grfi” ‘ tar-oggfgw‘ax .2 W ”(A 163‘. If??? WV . 9:55:45; J I“. 2;;- . l I" ',,..,A ‘ $27 “gala“ . 3; Hi." '\ :4». .I m ' ‘ ,P; 7 gd}: {)4 5311:. a gfi‘jizg‘ . I. I 9 \‘M , 4.; L “A W ;,. I"g 3. ‘ » ‘ p " 'npn-ix .., 5)., I a r ‘ NI. .. - . " " J “‘in £31?“ I ' ' ' ' 4 ;‘ . 53y ' “2?, . if. . r _ A )(1 @ ‘iw y .ngxé‘m v .w M ,. . . ‘2 ‘ 2’} ‘r 3‘ (3.- - I- h. $23333 inf-’2- ! . ' NATE 1% 30"? H: ' ' E I ' ' L. l 323‘“ ‘r "‘ «‘u a; “. . ' -‘ ‘ ’ §Iml " f“ e . I" V 2 I, w W 23‘“ I ~ ‘61 119‘; l. ’ ' e v I '2 ' “t - .. ‘4‘. Ir”: :4 woman . . ‘7 2.. “22.35%”- ‘ , 2 .I {if " Fm/aufqa" II " “”15; 3:. w."% II' N 35%.: .I\ r. I In“ at)”; 7- I J . ”v . "5 L9 . 2v 1, “A I .3: 0" :9!“ (MI. ' ) 2 . "i ‘Bflg “In I" , gm.I . Y“ > 2 5:": c ‘ t g, . » ' ' um I $5 9" ‘ f ’3 .. ." [31“ h 91%.: 12“)“. - .z : ‘ '55:»; {llg-Jl‘n "iii'fi‘mtm \ . “33'; I ‘ ”L7 22' :3.‘ :1 w! ‘ www . ‘V’ 2%" 33‘ ~ «In: I 2 i a 2 2-; :réc' (“A 3,-" " v “ “i. '3?- 3;)" «2 J5 um.- 2W 0 _-_»"9 . .94 n “:38" r.- '-‘I n- h~x In '15! 6;} ‘1... la ‘ .‘lJ :25! ’l ”:03 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III 3 1293 00895 7 1 I This is to certify that the dissertation entitled The Early Percussion Music of John Cage 1935-1943 presented by Barry Michael Williams has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein Applied Music, Theory & Literature We qmw Major professor [hm October 19, 1990 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 LIBRARY Mlchl Unlverslty PLACE IN RETUR OX to ram 9 this checkout from year record EVOID FINES return on or before date due. / DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I THE EARLY PERCUSSION MUSIC OF JOHN CAGE 1935 - 1943 BY Barry Michael Williams A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Music 1990 ABSTRACT THE EARLY PERCUSSION MUSIC OF JOHN CAGE 1935 - 1943 BY Barry Michael Williams From 1935 to 1943, John Cage composed fifteen works for percussion. Many of these works were written for and performed by percussion ensembles which the composer organized on the West Coast and later in Chicago and New York. This document addresses the historical significance of Cage’s early work in percussion and provides detailed analysis of two compositions for percussion, gigs; Construction (In Metal), and Amores. The analyses discuss Cage’s primary compositional techniques, including the "square—root" formula, fixed rhythmic patterns, and "icti-controls." Information obtained from the analyses of the works cited above is used to aid in the presentation of the other works for percussion which Cage composed during the same time period. Some of Cage’s later works for percussion are discussed in order to show the relationships between the compositional procedures employed in the early percussion works and the composer’s later experiments with chance operations, indeterminacy and "music of contingency." A summary is provided and conclusions are drawn with regard to the composer’s primary influences, his compositional styles and procedures employed in the early percussion works, and the impact of his activity in percussion on later developments in his own music and on the art form in general. Appendices include a chronological survey of John Cage’s career through 1943, a chronological list of the fifteen early works for percussion with instrumentation, and a 1940 list of percussion instruments owned by the composer. An extensive bibliography of primary and secondary sources, along with general reference materials, is included. Much of the primary source material was obtained from the John Cage Archive, housed at the Northwestern University music library, and from interviews with the composer. Copyrighted musical examples are used by permission of C.F. Peters Corporation. Copyright by BARRY MICHAEL WILLIAMS 1990 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the following individuals: the members of my committee, Professors Dale Bartlett, Dale Bonge, Mark Johnson (principal reader), and Theodore Johnson for their support and helpful suggestions; Deborah Campana and the Northwestern University Music Library for graciously allowing me access to the John Cage Archive; Stuart Saunders Smith for putting me in touch with John Cage; Terry Applebaum for believing in my potential; John Cage for his interest in this project and for graciously allowing me to interview and correspond with him: and my wife, Catherine, for her constant and unwavering encouragement. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Chapter One An Overview of John Cage’s Career Through 1943 Chapter Two An Analysis of First Construction (In Metal) Chapter Three An Analysis of Amores Chapter Four Cage's Other Percussion Works, 1935 - 1943 Chapter Five Cage’s Percussion Music Since 1943 Chapter Six Summary and Conclusion Appendix A List of Percussion Instruments Owned by John Cage vi 28 61 109 162 186 217 Appendix B Chronological List of Percussion Works by John Cage (1935 - 1943) with Instrumentation Appendix C Biographical Chronology of John Cage's Career Through 1943 Appendix D "The Future of Music: Bibliography Credo" vii 218 223 227 230 LIST OF FIGURES Instrumentation for First Construction 1In Metal). Grouping of instruments used in First Construction according to origin. Distribution of sounds in First Construction. Redistribution of sounds according to sustained and non-sustained quality. Example of instrument notation. Player 4. Notation for water gong. Player 6, measures 45-51. Notation for string piano glissandi. Player 2, measures 4 0-4 1 . Notation for string piano harmonics. Player 2, measures 101-104. viii 28 32 33 33 34 35 35 36 2-10. 2-11. 2-12. 2-13. 2-15. N I 16. 2-17. Notation measures Notation measures Notation measures Notation 200-203. Notation for string sweep on piano. Player 2, 67-69. for muting instructions. Player 5, 33-36. for muting instructions. Player 5, 146-149. of playing area. Player 6, measures of grupetti. Player 5, measures 17-20. Proportional Division 4:3:2:3:4 found in the first sixteen-measure section of First Con— struction, measures 1-16. Outline of macrostructure divisions found in First Construction. Motives found in the first sixteen-measure section of First Construction. Presentation of motives 5, 5a, 5b. Players 4 and 5, measures 17-21. ix 36 36 37 37 37 39-40 41 42-43 44 2-18. 2-22. 2-24. N I 25. Motives presented in the first three-measure subsection of Section II, measures 21-33. Motives presented in the two-measure section of Section II, measures 24-25. Integration of motives found in the final three- and four-measure subsections of Section II, measures 26-32. Motives found in Section III, measures 32-48. Motives found in Section IV, measures 48-63. Manipulation of motive 1 showing metric dis- placement, Player 3, Section V, measures 65-68. Motives found in the first three-measure sub- section of Section V, measures 69-71. Motives found in the two-measure subsection of Section V, measures 72-73. Motives found in Section VI, measures 81-88. Activity found in Section VII, measures 97-106. 45 45 46-47 48-49 50-51 52 52 53 54 55 2-28. Final sixteen-measure section and nine-measure 57-59 coda, measures 241-265. 3-1. Rhythmic reduction of Amores, movement I, 64 showing proportional phrase divisions 1:2:2/2:3/2:1.5:1.5. 3-2. Rhythmic reduction of Amores, movement I, show- 67 ing proportional phrase divisions 1:3:1:4:1:5. 3-3. Example of instrument notation. 69 3-4. Diagram of large formal divisions found in 72 movement II of Amores. 3-5. Pod rattle motive (player B) found in the first 74 three measures of Amores, movement II. 3-6. Measures 1-3 of Amores, movement II, showing 75 rhythmic stratification. 3-7. Measures 4-8 of Amores, movement II. 76 3-8. Measures 9-10 of Amores, movement II. 76 3-9. Measures 11-14 of Amores, movement II, showing 77 "icti-control" and motivic recursion. xi 3-10. 3-11. 3-12. 3-13. 3-16. 3-19. 3-21. 