1 Studying Musical Performance Symposium 22.5.

2008 Hanna Kaikko / University of Turku

Not Rehearsing but Performing Free Improvised Music

Introduction In my research I study free improvisation music and in this paper I am going to present some interesting aspects in free improvisation music that have come up in my discussions with some improvisers in Turku. These six improvisers whom I have interviewed about their music making are just a small sample of a Finnish underground music scene that is based on improvisation as a method and a goal for their actions.1 At first I want to point out just how I use the terms free improvisation and free improvised music in this presentation. Free improvisation can refer to free improvisation that has its roots in free jazz but also to free improvised music that has evolved in Europe with more connections to other types of popular music and classical music. In this context terms free improvisation and free improvised music are to be understood as the music genre known as European free improvisation. What is free improvisation music and what is it not? The genre of free improvisation first appeared a few years after when other improvisational musics and methods of composing in the mid-1950s begun again to gain foothold in the music culture. Free improvisation, free jazz and improvisationrelated compositional methods in the Western contemporary classical music (American experimental music and European avant-garde music) differ from each other, although they do have similarities, and although their proponents do share some thoughts and one view in particular - creating musical works in real time. It is not easy to make a distinction between all the musics that are labelled free improvisation or free music and I am not always quite sure how necessary it is, but at least it is possible to distinguish
1

Some of the improvisers wanted to remain anonymous so throughout this text I refer to them with a letter i (as interview) and numbers, 1 being the first interviewee and 6 the last.

2 the free improvisational musics that have evolved in the United States from those evolved in Europe. Todd S. Jenkins (2004) writes about this division:
The general distinctions between music that is considered free jazz and that which is considered free improv in a modern European experimental sense, are that the former uses some type of reference points, be they short composed themes, jazz-playing techniques, or more general structural suggestions, an some recognizable swing inflictions or syncopations (ibid., xxxixxxii).

This division and the debate over the question in what music improvisation first began to reappear into the music culture are still very much alive. A certain kind of history of free improvisation and to improvised music is being written and the debate about its origins is more or less linked to a discussion of its origins in America and Europe. George E. Lewis (1996/2002) emphasizes the meaning of African-American culture and jazz music in the reappearance of improvisation and real-time music making and reads improvisation musics history from this angle. Matthew Sansom (2001), on the other hand, connects improvisation more closely to the experimental classical music in America and Europe. All of the improvisational musics do share a kind of improvisational history since in the 1960s and 1970s it was not all that rare for musicians from different genres to collaborate. For example AMM, a group co-founded by percussionist Edwin (Eddie) Prvost (who has also theorized about improvisation and its practice) with tenor saxophonist Lou Gare, bassist Lawrence Sheaff and guitarist Keith Rowe, linked together jazz musicians and classical composers (such as Cornelius Cardew and Christian Wolff). Outside AMM, Prvost has also worked together with other individual European free improvisers such as guitarist Derek Bailey. Throughout the history of the genre, musicians have tried to formulate their ideas of improvisation and reply to the question: What is and what is not free improvisation. Derek Bailey, who can be seen as one of the main figures in European free improvisation, has presented his own views on free improvisation as music as well as a music making technique on numerous occasions. He defines the characteristics of free improvisation thus:
Diversity is its most consistent characteristic. It has no stylistic or idiomatic commitment. It has no prescribed idiomatic sound. The characteristics of freely improvised music are established only by the sonic musical identity of the person or persons playing it. (Bailey 1980/1992, 83.)

