http://www.element.freewebweb.com/

 

Wojciech Kwapisiński - Music
music as non-controlled sounds. few remarks on John Cage's theory of music, ambient, field recording and the medium itself
music is buildt up of sounds. spoken words are made of sounds. words being written are the notation of a spoken language. to stop being hearing oriented imagine words in natural languages not being made of sounds but for example movements or visual signals. imagination needs to work more but, still, you can manage. now go further. the language of smells or tastes. why not. hard to imagine, but only because of our own barriers. the language of touch. the language of vibration. here somehow we go back to common understanding of the word "music". making any statement using any signs invented to bring a meaning can lead to poetry and the poetry is clearly close to music, maybe it is music even. so you can use music just like words and you can use words like music. the word "use" brings some connotations to pragmatics or simply to economy. it brings opposition when you say "music user". but why? some cultural rising aspects. not important now. in fact, people use music just like they use words. does it makes you feel bad? and further if i say that words are music do you feel offended? am i starting to write poetry or just talking nonsense? it's just a matter of definition? maybe you're right. i see or feel something bigger here. consider this text as a notation. isn't it simillar to reading notes, scores, partiture? now, while writing, i compose something using a method of improvisation. i compose a text. i improvise cause i had no plan what to write exactly when i started to write. only the topic was given. it's simillar to the theme of musical improvisation. and now, when you read this text you simply perform my composition. the effect of performance should be the feeling that you understand what i had written or you don't understand. whatever.
what word "music" really means?when you check etymology dictionaries in the web, definitions connected with "music" give variety of possible roots of the word; from mysterious art of muses, to even more mysterious abillity to think. there is this word "abillity" coming back. still no clear clue what is behind those words. so what about thinking of music as art of non-controlled sounds or art of not controlling sounds? then is it a piece of art you can share with others? what is the reason to record what you hear or think? if we go back to thinking further, if music is the abillity to think about something, is it important to share your thoughts with others? and why your answer is what it is?
music as a medium of communication and externalisation of a way of thinking about the medium itself
let's consider music an activity. music as an abstract thing doesn't speak to my imagination in clear and simple way. there is a social and communicative aspect that is essential in musical activity. if we think about music without social and communicative background, it could at times be regarded as some masochistic or self indulgent activity. If you'd leave your experiences in this field for yourself, no one would mind as long as they wouldn't suspect anything. but let us think, that whatever you do in your everyday life, you combine it with making music, just as you percieve everything as music, even if you are a salesman, a sailor or a taxi driver. maybe your whole apparition would make you a little bit weird in reception. you can see your whole life as a work of art or a piece of music written or improvised by something you'd call god or spacetime or evolution or atmosphere. Is it important that you are the receiver of this music? this cosmos? harmony of the spheres? should you tell anyone about your way of thinking and perceiving? should you look for any explanations for your special way of thinking? should you ask yourself is it a pleasure or annoyance and then share the outcome of your examination? should you measure what you perceive looking for pleasent and unpleasent offtakes and pickups? should you decode the things you perceive and write about it or tell your friends? make a theory of harmony and disharmony? theory of rhytm? theory of music? if not, would it be a burden for you just to be silent about your interesting way of thinking? maybe you know the history of music. maybe you have your own view on the topic of music. maybe you try to follow the recent discoveries in theory of music, composition and improvisation. maybe you look for something new in these fields. it must be a hard task but i know that you can make it. listening to brain waves or controlling the parameters of any matter by brain waves. nothing special. maybe you even started to compose a DNA model of an android called "beethoven's portrait" that will compose music without hearing a sound or maybe you are programming a multi improvisational composition on the world wide web. well, still i think it's not the new music you are looking for, cause that is too simple. my imagination doesn't go further but your imagination probably can. now let us take a picture of the opposite site. maybe you think that after the XX century there is no point to create any new theory of music, to make music, or even to listen to music at all. it has no purpose, and you have enough of wasting your time on something that has no concrete application and you see no fun in repeating old and well known ways of thinking. maybe this is the end of music. maybe the word "music" is just a name for epigones of the old times that are just repeating old sounds or mixing samples of possible sounds. but what for? just for purposeless purpose or purposefull useslesness? why not? the meta-meta-music time has come. but how does that sound? maybe it is a recording of a thousand of millions of recordings of natural sounds, syntetic sounds, composed sounds and improvised sounds played backwards etc etc. you can continue. for your own pleassure, for recognition or dissatisfaction and irritation. go on. what if you want to pleasure or irritate other fellowhumans? sure, you don't have to stop on fellow humans. why not give it to other animals, plants or machines? why