3-22. Measures 15-16 of Amgres, movement motivic recursion and accompanying durchbrochene-Arbeit. Measures 17-18 of Amores, Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures Measures 19-20 21-30 21-30 21-22 23-24 25-28 28-30 31-32 31-35 34-35 36-37 of of of of of of of of of of of Amores, Amores, Amores, Amores, Amores, Amores, Amores, Amores, Amoges, Amores, Amores, xii movement movement movement movement movement movement movement movement movement movement movement movement II, showing figures in II. II. II, II, II, II, II, II, II, II, II. player player player player player player player player 78 79 79 8O 81 81 82 82 83 84 84 85 85 3- 3.. 3- 3... 3- 3.. 3- 3— 23. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 3o. 31. 32. 33. Measures 38-40 of Amores, movement II. Measures 41-50 of Amores, movement II, player B. Measures 41-44 of Amores, movement II. Measures 45-50 of Amores, movement II. Section VI, measures 51-70 of Amores, movement II. Section VII, measures 71-80 of Amores, movement II. Section VIII, measures 81-90 of Amores, move- ment II. Section IX, measures 91-100 of Amores, movement II. Diagram of structure for Amores, movement II. Example of notation used in Amores, movement III (measures 1-3). Example of notation used in Trio, movement III (measures 1-3). xiii 86 87 88 89 9O 91 92 93 94 96 96 3-34. m l 35. 3-36. L») I 37. 3-38. 3-39. 3-40. Motives found in movement III of Amores. Permutations of motives found in movement III of Amores. The first two phrases found in Section I of Amores, movement III, showing motives and their permutations. Motives found in the final four-measure phrase of Section I in Amores, movement III (measures 9-12). Motives found in the first two phrases (measures 13-15 and 16-22) of Section II in Amores, movement III. Motives found in the final six-measure phrase of Section II in Amores, movement III (measures 23-28). Motives found in Section III of Amores, move- ment III (measures 29-33). Proportional division 3:3:2:2 found in the first ten-measure section of Amores, movement IV (measures 1-10). xiv 97 97 98 99 100 101 101 103 3-42. 3-44 0 3-45. 4-5. Outline of macrostructure divisions found in Amgrgs, movement IV. Measures 11-15 of Amores, movement I. Measures 61-70 of Amores, movement IV. The final two sections of macrostructure found in Amo es, movement IV (measures 81-100). Example of notation employed in Quartet, move- ment I, units 21-52. Example of notation found in Trio, movement II. Example of notation employed in Imaginary Landscaps No. 1. Outline of formal structure found in Imaginary Landscape No. 1. Imaginary Landscape No. 1, interlude 1, measure 16, string piano. Instrumentation and notation employed in Second Construction. XV 103 104 105 106 111 114 116 117 117 119 4-10. 4-11. 4-12. 4-13. 4-14. 4:- I 15. Opening motive found in Second Construction, measures 1-4, player one. Similar motive found in measures 16-19, player four. Similar motive found in measures 49-52, player one . Fugue subject found in Second Construction, measures 161-164, player two. Performance note to Living Room Music. Composite rhythms created through variations in sticking patterns found in Living Room Music, movement I, measures 1-4. Example of notation used in Living Room Music, movement II, measures 9-13. Example of notation used in Double Music, measures 1-17. Third Construction. Instrumentation for players one and two. xvi 121 121 121 122 123 123 125 127 129 4-16. 4-17. 4-18. 4-19. 4-20. 4-21. 4-22. 4-23. 4-24. Epipg gonstructiop. Instrumentation for players three and four. Ipipg Construction. Instruments grouped accord- ing to type. Combinations of periodic and aperiodic rhythmic activity found in Third Construction, measures 72-79. Rhythmic "cadences" found in Third Construction, measures 24-25 and 96-97. Instrumentation for Imaginary Lsndscaps No. 2. Imaginary Lsndscape No. 2. Notation for wire coil attached to phonographic cartridge, measures 1-2 and 35-36. Imaginary Landscape No. 3. Notation for audio frequency oscillators, measures 95-100. Imaginary Landscape No. 3. Example of super- imposed cross-rhythms, measures 13-18. Credo 1p US. Notation for radio/phonograph, measures 1-4. xvii 130 131 132 133 134 135 137 138 139 4-25. a I 26. a I 27. 4-28. 4-29. 4-30. 4-31. 4-33. 4-34. QIQQQ In 9.. QIQQQ In H.