3 He divides improvisational musics into idiomatic and non-idiomatic improvisation. Idiomatic improvisation he considers as mainly concerned with the expression of an idiom such as jazz, flamenco or baroque and as something that takes its identity and motivation from that idiom (mts., xi). Non-idiomatic improvisation is not tied to representing an idiomatic identity and, in Baileys view, is more often found in free improvisation (xii). It is worth noticing how in this particular text, after 20 years of improvising, Bailey makes a quite rigid point that not all of the music that is called free improvisation is non-idiomatic (which he considers to be free improvisation in its purest form). He excludes a lot of improvisationally created music from his category of improvisation by such a demarcation. Defining musical free improvisation has been mainly in the hands of the doers, the musicians. During the last 15 years, it has also become a subject of research in musicology and ethnomusicology. Many of these researchers have a personal musical interest in improvisation and some are improvisers themselves. David Borgo2 (1999) for example has written his dissertation about the dynamics of musical free improvisation, Julie Smith3 (2001) has studied in her research women improvisers and Matthew Sansom4 (1997) has made a qualitative investigation of musical meanings in free improvisation. In Finland, the focus on studying free improvisation has been mostly in its usage as a method of composing or music making in classical5, religious6 and jazz music, and in its usage as a teaching method or part of music therapy.

In his dissertation Borgo states that in a free improvisation performance musical techniques, relationships and interactions are continually refined and negotiated. And by studying this we may well come to understand the dynamics of the natural world and our place within it. He analyses the interaction and synergy in few specific recorded performances and suggests in the end, that a free improvisation ensemble may be viewed as an autopoietic or self-producing and self-regulating social system. (Mts., xi-xii.) 3 Smith attemps to read female icons (for example Mother, Demeter, Siren Hysteric, Diva-dog) as rupturing, resisting, transforming and improvising figures in a phallogocentric culture and to read them into sound in order to develop a female sonography that attests to the sonic realities of our everyday lives and the improvisational differences that compose our subjectivities (mts., 215). 4 Sansom tries to develop an understanding of musical meaning that is based on musicians statements about their creative musical experiences and psychoanalytic theory. He believes that: With improvisations creative emphasis it is possible to bring to the foreground the processes (or active dynamics) involved in the construction of musical meaning and to relax focus upon other more structurally based and cultural meanings (mts., i). 5 Hannu T. Riikonen (2000) has studied in his licentiate thesis the beliefs amongst the improvisation movement in the contemporary music in the 1960s. 6 Atte Tenkanen (1992) has studied improvisation as a working method for organists.

4 The Shift in Thinking about Freedom: From Emancipation and its Restrictions to Liberty of Choice Since its appearance in the 1960s, thoughts about freedom and improvisation in European free improvised music have little by little moved away from their original strict view. At first musicians such as Bailey and Prvost emphasized the action of breaking away from the usual tradition and musical conventions and reaching always for a new expression and new sounds with music that does not have a tradition or is not idiomatic. Freedom in improvised music was mostly seen as freeing oneself from restrictions, as emancipation in musical discourse. Still this freedom in itself contained numerous inhibiting rules, such as: you should not rely on what you have learned to do and you should not use familiar instruments. New sounds and musics were found, but sometimes the search for new musical techniques and new instruments and the attitude of not knowing (or at lest not showing that you do) became a burden. Gradually during the existence and the development of free improvised musics own recorded and written tradition (I do not mean notation but musicians own theoretical writings) the musicians have begun to emphasize the action of choosing from all of the musical cultures that surround them - preferring this as a way to reach for new interesting sounds. Freedom in improvisation music is seen as a freedom of choice without musical restrictions, as a liberty of choice. As one of my interviewees described his understanding of improvising to me: exploring sounds and searching, finding. Even repetition, which was earlier seen as the main threat to the spirit of improvisation, is embraced as a stylistic device. As another improviser explained to me that In my opinion, nothing can be forbidden in free improvisation (i5,18:53)7, and then a little later in discussion he gave to this opinion some more thought and elaborated:
It is possible to improvise freely (.) and repeat and do fixed things. If you are free, then you are allowed to do what ever you want. And you should. Well, not should but you can do. If you want to. If you are having fun. (i5, 23:25-23:42)8

This shift of attitude can also be seen in Baileys revised writing when after 12 years from its first publishing, he states in the second edition of his book his somewhat
7 8

Mun mielest vapaas improvisaatios ei voi ol mitt kiellettyy. (i5,18:53) Ni kyl o on niinku mahollist ni improvisoida vapaasti (.) ja toistaa, siis tee- vapaasti (.) saa tehd sovittuiki juttui jos o vapaa ni siin saa tehd mit vaan. Ja pitki. Tai ei pid mut et voi. Jos haluu. Jos o kivaa. (i5, 23:25-23:42)