not think of machines programmed with usage of all available knowledge about human behaviour to take over in the field of making of music? they could be better than people. the only problem the would be the purpose of programming. we can choose even to start with all applications of music we can imagine; from curing, relaxing, influencing work efficiency, torturing, to evoking amazement, hypnotizing or killing. next step would be to command to learn from feedback and seek what is the best use of music in the changing enviroment. we can start from small inputs, like counting the income of a corporation or checking the pulse of people streaming music recomended by their favourite, commercial or non-commercial music streaming platform. maybe you could listen to compositions made by wonderful computers and then reflect if you can call them authors of the music they make? are they cybernetic persons allready? do they have their rights to freedom of speech and scientific reaserch? do they have the rights to have rights to compose whatever they like? forget it. get back to communication. what is communication?
what are the fundaments of this algebra? your need of discovery? your curiosity? your pleassure? your money? or what? when you should ask yourself about the reason to share with others? who are you communicating with using your imaginary thinking of the abillity to create music, of possibility of music creation, of medium you use to think and to share? do you need to prove something? do you need to change anything?
music as an attempt to say nothing. remarks on John Cage's theory of music
maybe you know famous quote of John Cage, who said "i have nothing to say, so i say it". his ideal of music was music that means nothing, that has no meaning. he was attempting to get close to this ideal in his music activity, trying to compose with means of composition that are as much impredictable as possible. it's really difficult to compose things that you can't predict, like with creating mathematical algorhitm to generate random numbers. it depends on the ammount of numbers, how big will be the unpredictability, but in the same time you need to make a frame of which you can start to generate those random numbers, numbers that are without any visible link between them. the only visible link should be the command to make the sequence of numbers impossible to predict. Cage was saying that there is no more beutifull sounds for him than sounds of the enviroment. he claimed that those sounds can have no meaning, that they communicate nothing. It's also difficult task and everything relies on the set of events you can link to specific sign, signal, or symptom. first thing is your repertoir of those means to code and decode the information. with music it gets more and more confusing. let's go after Cage's intuition. we are somewhere in the city listening to the sounds. lets consider that we can link a lot of sounds considered as signs, signals and symptoms to the things that are generating those sounds. we can compare it with listening to white noise. they say that white noise is a container of every possible sounds human ear can here. the problem is how to pick up the minimal sound events that white noise is comprised of. the second problem is the definition of coummunication and information. if communication is considered as the way to transform the information into something you can understand, link to some event you know, and if information is considered as something you can differentiate from the background, then the bigger repertoir of common sounds you have, the harder your capability to receive sounds you don't know is. let's assume that Cage definition of music was to receive something you don't know and to be curious about it. with this scope there is a problem to get this with traditional means of music composing and most of efforts in XX century music were focused on diversifying compositional means to create music. just to make it interesting if you want to hear something you never heard before. everything depends on your own actual knowledge and your psychological and phisical capacity to look further.
let us try to look further. is it possible to communicate nothing? or it is just rhetorical gimmick that means nothing and is forcing people to misuse their intelectual powers?
music as a result of excess. theory of meassurement. can listening be an act of creation
John Cage said that being a composer is just the easiest way for him to cope with reality. it's nothing special. he just found his easiest way. we can suspect that probably he would like to stick to not even just intonation but just listening. well, he couldn't. he had to compose his impossible states of events but maybe it wasn't so mere as many can think. he didn't like improvisers as a slaves of their competence to play. Improvisers are close to just intonation and their are not so far away from just listening. they just should stop playing music and many of them does it. but if they like to play, why should anyone forbidden. it can be really nice. where was John Cage with his concepts? probably he tried to escape from being made or being controlled just like improvisers with their non-idiomatic way of playing. you just play what you are. so what is the difference anyway? isn't it just something like to show the condition of XX century art as imposible? as a slavery of the market, of the money, of the technology, of the media? I don't know for sure. but i know that in ancient times there were guys who were telling about uselessness of music, about emptiness of music, about its hypnotic power to make people stupid, as a result of excess. something went wrong and people started to use their powers for nothing, for self amusement and time wasting, time counting. music is so often connected with mathematics and phisics. it surely has much in common with them. even scientific method rule number one is just to observe. observe with all senses you have. the less is your impact on things you observe, the biggest will be your knowledge. the same was with budda and other meditators. do nothing. observe. so what new we obtain after our short examination?
nothing

