Manifesto - Michelle Cheng

            John Cage played an undeniably significant role in challenging and reframing the definition of music.  He rejected the conventionally held idea that the basic elements of music – rhythm, harmony, melody, and duration, among others – are requirements of the form.  By his revised definition, music could include all instances of “organized sound”, effectively leaving duration (i.e. a finite amount of time) as the only necessary qualifying element.  In his essay, “On the Concept of Music,” Jerrold Levinson amends Cage’s all-encompassing definition by arguing that certain aural occurrences cannot be called music if they were not created with the intent of “aesthetic appreciation”.  He also makes a distinction between phenomena that we can retroactively apply musical concepts to and those we can truly label as musical.

            In reality, the desire to create something for the purpose of “aesthetic appreciation” should not automatically disqualify any type of organized sound, because this intent is secondary to its perceived meaning to the listener.  Even the most mundane of environmental sounds that one may not consider musical may be more significant or artistically valuable to someone else.  Therefore, defining what constitutes “aesthetic appreciation” for all listeners is futile because it is shaped by an individual’s experience and preferences.  By existence alone, any organized sound can technically be considered musical even if it cannot be analyzed like a more conventional example of music, so separating “real” music from other kinds of organized sound is unnecessary.  The now-problematic conventional classification of music is at least somewhat perpetuated by education: deeper knowledge of the academic side of music makes our personal definition of the form more established and possibly even restrictive.  Fortunately, the sheer diversity of organized sound at our disposal means that contrasting definitions of music can coexist.

            In terms of live musical performance, we tend to value the final artistic product more than the creative process itself, rather than giving equal acknowledgment to both.  Specifically, many listeners favor and expect perfection in a performance.  This tendency may be partially propagated by professional musical training, especially in classical music, where the student’s eventual goal is usually a perfect execution of a musical composition.  However, a performance devoid of errors is not always the most authentic or expressive one.  Fully live performances are the most authentic type in terms of artistic expression, followed by video and audio recordings of live performances and then edited non-live recordings.  Live performances are distinctive because the creation process of the final musical product is occurring in real time.

Comparatively, although the work being performed does not vary across these specific mediums, the artistic quality of the overall listener experience diminishes the further away one moves from the true live performance.  Studio recordings, the converse to live performance in this case, exist in a context of solitude because they are often experienced through individual listening, such as through headphones.  On the other hand, live performances are inherently a collective phenomenon, in which listeners engage in the artistic experience in a shared physical space.  Recordings of live performances, especially those with video, do not completely replicate the synergy of attending a live show, but are still valuable as artifacts of a spontaneous artistic occurrence.

 

Advances in recording and production technology have also contributed to our idealization of flawless performances.  This is especially prevalent in the realm of popular music, in which live performances sometimes consist of performers miming to studio recordings or versions pre-recorded especially for the occasion.  While there are situations that may require using a recording during a live show, such as harsh weather conditions, choosing this option ultimately defeats the purpose and integrity of live music.  Passing off performances that rely on recordings as live eliminates the opportunity for “one-time-only” idiosyncrasies – what listeners usually deem as imperfections as well as spontaneous alterations in artistic interpretation – of true live performance.