea, 81 Goldstein, Malcol, 64 Göring, Herann, 5 Grass, Günter, 37 Great Expectations , 22 Greenich Village, 6
113
Don Quixote, 22 dynaics, 78–79 Eco, Uberto, 37 Eisler, Hanns, 91 Electrola, 69 EMI, 69, 85 Emotion and Meaning in Music , 64 Eno, Brian, 41 Erdan, Jean, 15 Escot, Pozzi, 68 Euripides, 37, 43, 69, 83–84, 87, 95, 97
Grey Goose, The, 61 Grifths, Paul, 69 Gulliver’s Gulliver ’s Travels Travels , 22 “Hallelujah, I’ a Bu,” 60, 61, 83 Ha, Charles, 61 Harle, 51 Harrison, Lou, 15 Harvard, 6, 38, 51, 63; Wolff professor at, 2, 42–43, 69; Wolff schooled at, 18, 21–22 Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 43
Harvey, Larence, 43 HatArt, 85 “Hay Una Mujer Desaparecida,” 60 Hayood, Bill, 62
Ligeti, György, 50 Lindbergh, Anne Morro, 21 List, Garrett, 59 Listener , 49
Henahan, Donal, 54 “Hey Ho, Nobody Hoe,” 60, 76 Hindeith, Paul, 19 Hinrichsen, Walter, 32 Hit Parade Parade, 8 hocket, 62–63, 78 Hoer, 63 Hopkins Center for the Arts, 43 Hotel Colonial, 6 Huizinga, Johan, 95, 97
Loax, John and Alan, 60 “loops on a grid” technique, 65–66 Lucier, Alvin, 39, 89, 90 Ludigsburg, Gerany, 37 Luxeburg, Rosa, 81
I Ching , 17 Incompleat Folksinger Folksinger,, The, 60, 62 indeterinacy, 23 Internationale, The, 67 Iraq War, 91 Ives, Charles, 33, 40, 59, 93, 94 IWW (International Workers of the World), W orld), 62 Jaspers, Karl, 37 Joachi, Joseph, 7 “John Golden and an d the Larence Strike, Strike,”” 60, 62 Johns, Jasper, Jasper, 38 Johnson, Jaes P., P., 8 “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho,” 61 Juilliard String Quartet, 8 Jung, Carl, 6 Kafka, Franz, 5 Kahn, Si, 81
Mao Zedong, 48–49, 58 Marclay,, Christian, 85 Marclay Marcus, Bunita, 80 “Mary, Don’t You Weep,” 61 Maxeld, Richard, 21–22 McCarthy hearings, 51 McClure, John, 40 Meet the Coposer, Coposer, 80 Merck, Elizabeth, 5 MEV (Musica Electronica Viva), Viva), 40 Meyer,, Leonard, 64 Meyer Mikhashoff, Yvar Yvar,, 73, 74 Milhaud, Darius, 8 inialis, 52–53 Moby-Dick, 22 Mode Records, 85 Modern Music , 69 “Moorsoldaten (Peat-Bog Soldier), Soldier),”” 60 Mua, Gordon, 47 Musical Times Times , 45 MusikTexte, MusikT exte, 84 Myrdal, Jan, 52 Nash, Hope (Christian Wolff’s otherin-la), 71 Nash, Hope (“Holly”), 39, 44, 49, 61, 71,
Keil, Charles, 64 Keller, Hans, 49 Kessle, Gun, 52 Kinks, The, 39 Kosugi, Takahisa, 84, 85 Kotik, Petr, 89, 91 Krenek, Ernst, 56 Leicester, UK, 41 Lein, David, 7, 96 Lieboitz, René, 10
89; arriage to Wolff, 38; as other, 42, 68 Nash, Ray, 38, 44, 71 Near, Holly, 60 neues: coordination, 32–37, 72; ratio, 23–27, 29, 32 Ne Hapshire Philharonic, 82 Ne Hapshire Syphony Orchestra, 82 New Music Quarterly, 8 Ne York City, 6
Index 116
Ne York Public Library, 10 Ne York School of Coposers, 18, 37, 54, 85, 97; coposers, 4, 17, 26, 33, 89; concerts, 55; Coell on, 15; Feldan
Riley, Terry, 52 “Rock About,” 60 Rodgers, Richard, 89 Rolling Stones, The, 39
on, 55–56; reputation of, 80, 87–88; Tudor and, 20 Tudor New York Times , 20, 21, 54, 87 Ne York University, 47 Nice, France, 5
Roe, Keith, 40 Royalton, Veront, 38, 47, 89 Russell, Peeee, 8 Russell, Willia, 8 Rzeski Frederic, 3, 41, 59, 71, 84; coc opositions of, 51, 57–58, 65, 67, 73, 92–93; at Harvard, 22–23; as perforer, 36, 40, 47, 67, 73; politics, 50; on Wolff’s usic, 29, 62, 68, 70–71, 93