5 softened outlook to the differences between free and idiomatic improvisation:

Paradoxically, and in spite of the earlier arguments, it seems to me now that in practice the difference between free improvisation and idiomatic improvisation is not a fundamental one. Freedom for the free improvisor is like the ultimate idiomatic expression for the idiomatic improvisor, something of a Shangri-la. All improvisation takes place in relation to the known whether the known is traditional or newly acquired. The only real difference lies in the opportunities in free improvisation to renew or change the known and so provoke an openendedness which by definition is not possible in idiomatic improvisation. And this is certainly a great enough difference, but in its moment to moment practice the essentials of improvisation are to be found, it seems to me, in all improvisation, and its nature is revealed in any of its forms (1980/1992, 142).

This change in thinking in free improvisation musics tradition in dos and donts can be analyzed with reference to negative and positive duties in moral philosophy. They can loosely be seen as examples of an ethics of prohibitions and an ethics of positive injunctions. Singer (1965) has pointed out that a positive requirement is just as restrictive as of impulses and desires as a negative prohibition (mts, 97). He argues that: there is no logical or moral difference between them, that the only differences are psychological or rhetorical (ibid., 98). This change in regarding freedom in improvisation as liberty of choice rather than emancipation, might thus be deemed only rhetorical. Yet, somehow the intentions really are different, as they do imply very different kind of instructions for actions. Improvisation as emancipation contains instructions of what one ought not to do, the basic instruction being do not rely on what you know and have learned to do. Improvisation as freedom of choice has one important rule which takes into consideration the nature of human beings as cultural beings: there is no limit for the things you can choose from. Today it seems that free improvisation is more of an open attitude towards sounds than a set of rules in creating music. I think that this change has been possible because recordings, writings and other documentations have formed a tradition for free improvisation. In its early years the music broke away from Western art, popular and jazz musics and strived for new sounds. Through making records and releasing, them this genre, that has its basics in creating works in performance, produced a tradition and a canon for itself. Now, in the 21st century, new improvisers all around the world react to this tradition. They react not only to this tradition but to the varied musical culture that surrounds them. This is the

6 case with the improvisers I have interviewed. I also see that this change in attitude had to happen in order for free improvisational music to continue its existence, by including rather than excluding. European free improvisation is so named because it was first mainly done in Europe, but all the way from its beginning it has been more international than local. Now, after the expansion of the Internet and the availability of cheap recording technology, it has become even more global. Improvisers use cheap and handy technology to make recordings and sell them directly over the Internet, or make them available as free downloads. The boundaries between self-release, small-scale publishing and commercial publishing are becoming quite blurred. Do free improvisers rehearse improvisation? Free improvisational music can sound many things, or at lest could as the limits of our culture are also the limits of our musical expression. As a listener, I can hear strange and unknown sounds but also familiar things put together in new ways that surprise me and then again sometimes do not. Anyway, that is quite beside the point I meant to raise in my paper, which is do free improvisers rehearse improvisation? Do they separate the moments of rehearsal and performance? These are just a couple of questions I asked when I interviewed improvisers about their music making. In these discussions the themes of performing and performance, recording, publishing, rehearsing and the position of audience mingled with one another. I had prepared a thematic unstructured interview since I wanted the discussions to be quite free and open for all topics the improvisers wanted to talk about. Sometimes they themselves raised into the discussion themes that I had prepared to ask from them. Still I tried to keep the discussion in control, so that I could cover all topics that interested me. As a member of improvisation musics audience, I was curious to know just what was my position in this music. In performances I had felt that by reacting to the music I was communicating with the performer (especially when I reacted to the surprising or the