- 9131911195. Outline of form. Opening motive, measures 1-4. "First Progression," "Cowboy Solo," measures 1-20. 98-122. Credp in 31-45. gredp 1p measures US. "Facade Two," measures 1-5. US. "Second Progression," measures US. "Third Progression," measures la 5” "Third Progression," measures US. Excerpt from "Coda Facade," 29-51. Tps Wonderful Widow pf Eighteen springs. Instructions for performing on closed piano. The Wonderful Widoy g: Eighteen Springs, measures 1-12. xviii 141 141 142 142 143 144 144 145 148 150 4-35. 4-36. 4-38. 4-39. 4-40. 4.41. Eppever spd Sunsmell. Note on text. Fopever and Sunsmell. Outline of form. Eopeve; and Sunsmell, Section I, measures 1-23. Cross-rhythms found in Section II of Forever and Sunsmell, measures 34-37. Fopeve; and Sunsmell, Section II, measures 43-51. Eoreve; an Sunsmell, Section IV, measures 60-69. Foreve; an Sunsmell, Section V, measures 101-115. Notation employed in 27’10.554 For A Percus- sionist, page 5. Example of notation employed in Cartridge Music. Superimposition using page 6. Repertory of John Cage Percussion Group. xix 152 153 153 154 155 155 156 172 175 193-194 Compositional procedures utilized in percus- sion works, 1935 - 1943. Instrument types employed in Cage's fifteen early percussion works. XX 196-197 199-200 INTRODUCTION The early percussion music of John Cage, those works composed between 1935 and 1943, form an important part of the repertoire for the percussion medium. During this early period, the young composer organized the first known performing percussion ensemble in America. The success of his first percussion concert, given in Seattle, Washington in December, 1939, encouraged Cage to seek the composition of works for percussion by composers throughout North America, including Henry Cowell, Lou Harrison, Johanna M. Beyer and William Russell. It is partially due to Cage's efforts within the percussion medium that the repertoire for percussion ensembles has expanded and the percussion medium itself has gained acceptance as a genuine musical art form. Cage, in collaboration with Lou Harrison and others, experimented with percussion instruments of both conven- tional and unconventional nature. He produced music with traditional orchestral percussion instruments and with those of non-Western origin. Through the employment of "found" objects as percussion instruments (automobile brake drums, thundersheets, bottles, etc.) and electrical devices (phonographs, buzzers, and audio-frequency oscillators), 2 Cage expanded the tonal spectrum of the percussion ensemble and influenced a generation of percussion composers. The purpose of this document is to address the percussion compositions of John Cage analytically and the early performances of these works historically with the intention of providing a background from which one could approach their performance. Since many of these works remain staples of the percussion ensemble repertoire and served to influence the compositional techniques of later percussion composers, a compilation of information concerning these pieces and the analysis of certain key works from among the collection is warranted. Two of Cage’s major works for percussion are analyzed in this document, and the collected information is used to aid in the discussion of his other percussion works from the same time period. The analyses discuss Cage’s formal compositional procedures and his use of percussive timbral resources . Procedures Procedures followed in this document have been established to investigate Cage's professional career through 1943, his compositions for percussion, and the early performances of these works. The following procedural steps are taken in this investigation: Prgcsdursi gpsp st. This step develops a historical overview of John Cage’s professional career through 1943, 3 with emphasis on his organization of percussion ensembles on the West Coast, in Chicago and New York City, and the performances given by these ensembles. Materials for this survey have been obtained from articles, reviews, and interviews with the composer. The most significant biographical