Wojciech Kwapisiński - Music (Częstochowa 2019)


music as non-controlled sounds. few remarks on John Cage's theory of music, ambient, field recording and the medium itself


music is buildt up of sounds. spoken words are made of sounds. words being written are the notation of a spoken language. to stop being hearing oriented imagine words in natural languages not being made of sounds but for example movements or visual signals. imagination needs to work more but, still, you can manage. now go further. the language of smells or tastes. why not. hard to imagine, but only because of our own barriers. the language of touch. the language of vibration. here somehow we go back to common understanding of the word "music". making any statement using any signs invented to bring a meaning can lead to poetry and the poetry is clearly close to music, maybe it is music even. so you can use music just like words and you can use words like music. the word "use" brings some connotations to pragmatics or simply to economy. it brings opposition when you say "music user". but why? some cultural rising aspects. not important now. in fact, people use music just like they use words. does it makes you feel bad? and further if i say that words are music do you feel offended? am i starting to write poetry or just talking nonsense? it's just a matter of definition? maybe you're right. i see or feel something bigger here. consider this text as a notation. isn't it simillar to reading notes, scores, partiture? now, while writing, i compose something using a method of improvisation. i compose a text. i improvise cause i had no plan what to write exactly when i started to write. only the topic was given. it's simillar to the theme of musical improvisation. and now, when you read this text you simply perform my composition. the effect of performance should be the feeling that you understand what i had written or you don't understand. whatever.

what word "music" really means? when you check etymology dictionaries in the web, definitions connected with "music" give variety of possible roots of the word; from mysterious art of muses, to even more mysterious abillity to think. there is this word "abillity" coming back. still no clear clue what is behind those words. so what about thinking of music as art of non-controlled sounds or art of not controlling sounds? then is it a piece of art you can share with others? what is the reason to record what you hear or think? if we go back to thinking further, if music is the abillity to think about something, is it important to share your thoughts with others? and why your answer is what it is?


music as a medium of communication and externalisation of a way of thinking about the medium itself