“O Freedo,” 61 Oliveros, Pauline, 57 Ono, Yoko, 41 Oppens, Ursula, 73 Ostrava Days Festival, 89 Oxford University, 69 Paine Hall (Harvard), 22 Palero, Italy, 37 Pantheon, 6, 17, 37 Paris, France, 6 Parks, Rosa, 81 Parsons, Michael, 41 Patch Barracks, 31 PEN, 37 Peters, C. F., 32–33, 34, 85 “Picket Line Song, Song,”” 77 Piston,, Walter, Piston Walter, 19 Plato, 58, 59 Plyouth, Ne Hapshire, 75 Polansky, Polan sky, Larry, Larry, 71, 96, 97 “Po’ Lazarus,” 60 Portugal, 6 Prague, 56 “Preacher and an d the Slave, The,” The,” 60, 62 Prévost, Eddie, 40, 96
Satie, Erik, 10, 39, 63 Schoenberg, Arnold, 8, 9, 10, 15, 19, 56, 93 Schulkosky, Robyn, 82 Schuann, Clara, 7, 9 Schuann, Robert, 7 Schertsik, Kurt, 59 Scratch Orchestra, 45–46, 47, 48–49, 50 Second Viennese School, 10, 56 Seeger, Charles, 60, 62 Seeger, Mike, 62 Seeger, Peggy, 81 Seeger, Pete, 60, 62 Seeger, Ruth Craford, 60, 62, 81 S.E.M. Enseble, 89, 91 Serkin, Rudolph, 7 Serpa Pinto, 6 “Set Don, Servant,” 61 Sheaff, Laurence, 40 Shostakovich, Ditri, 94 Skepton, Hoard, 41 Sith College, 69
115
Princeton University, 69 quilting, 63–64, 67, 92 Radcliffe College, 38 Rando House, 37 Reich, Steve, 52 Reichstag, burning of, 5 Reihe, Die, 22, 31 Republicans, 51 Reynolds, Malvina, 81
Songs o Work and Protest , 60, 62 Sonic Youth, 85–86 Sonus: A Journal o Investigations into Global Musical Possibilities , 68 Sophocles, 69, 84 Soviet Union, 51 Spain, 6 Spanier, Spani er, Mugsy, Mugsy, 8 Stalin, Josef, 51 Stapley, Burdette, 31 Steuerann, Eduard, 7
Stockhausen, Karlheinz, 22, 33, 43; copositions of, 27, 31, 42, 89, 93 Stravinsky, Igor, 19, 40, 63, 94 Stuyvesant Casino, 8, 9
Whitney Museu, 55 Who, The, 39 Wilhel, Richard, 17 Winant, Willia, 85, 97
Sultan, Grete, 9 “Sun is Burning, The,” 60 SUNY Buffalo, 56
Winchester, UK, 41 Winchester, Wire, 88 WNYC, 8 Wolff, W olff, Christian George: ary, ary, 27, 31; aards, 84; and John Cage ( see see Cage, John); children of, 42–44, 68, 89; copositional process, 63–67, 71–73, 78–79, 93–95; at Darstadt, 42–43, 50, 59; education, 6–8, 19, 21–23, 37; and Morton Feldan ( see see Feldan, Morton); and folksong, 60–61, 64–65, 76–78; and elody, 53–53, 59, 72–79, 92; and inialis, 52–53; parents of,
Tallis, Thoas, 92 Tallis, Tangleood, T angleood, 9, 10 “There Once Was a Union Maid,” 60, 61 Thopson, Randall, 19, 22 Thoson, Vir Virgil, gil, 10 Tilbury,, John, 41, 45, 53, 58, 96 Tilbury Tie Records, 33 Tolstoy T olstoy,, Leo, 7 Tom Jones , 22
Tom Sawyer , 7 Ton Hall, 55 Ton Treasure Island , 7 TriQuarterly, 70 Tudor T udor,, David, 38, 43, 50, 59, 84; death of, 81–82; and Ne York School, 55; perforances of Wolff’s usic, 20–22, 25, 27–28, 40, 47 UNESCO, 47–48 “Union Maid,” 61 United States, Wolffs’ arrival in, 6 University of Illinois, 61 University of Munich, 32 Urban Blues , 64 Valèry,, Paul, 6 Valèry Varése, V arése, Edgar, Edgar, 8, 9, 85–86 Vexations , 39
5–7, 17–18, 21, 37; and politics, 48–52, 58–60, 62, 66, 69, 76–78; as professor, 38, 41–43, 57–58, 64, 68–69, 83–84; and publishers, 32–33; recordings, 33, 40, 47, 74, 85–86, 88, 111–12; and rock usic, 39, 85–86; edding, 38 Wolff, W olff, Christian George (copositions): Accompaniments , 51–52, 58; Black Organ Preludes , 82; Bowery Preludes , 77–78; Braverman Brav erman Music , 73; Bread and Roses , 60, 67–68, 73, 79; Burdocks , 44, 46–49, 50–52, 63, 85; Cello Variations on “Hallelujah, I’m a Bum,” 60; 60; Death o Mother Jones , 60; Digger Song , 72; Duet II, 32; Duo for Pianists I, 25–26; Duo for Pianists II, 26–29, 31; Duo for Violinist and Pianist, 32; Edges , 41, 80, 85; Electric Spring , 39; Emma, 81; Exercises, 54, 61, 70, 73–74, 76, 79–80; F For or 1, 2 or 3