7 humorous elements in the music).9 I wondered just how the abilities to improvise were acquired and did the improvisers practice? If they did rehearse, what then was improvisations connection to performance when this music emphasizes performance and creating music in the moment? In my own musical experience rehearsing had mainly meant repetition and perfecting the future performance. I also knew that in free improvisation repetition was to be avoided and the element of surprise was being emphasized. In the interviews I asked how, when and why these musicians began to improvise. Then again later we discussed about improvisations ties to performing and rehearsing improvisation. I was interested to know did the improvisers separate a moment of rehearsing improvisation and improvising from each other. I was personally interested to know just where and when can improvisation occur, what in fact was improvisations connection to performance? In discussions the improvisers did not separate rehearsing improvisation from performance. The aspects of rehearsing improvisation were tied to performing. As one of the improvisers said:
Of course one can rehearse improvisation, but then one is really rehearsing acting together with those particular people and with a particular aesthetics. I cant say how much it prepares for the kind of improvisation that is done from very different starting points and with a different set of aesthetics. Not much, I think. Perhaps some. But one does get training and practice, and gets better. (i6, 10:43-11:29).10

In other words you learn to improvise by improvising and you do get better. The same improviser explained that when improvising ones experience about playing increases and that playing sessions (as the improvisers call them) were not rehearsals either because they do not lead to a perfected performance.
Yes, well the conversation goes for example so that someone says that we really should play more cause we havent played that much and I wouldnt like to go to a gig this way. But it is hard to perceive it as an actual rehearsal because its products should be like There should be
9

This kind of improvisation music that is done within the so-called new Finnish underground music (as opposed to the mainstream, and a kind of successor 1970s Finnish underground music played by M.A. Numminen etc.) has the elements of play. The music is often named with tongue twisters or with sarcasm but still the musicians own attitude to their music is earnest. 10 h, tota, voi, kyl sit voi iha hyvi harjotella siis tietenki (..) sillo ehk harjottelee toimimista just niitte tiettyje ihmisten kanssa ja hmm (.) jotenki sil tietyl estetiikal (...) et en sit ti mite paljo se harjottaa iha iha jotenki s- sii sellaseen improvisaatioon mit tehdn ihan tosi toisenlaisist lhtkohdist toisenlaisel estetiikal, et eip varmaa kovinkaa paljon (.) ehk jonku verra, mut tota (.) kyl siin harjaantuu ja saa harjotusta ja tulee paremmaks. (i6, 10:43-11:29)

8
something that is perfected gradually and that something is that music in particular. If something in this accumulates it is ones feeling about playing. Its not rehearsing especially because its not so dependent on that future performance. It doesnt in some way lead straight to performance. Its hard to show how it would lead into it. So maybe its just acknowledged that one can lose ones experience as well as ones sensitivity and readiness. You can then recover it by doing. (i6, 11:52-13:13.) 11

Rehearsing is seen more as rehearsing technical skills and it is done in a group but alone. These technical rehearsals can sometimes slip into improvisation.
I dont know really () because the boundaries are very elusive because sometimes one really clearly practices and in this case its some kind of technical exercise trying to train your dexterity. But I dont really, I feel that I can do it, but I wont stick to it. Unintentionally it begins to flee from rehearsing because even though it were a very disciplined exercise it would stay that way just for a while. Then it begins to move further away from technical repetitions and moves away to a state of improvisation which is harder to describe in a sentence but which is like studying or looking for or finding sounds. Sometimes you do play without making a sound. I mean that the instrument is there but you are handling it so that it doesnt make a sound. But that is also part of improvisational playing. I dont know how to name it but it is improvisation, not rehearsing. (i4, 37:47-39:35.)12

When discussing rehearsing, another aspect of free improvisational music making came apparent: you do not need an audience for your improvisation for it to be considered a performance. Improvisation can happen with audience, without audience and together with a group or alone. The musicians or the player himself/herself can be the audience in playing sessions. One can also think an audience for oneself when one is playing solo improvisations. When recording solo or group improvisation sessions, the future listeners can be considered as the audience. By listening the records, you can also yourself take a position as a member of audience.
11