information was obtained from the John Cage Archive at the Northwestern University Music Library. Two notebooks in this collection, gphp Qggs: Professor Maestro Percussionist Compose; I and II, contain programs, newspaper clippings, correspondence and photographs dating from the late 1930’s through 1943. Further information was obtained from two books of inter- views with Cage, Ep; pps Bipgs: gppp ngs ip Conversation giph Qanisi Charles and gonversipg gipp gags, edited by Richard Kostelanetz. In addition, Cage’s first book, Siienge, provided vital historical data and information concerning the composer’s compositional philosophy. The author's correspondence and interview with the composer provided needed clarification of historical events and personal philosophy. Procedurai spsp IEQ- Two of Cage's compositions, Figs; Copspppgtiop (in Metal) and Amores, are analyzed in terms of structure, style, motivic relationships and instrumenta- tion. The analyses examine the number and types of instruments, rhythmic and/or melodic motives, meter, dynamics, structure, tempo and timbre. Instruments are described and substitutions recommended where necessary. 4 Notation is discussed in terms of instrument location, staff order, note arrangement and specific expressive markings. Specific examples are used to illustrate the author's findings. Procedural fipsp Ipzsg. An overview of Cage's other percussion works written between 1935 and 1943 is given, based upon the procedures established in step two. The compositions investigated include: Composition, Qats Number of Players Quartet, 1935 4 Trio, 1936 3 Imaginary Landscape No. 1, 1939 4 First Construction (in Metal), 1939 6 + assistant Living Room Music, 1940 4 Second Construction, 1940 4 Double Music (composed jointly with Lou Harrison), 1941 4 Third Construction, 1941 4 Imaginary Landscape No. 2 (or March No. 1), 1942 5 Imaginary Landscape No. 3, 1942 6 Forever and Sunsmell, 1942 2 + voice The Wonderful Widow of Eighteen Springs, 1942 1 + voice Credo in US, 1942 4 Amores, 1943 3 + prepared piano She is Asleep (Quartet for 12 Tom Toms), 1943 4 All compositions are copyrights of Henmar Press Inc. and are used herein by permission of C.F. Peters Corporation. Organization This investigation is organized in six chapters. Chapter One provides an overview of John Cage's career 5 through 1943. Chapter Two contains a specific analysis of flips; Qopsggpction (in Metal). Chapter Three contains a specific analysis of Amores. Chapter Four applies the information gained in Chapters Two and Three to Cage's other percussion works from the same time period. Chapter Five presents and discusses Cage’s percussion works composed after 1943. Chapter Six serves as a summary and draws conclusions based on the information presented in the document. Appendices include a 1940 list of percussion instruments owned by John Cage, a chronological list of Cage's percussion works (1935-1943) with instrumentation, and a biographical chronology of the composer’s career through 1943. Chapter One An Overview of John Cage’s Career Through 1943 John Cage was born in Los Angeles, California in 1912. His earliest experience with music came through piano lessons with his Aunt Phoebe James. Cage recalled, She introduced me to Moskowski and what you might call "Piano Music the Whole World Loves to Play." I started taking piano lessons when I was in the fourth grade at school but I became more interested in sight-reading than in running up and down the scaies. Being a virtuoso didn't interest me at all. After graduating as class valedictorian from Los Angeles High School in 1928, Cage entered Pomona College in Claremont, California, where he remained for two years.2 In 1930, he left for Europe, where he studied architec- 3 ture, wrote poetry, painted, and first composed music.4 Cage returned to California in the fall of 1931 and settled in Santa Monica, where he worked as a gardener in an auto court in exchange for his rent and gave lectures on modern painting and music to local housewives.5 During this period, Cage began