let's consider music an activity. music as an abstract thing doesn't speak to my imagination in clear and simple way. there is a social and communicative aspect that is essential in musical activity. if we think about music without social and communicative background, it could at times be regarded as some masochistic or self indulgent activity. If you'd leave your experiences in this field for yourself, no one would mind as long as they wouldn't suspect anything. but let us think, that whatever you do in your everyday life, you combine it with making music, just as you perceive everything as music, even if you are a salesman, a sailor or a taxi driver. maybe your whole apparition would make you a little bit weird in reception. you can see your whole life as a work of art or a piece of music written or improvised by something you'd call god or spacetime or evolution or atmosphere. Is it important that you are the receiver of this music? this cosmos? harmony of the spheres? should you tell anyone about your way of thinking and perceiving? should you look for any explanations for your special way of thinking? should you ask yourself is it a pleasure or annoyance and then share the outcome of your examination? should you measure what you perceive looking for pleasent and unpleasent offtakes and pickups? should you decode the things you perceive and write about it or tell your friends? make a theory of harmony and disharmony? theory of rhytm? theory of music? if not, would it be a burden for you just to be silent about your interesting way of thinking? maybe you know the history of music. maybe you have your own view on the topic of music. maybe you try to follow the recent discoveries in theory of music, composition and improvisation. maybe you look for something new in these fields. it must be a hard task but i know that you can make it. listening to brain waves or controlling the parameters of any matter by brain waves. nothing special. maybe you even started to compose a DNA model of an android called "beethoven's portrait" that will compose music without hearing a sound or maybe you are programming a multi improvisational composition on the world wide web. well, still i think it's not the new music you are looking for, cause that is too simple. my imagination doesn't go further but your imagination probably can. now let us take a picture of the opposite site. maybe you think that after the XX century there is no point to create any new theory of music, to make music, or even to listen to music at all. it has no purpose, and you have enough of wasting your time on something that has no concrete application and you see no fun in repeating old and well known ways of thinking. maybe this is the end of music. maybe the word "music" is just a name for epigones of the old times that are just repeating old sounds or mixing samples of possible sounds. but what for? just for purposeless purpose or purposefull useslesness? why not? the meta-meta-music time has come. but how does that sound? maybe it is a recording of a thousand of millions of recordings of natural sounds, syntetic sounds, composed sounds and improvised sounds played backwards etc etc. you can continue. for your own pleassure, for recognition or dissatisfaction and irritation. go on. what if you want to pleasure or irritate other fellowhumans? sure, you don't have to stop on fellow humans. why not give it to other animals, plants or machines? why not think of machines programmed with usage of all available knowledge about human behaviour to take over in the field of making of music? they could be better than people. the only problem there would be the purpose of programming. we can choose even to start with all applications of music we can imagine; from curing, relaxing, influencing work efficiency, torturing, to evoking amazement, hypnotizing or killing. next step would be to command to learn from feedback and seek what is the best use of music in the changing enviroment. we can start from small inputs, like counting the income of a corporation or checking the pulse of people streaming music recomended by their favourite, commercial or non-commercial music streaming platform. maybe you could listen to compositions made by wonderful computers and then reflect if you can call them authors of the music they make? are they cybernetic persons allready? do they have their rights to freedom of speech and scientific reaserch? do they have the rights to have rights to compose whatever they like? forget it. get back to communication. what is communication?

what are the fundaments of this algebra? your need of discovery? your curiosity? your pleassure? your money? or what? when you should ask yourself about the reason to share with others? who are you communicating with using your imaginary thinking of the abillity to create music, of possibility of music creation, of medium you use to think and to share? do you need to prove something? do you need to change anything?


music as an attempt to say nothing. remarks on John Cage's theory of music


maybe you know famous quote of John Cage, who said "i have nothing to say, so i say it". his ideal of music was music that means nothing, that has no meaning. he was attempting to get close to this ideal in his music activity, trying to compose with means of composition that are as much impredictable as possible. it's really difficult to compose things that you can't predict, like with creating mathematical algorhitm to generate random numbers. it depends on the ammount of numbers, how big will be the unpredictability, but in the same time you need to make a frame of which you can start to generate those random numbers, numbers that are without any visible link between them. the only visible link should be the command to make the sequence of numbers impossible to predict. Cage was saying that there is no more beautifull sounds for him than sounds of the enviroment. he claimed that those sounds can have no meaning, that they communicate nothing. It's also difficult task and everything relies on the set of events you can link to specific sign, signal, or symptom. first thing is your repertoir of those means to code and decode the information. with music it gets more and more confusing. let's go after Cage's intuition. we are somewhere in the city listening to the sounds. lets consider that we can link a lot of sounds considered as signs, signals and symptoms to the things that are generating those sounds. we can compare it with listening to white noise. they say that white noise is a container of every possible sounds human ear can here. the problem is how to pick up the minimal sound events that white noise is comprised of. the second problem is the definition of coummunication and information. if communication is considered as the way to transform the information into something you can understand, link to some event you know, and if information is considered as something you can differentiate from the background, then the bigger repertoir of common sounds you have, the harder your capability to receive sounds you don't know is. let's assume that Cage definition of music was to receive something you don't know and to be curious about it. with this scope there is a problem to get this with traditional means of music composing and most of efforts in XX century music were focused on diversifying compositional means to create music. just to make it interesting if you want to hear something you never heard before. everything depends on your own actual knowledge and your psychological and phisical capacity to look further.

let us try to look further. is it possible to communicate nothing? or it is just rethorical gimmick that means nothing and is forcing people to misuse their intelectual powers?


music as a result of excess. theory of meassurement. can listening be an act of creation