Joo, no siis se puhehan menee esimerkiksi sillai et joku saattaa sanoa et pits kyl soittaa enemmn kun nyt ei o soiteltu kauheesti et ku ei viittis men keikal iha sillai et ollaan soitettu nin vh. Mut tota sitki o viakee mielt vasrsinaisesti harjotteluks koska... Siin harjottelussa niiden tuotosten suhde pits olla jotenkin semmonen ett ne niinku. Et siin ois olemas joku asia joka tydellistyy vhitellen ja se ois nimenomaan se musiikki. Et ehk tossa jos joku asia kumuloituu ni se on tunne siit soittamisesta. No ehk varsinkin sen takia se ei o harjotttelua ett se ei, se ei o niin, se ei o niin alisteista sille, sil tota tuleval esityksel. Eik jotenki se johda siihe suoraan. Vaikee osottaa et miten se johtais siihe. Et kaipa siin sit vaan tunnustetaan ett sen voi pikkase kadottaa sen kokemuksen ja sen niinku herkkyyden ja valmiuden. Et sitte sit voi hankkii takasi niinku tekemll. (i6, 11:52-13:13.) 12 Et emm oikein tied (...) koska se o aika hilyv se rajanveto koska vlill sitte niinku todella niin selkeesti harjottelee eli siis vaan (.) ts tapauksessa ehk se on siis jotain teknist harjotetta siis sillai niinku (.) aah yritt kehitt jotain sorminppryytt et niinku. M en oikein, mul o vh sillee et m niinku voin teh sit mut m en oikeen pysy siin. Et siin tulee vkisinkin se rupee karkaamaan et vaikka se olis kuinka sillai kurialasta harjottelua ni siit huolimatta se yleens niinku on sit hyvin vh aikaa et sit se lhtee niinku (.) lhtee pois sellasesta niinku teknisest kertaamisesta ja toistamisesta ja siirtyy semmoseen niinku (.) siihe improvisaation tilaan joka sit o vh hankalampi sanoo niinku yhes lauseessa mut vh sillai niinku tutkimaan ni tai niinku etsimn, lytmn niinku (.) tekee jotain ehk jotain niinku. Mys jollai tavalla tulee ite soitettua sellasta niinko sellasia asioita mist ei juurikaan niinku tuu nt. Et niinku sun niinku soitin on siin mut et et sit ksittelee mys sill tavalla et se ei soi. Mutta et sekin on sit niinku osa sit improvisaatiosoittamista. En ti mink nimen sille nytte sit antais mut kyl se niin menee sinne improvisaatioon se, ei se ainakaan harjotteluu oo. (37:47-39:35)

9
i6: But of course I play and sing alone. Its just a way of being. I sing especially because I dont have that much instruments and I dont master them. Ive had times in my life when I have played everything that I have just for my own pleasure. And it is improvisation without exception, it just is. Doesnt improvisation need an audience then? No, it doesnt. I play gigs quite seldom so it is, of course the players are and audience for themselves and one positions one self in enjoying what one hears while playing. In a way no, you dont need and audience and perhaps not even the impression of an audience. (i6, 09:24-10:41)13

HK: i6:

In its extreme, the audience can be excluded altogether. And even if it is present in a performance, you can exclude it and turn towards the group, if its presence is somehow threatening. One of the main possible threats for improvisation was considered to be an audience that will not communicate with the performers, perhaps because they are unknowing of the music or hostile to it or the environment is just wrong. This kind of situation could lead the musicians either to provoke the audience or to turn away from it and towards each other. By turning their backs on the audience the improvisers in a way are securing their own important space and place, their attitude and state of mind. At first, as a member of the audience, I felt a little betrayed when I was so easily excluded from the performance. To me it seemed to be the ultimate narcissistic way of doing music when the players own presence is enough to make it proper music and even a performance. What happened then to the communicativeness of music when that communication was so ultimately self-centered? Then I began to think that perhaps it is not about excluding the audience but giving it a wider meaning. The audience does not have just a physical presence in the act of performance but the image of it is also present in playing and recording sessions. At the same time it stresses the authors position as self-reflecting and also demands some kind of quality of presence from the actual audience. I am doubtful to consider this attitude straight away as a narcissistic and selfsufficient attitude towards making music. It is also an empowering act and an aspiration to detach the music from value-judgements that are set from the outside. And then again this detachment could also be seen as a way to shield the improvisational attitude
13