Vietna War, 43, 51, 58 Vox V ox Records, 69, 85
War and Peace, 22 Washington W ashington Square, 51 Webern, W ebern, Anton, 8, 10, 13, 40; style of, 12, 16, 23, 25, 73; syphony of, 79, 92; Wolff W olff likened to, 39, 56; Wolff Wolff on, 22 Wergo, W ergo, 69, 85 Wesleyan W esleyan University, University, 42, 62, 68 Westdeutscher W estdeutscher Rundfunk, 50
People, 34–37, 39–40, 87–88; F For or 5 or 10 Players , 33–34, 36; F For or Cornelius , 81; F For or Morty, 81; F For or Pianist , 27–28, 32; F For or Piano I , 20, 22, 53; F For or Piano II , 20–21, For or Prepared Piano, 14–15, 17, 22, 53; F 20–21; F For or Si , 81; Hay Una Mujer Desa parecida, 67–68, 73; In Between Pieces , 34; John David , 81–83, 90; Liyashiswa, 80; Long Piano, 92–93, 95; Madrigals , 23; Malvina, 81; Merce, 81; Microexer Microexer-cises , 93–94; Music or Magnetic Tape I ,
Index 118
28–30; Music or Merce Cunningham, 28; Music or Six or Seven Players , 28–29; Nine, 16, 56, 89; Or 4 People, 76; Orchestra: Orchestr a: Pieces , 91–92; Ordinary Mat-
ter , 90–91; Peace Marches, Marc hes, 76–77, 80, 91; Pebbles , 84–85; Peggy, 81; Preludes (piano), 74–75; Prose Collection, 41–42, 80, 84; Pulse, 84; Rhapsody, 92; Rosas , 81; Ruth, 81; Septet, 34; Serenade, 13; Snowdrop, 53–54; Sonata for Three Pianos, 24; Spring , 82; String Trio, 13; Suite for Prepared Piano, Pian o, 28; Suite II, 32; Summer , 32; Tilbury 1, 53–54; Tilbury 2 & 3, 53–54; Trio II, 32; Wobbly Music , 61–63 Wolff, W olff, Christian George (ritings and lectures), 31, 43, 46, 68, 70, 109; on classics, 83–84; Cues , 84, 109; dissertation, 37, 87; “Plato and the Ne Music,”” 58–59, 68 Music,
Wolff, Christian Mayhe (“He”), 42, 44 Wolff, Wolff, W olff, Helen, 5, 6, 7, 8, 17–18, 21, 37 Wolff, W olff, Kurt, 5–8, 17–18, 21, 37 Wolff, W olff, Maria, 5 W Wolff, olff, 68 of Chris Wolff, W olff, Nicholas Nikolaus (“Tico”), (half brother tian), 5 Wolff, W olff, Tasen, 43, 44, 89 Wolff, W olff, Tristra, 68, 89 Wolpe, W olpe, Stefan, 22 World W orld War War II, 6, 51 Xenakis, Iannis, 50, 76 Yenan Foru, 48, 49 Yenan Young, Y oung, La Monte, 41 Zappa, Frank, 86 Zen, 1
117
michael hicks is a professor of usic at Brigha Young
University and the author of Sixties Rock: Garage, Psychedelic, and Other Satisactions and and other orks. christian asplund is
an associate professor of usic and coposer-in-residence at Brigha Young University.
a m e r i c a n
Composers
Lou Harrison Leta E. Miller Miller and Fredric Fredric Lieberman John Cage David Nicholls Dudley Buck N. Lee Orr Willia Grant Still Willia Still Catherine Parsons Smith Rudolf Fril William Everett Elliott Carter James Wierzbicki Carla Bley Amy C. Beal Christian Wolff Michael Hicks and Christian Asplund
The University of Illinois Press is a founding member of the Association of American University Presses.
Composed in 9.5/13 Janson Text LT Std with Meta display by Barbara Evans at the University of Illinois I llinois Press Manufactured by Sheridan Books, Inc.
University of Illinois Press 1325 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820-6903 www.press.uillinois.edu
View more...
Comments