John Cage said that being a composer is just the easiest way for him to cope with reality. it's nothing special. he just found his easiest way. we can suspect that probably he would like to stick to not even just intonation but just listening. well, he couldn't. he had to compose his impossible states of events but maybe it wasn't so mere as many can think. he didn't like improvisers as a slaves of their competence to play. Improvisers are close to just intonation and their are not so far away from just listening. they just should stop playing music and many of them does it. but if they like to play, why should anyone forbidden. it can be really nice. where was John Cage with his concepts? probably he tried to escape from being made or being controlled just like improvisers with their non-idiomatic way of playing. you just play what you are. so what is the difference anyway? isn't it just something like to show the condition of XX century art as imposible? as a slavery of the market, of the money, of the technology, of the media? I don't know for sure. but i know that in ancient times there were guys who were telling about uselessness of music, about emptiness of music, about its hypnotic power to make people stupid, as a result of excess. something went wrong and people started to use their powers for nothing, for self amusement and time wasting, time counting. music is so often connected with mathematics and phisics. it surely has much in common with them. even scientific method rule number one is just to observe. observe with all senses you have. the less is your impact on things you observe, the biggest will be your knowledge. the same was with budda and other meditators. do nothing. observe. so what new we obtain after our short examination?

nothing

 

Wojciech Kwapisiński - silence as a data 2020

 

Let me speak about the matter of music. Silence, not a sound. Something that so many people are afraid of. Does silence is really impossible to achieve? Silence as a metaphor of death. Turn you off as an annoying computer that you are connected with in desperate search for information. Let me inform you. Let me speak. With all your crypto-trust, you can rely on me. How can I rely on you without any trust? Cause I have no. So simple. The machine will be our judge. So safe, but do you know, who is writing the program? Is it the time when machine does it? Are you sure? And if it does, are you safe? Let me compute it. I will speak to you in the second person more and wider, to make you understand, how deeper and thoughtfully people and machines will call you like a son and daughter. They already started, my son. They already started, my daughter. You are the chosen one, the one to be turned to zero. Time breaking activity, pulse measurement, not an interface any more, rather inter-brain. The dream to communicate to recognize the truth. To survive your own death. Let us be the one! Let me count your time. Any hope you need? I will give you a bit. The space is dilating.

 

Wojciech Kwapisiński - Chanson o Spatial Music Zygmunta Krauzego. (2013/2014)

 

Wiemy od dawna, że kompozytorom nie wypada uchodzić za półbogów stwarzających nowe światy. Prometeusz zawsze kończy przybity do skały, tam, gdzie czekają sępy.

Na płycie Spatial Music możemy posłuchać trzech utworów: studyjnej wersji Kompozycji Muzyczno-Przestrzennej powstałej w 1968 roku i na nowo zmiksowanej przez Krauzego, kompozycji Fete galante et pastorale z roku 1974 zarejestrowanej na żywo przy wykorzystaniu akustycznych właściwości 26 komnat barokowego zamku Eggenborg w Grazu, oraz nagraniowego performansu Arszyna powstałego podczas wystawy Sounding the Body Electric, która odbyła się w Łodzi w roku 2012.
Słuchając tej płyty mogę poczuć się jak Arszyn przemierzający pomieszczenia instalacji Teresy Kelm, Zygmunta Krauzego i Henryka Morela. Moje słuchanie może być takim właśnie nagraniowym performansem. Nie trzeba go nawet nagrywać. Panta rei.
Mam przed sobą trzy sytuacje muzyczne, które są istotnie tym samym, gdy przemierzam wraz z nimi przestrzeń między kuchnią a łazienką. Ta muzyka przypadła mi do gustu, a ci, którzy się z nią zetknęli realizują swoją wersję muzyki przestrzennej.

Ta muzyka opowiada mi, że w 1968 roku byliśmy już blisko prawdy. To był ten sam utwór, ale z innej perspektywy. Dziś wracamy do muzyki przestrzeni. Żeby iść dalej musimy nauczyć się jej do końca. Łatwo zapomnieć skąd jesteśmy. Ciągłe zapominanie jest nieracjonalne.