HK: i6:

i6: Mut siis tietysti m laulan ja soitan yksinni. Mu- ihan vaan sillai olemisen tapana. Etenkin laulan koska ei mulla ole niin kovasti soittimii enk mkn sit niit hallitse, mut tota kyl nyt sellasii elmnvaiheit on ollu millo m oon huvikseni soitellukki kaikkee mit mul ny on saatunu oleen (..) Ja siis se on sillon improvisaatioo ilman muut, siis vaan niinku. Eli improvisaatio tartte sit yleis siihen vai? Ei, ei se kyl tartte koska no sit m oon aika harvoil keikoilla ylipns soitan (.) mm, et se on siis tietenkin ne soittajat on toisilleen yleis ja sillai ja siin niinku hmm asetutaan nauttimaan mit kuulee samalla kun soittaa (..) et siin mieless ei, ei tarvi yleis ja ei ehk ei ees ehk mielikuvaa yleisst vlttmt. (i6, 09:24-10:41)

10 against hostile and unknowing views. What is then improvisations connection to performance? In discussions improvisers tied their improvisation to performance. It seems that improvisation performance, just like the act of improvisation, is a state of mind. It is more of an attitude than a musical practice with a set of rules or an actual demonstration tied to an actual place. It happens in its particular time and in that particular place and it is done in real time, but the space for improvisation is formed by the attitude of the improviser. The improvisers can and they are allowed to choose when the improvisation becomes a performance, even if it is alone and without anyone else listening but the improviser. In my research the relations between rehearsal, improvisation, performance and also recording and publishing (for which I did not have the time to discuss here) are now in the centre of my interest. I am trying to get to the point of them and still in the search of means to do it.
Recorded interview materials i4, recorded 6.6.2007 (1:10:06) i5, recorded 2.8.2007 (1:10:52) i6, recorded 28.8.2007 (1:01:26) Bibliography Bailey, Derek 1980/1992. Improvisation Its Nature and Practise in Music. Originally published by Moorland pub. in association with Incus Records. USA: Da Capo Press. Borgo, David 1999. Reference for Uncertainty. Chaos, Order, and the Dynamics of Musical Free Improvisation. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, USA. Jenkins, Todd (S.) 2004 A. Free Jazz and Free Improvisation: An Encyclopedia, volume 1 A-J . Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Lewis, George (E.) [1996] 2002. Improvised Music after 1950: Afrological and Eurilogical

10

11
Perspectives. Black Music Research Journal, Vol 22, supplement: Best of BMRJ, pp.215-246. (Originally published in MNRJ vol. 16, no. 1, 1996.) Prvost, Edwin 1995. No Sound is Innocent: AMM and the Practice of Self-Invention: Metamusical Narratives. Wiltshire UK: Copula. Riikonen, Hannu (T.) 2000. 1960-luku ja uusi tapa improvisoida: Nykymusiikin improvisaatioliikkeen piiriss vallinneista improvisaatioksityksist. Lisensiaatinty, Turun yliopisto, musiikkitiede. Sansom, Matthew James 1997. Musical Meaning: A Qualitative Investigation onf Free Improvisation. PhD thesis, Department of Music, University of Sheffield. Sansom, Matthew 2001. Imagining Music: Abstract Expressionism and Free Improvisation. Leonardo Music Journal (Not Necessarily English Music:Britains Second Golden Age). Vol., 11, pp. 29-34. Singer, Marcus (G.) 1965. Negative and Postive Duties. The Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 15, No. 59. Smith, Julie Dawn 2001. Diva-dogs: Sounding Women Improvising. PhD thesis, the University of British Columbia, Canada. Tenkanen, Atte 1992. Urkuimprovisaation aspekteja. Urkuimprovisaatio kytnnn tyss. Improvisaatio ja koulutuksen tukiaineet. Lopputy, Sibelius-Akatemia, Kirkkomusiikin osasto.

11