Muzyka będzie przypominać o celu wędrówki. W muzyce nie ma miejsca na projektowanie nieistniejących światów. W muzyce nie ma czego zazdrościć. W muzyce nie ma komu gratulować. Można przejść z kuchni do łazienki, albo z sali koncertowej do centrum handlowego. Można nacisnąć przycisk stop, albo przewinąć oszukańcze partytury. Muzyka będzie zawsze, mimo, że niektórzy jeszcze próbują nam wmówić, że jesteśmy tylko przedmiotami w innej instalacji.
Mówią ci, żeś znów rybałtem, godnym pogardy, na samym dnie łańcucha pokarmowego. Mówią ci, żeś znów wagantem, na usługach tego czy innego pana. Nie przejmuj się, idź i przypominaj prawdę.

Goodspeed, You Black Emperor, a Bogu niech będą dzięki za Zygmunta Krauzego.
Wojciech Kwapisiński - nowe buty Milo Kurtisa, albo od początku do końca (2013/2014)
Będzie to recenzja płyty zespołu Grupa W Składzie. To debiutanckie wydawnictwo zespołu założonego w latach siedemdziesiątych. Już choćby nad tym faktem wypada się zastanowić.
Wciąż musimy się uczyć, bez końca. Żeby być dobrym uczniem, trzeba być dobrym nauczycielem. Żeby być dobrym nauczycielem, trzeba być dobrym uczniem. Jednocześnie i bez końca. Nie warto zatrzymywać się tam gdzie pojawia się przeszkoda: „Jeść. Myśleć. Grać.” Ta akcja artystyczna jest bez końca. Zmienia się tylko jej forma.
Grupa W Składzie zajmując się muzyką sięgała jej granic i przekraczała je. Ich muzyka żyje, ich muzyka płynie dalej. Ludzie zaangażowani w ten zespół angażowali też innych, poszerzali formułę, współpracowali ze wszystkimi, którzy tak jak oni, chcieli szukać porozumienia, wyrażenia swoich emocji i myśli w nowym języku, który pozwoliłby pokonać to, co mogło wydawać się nie do przejścia. Dziś muzycy chcą robić to samo. Dlatego ta płyta nie jest dokumentem minionych czasów. Wszystko dzieje się cały czas.
Czym są kaliskie domy kultury? Sił życiowych nie można powiększać przez stawianie murów, kłamstwo i strach. Jesteśmy wszakże chodzącymi reklamami. Co chcecie reklamować? Powiedziałbym, że trzeba kupić płytę Grupy W Składzie, ale ta płyta jest za darmo. Sfinansowana została przez Wydawnictwo Trzecia Fala, Centrum Sztuki Fort Sokolnickiego, Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego. Świetna inwestycja firm z perspektywami.
Pracuj, by się uczyć, nie pracuj dla pieniędzy. Znacie to? Pieniądze są wymyślone, człowiek jest. Tu zacytuję przedstawiciela innej, nieistniejącej już firmy:
"A teraz laureat pierwszej nagrody w kategorii/klasie otwartej. Sądzę, że muszę się wytłumaczyć z tego nazewnictwa, nieco figlarnego, zaczerpniętego z szybownictwa i jak się okazuję niezbyt adekwatnego. Otóż nazwy tych kategorii są świadectwem kłopotów, trudności w jakich postawiła jury różnorodność propozycji, różnorodność produkcji, często wykraczających poza ramy znane, uznane. To jest świadectwo tych trudności, jak i swego rodzaju próba ich przezwyciężenia. W kategorii otwartej mieściły się te zespoły, których podstawową cechą jest otwarty stosunek do muzyki, do rzeczy w muzyce nowych, jeszcze nieznanych, być może niesłusznych, ale zawsze odważnych i zasługujących na uznanie. Lansowanie tego rodzaju idei w amatorskim ruchu muzycznym było zawsze cechą szczególną, jakoś naczelną, kaliskich spotkań i sądzę, że państwa udział w tym koncercie, państwa akceptacja tego festiwalu jest jednocześnie akceptacją tej idei. Wobec tego z ogromnym zaufaniem, choć przyznam nie bez obaw, proponuję występ laureata pierwszej nagrody w kategorii otwartej, warszawskiej Grupy W Składzie."
Firma ta szczęśliwie przestała istnieć, bo nie znała się na biznesie. Cytat ten pokazuje jednak, że ludzie myślący też w tej firmie pracowali. Najcenniejszy surowiec do wydobycia jest w nas. Muzyka zawarta na debiutanckiej płycie Grupy W Składzie jest piękna. Żeby docenić piękno tej muzyki, trzeba ją zrozumieć.
Wojciech Kwapisiński - Piosenka o przestrzeni (2012/2013)
Będzie to piosenka na podstawie książki "Doskonale zwyczajna rzeczywistość. Socjologia, geografia albo metafizyka muzyki" autorstwa Michała Libery (Warszawa 2012).
Jedną z tez tej książki jest uznane twierdzenie mówiące, że wszystko w tym świecie ma swoją rynkową wartość i nie można się od tego uwolnić. Inna teza głosi, że oficjalnie wszystko we wszystkich możliwych światach jest muzyką. Z tych dwóch tez wynika słuszny wniosek, iż potrzeba innowacyjności i odkrywania nowych światów w muzyce tego świata jest obecnie przyspieszoną wersją gestu, który rozpływa się w powietrzu niczym muzyka. Michał Libera błyskotliwie opisuje spektakularne osiągnięcia - a tym samym klęski - kolejnych przełomowych dla historii muzyki odkryć. Takie jest prawo tego świata, że rozdziobią nas kruki i wrony.
Od siebie dodam, że współczesny improwizator stał się wreszcie muzykiem ludowym, a muzyka nieidiomatyczna jest teraz pięknym folkowym idiomem. Pomostem między człowiekiem a nadczłowiekiem był Derek Bailey. Niech go Bóg błogosławi. Znowu wystarczy tylko iść ze swoimi skrzypkami na ulicę i na puszczę i grać. Można też zostać w domu – o ile ma się dom i życzliwych sąsiadów.
Muzyka akademicka, która wchłania w siebie eksperymenty wszelkiej maści, niedługo – za sound artem - zacznie przenosić się do galerii sztuki, a potem na ulicę i na puszczę odkrywając na nowo te same niezmierzone jeszcze lądy i oceany słuchania człowieka współczesnego. Miejmy nadzieję, że dogonią Janko Muzykanta nim będzie za późno.
Wszystko wskazuje na to, iż człowiek współczesny rozwinął się na tyle, że może ze spokojem przyznać, że jest człowiekiem pierwotnym, a kształt swojej misternie w tym świecie budowanej cywilizacji uznać za bezsensowny niczym muzyka.
Przemysł muzyczny jak każdy inny przemysł oparty został na błędzie (oszustwie/przekręcie). Błąd ten był potrzebny by móc go dziś zobaczyć w jakości HI-FI. Tę tragiczną prawdę wyraża w swojej pracy Michał Libera. Niech będzie to wiedza radosna!
Aby zdobyć władzę w tym świecie trzeba zdobyć przestrzeń. Identycznie; aby grać muzykę w tym świecie trzeba zdobyć przestrzeń. aby przeprowadzić zmiany w tym świecie trzeba zdobyć przestrzeń; aby ukrócić władzę w tym świecie trzeba zdobyć przestrzeń; aby znieść władzę i opuścić ten najlepszy z możliwych światów, który w istocie jest tylko jednym z możliwych światów, trzeba uwolnić przestrzeń.
Ileż tu pytań, wątpliwości i wyzwań dla nowej muzyki! Skąd brać motywację, skoro to, co ma zmuszać nas do rozwoju jest bez sensu? Można tylko wykrzyczeć slogany takie jak: wszystko zależy od ciebie. praca u podstaw. działanie oddolne i odgórne. ucz się ucz, nauka to potęgi klucz. Człowiek to istota twórcza. Uwolnij przestrzeń.
Gdy piszę tę piosenkę obchodzimy święta Bożego Narodzenia, niebo gwiaździste świeci piętro nade mną, a mój ojciec gra ballady Okudżawy piętro pode mną. Doskonale zwyczajna rzeczywistość.
Życzę nam, by w innym możliwym świecie znalazło się miejsce dla wszystkich. Ta wiara jest moja.

Wpisz treść wiadomości.
Wpisz swój adres email.Przepisz kod z obrazka.