studying composition with pianist Richard Buhlig. According to Cage: The week came when I was to speak about Schoenberg. I had learned, some time earlier, that Richard Buhlig had been the first to play Opus 11--Schoenberg’s first three piano pieces--and it suddenly occurred to me that he might be living in Los Angeles . . . so I ran to the telephone book. His name was listed! I phoned him, and asked him if he would agree to play Schoenberg's pieces for me. He replied: "Certainly not!" and hung up. Next, I wanted somehow to get him to illustrate my lecture by performing those pieces. So I decided to see him personally, so as to avoid having him abruptly end things by hanging up on me again. Well, I made the trip 6 7 from Santa Monica to Los Angeles in a great hurry to go to see him . . . but when I knocked on his door, there was no answer! I stayed in front of his house for twelve hours waiting! Finally, around midnight, he returned home, and when I explained to him that I had waited at his door for twelve hours, he agreed to see me. I asked him to play the Schoenberg pieces at the next lecture. He again answered, "Certainly not!" So then I asked him to teach me composition. He replied that he did not teach composition, but piano, but that he would, nevertheless, agree to do his best. After several months of work with him, he told me he couldn’t help me anymore, and that I should send my compositions to Henry Cowell. Cowell suggested that Cage study composition with Schoenberg, but added that he should first prepare himself by studying with Adolf Weiss, Schoenberg’s first American pupil.7 Cage moved to New York City in the Spring of 1933 to study harmony and composition with Weiss. At the same time, he attended Cowell’s courses in contemporary music, modern harmony, and music of the world’s peoples at the New School for Social Research.8 In her dissertation, Form and Structurs in thssMusic of Johp Cage, Deborah Campana makes the following observation: Although Cage's interest in pitch ordering was the initial factor prompting Cowell's suggestion that he study with Weiss and then Schoenberg, Cage's composi- tional style changed while studying in New York to reflect Cowell’s influence more than that of the twelve tone school. . . . Because Cowell had recently studied in Europe and Asia (as a Guggenheim Fellow) with Erich von Hornbostel, Professor Sambamoorthy of Madras and Raden Mas Jodjhana of Java, his music as well as the content of his classes reflected newly-cultivated ideas concerning the union of non-Western musical features with his own musical ideas. . . . Perhaps as a result of Cowell’s influence, upon Cage's return to California, an interest in neg sounds, specifically percussion, began to surface. 0 8 Cage studied counterpoint, form and analysis with Schoenberg from 1935 to 1937.11 It was during this time that Cage’s interest in percussion music and the use of noise in musical composition surfaced. Schoenberg had impressed upon his students the importance of the structural function of tonality. Cage recalls a now-famous encounter with the Austrian composer: After I had been studying music with him for two years, Schoenberg said, "In order to write music, you must have a feeling for harmony." I explained to him that I had no feeling for harmony. He then said that I would always encounter an obstacle, that it would be as though I came to a wall through which I could not pass. I said, "In that case I wiii devote my life to beating my head against that wall." In 1936, Cage became acquainted with Oscar Fischinger, an abstract film-maker who engaged the young composer to write new music for his visual projects. The association with Fischinger would profoundly influence Cage’s direction in music: When I was introduced to him, he began to talk with me about the spirit which is inside each of the objects in this world. So, he told me, all we need to do to liberate that spirit is to brush past the object, and to draw forth igs sound. That’s the idea which led me to percussion. Fischinger had given Cage the means whereby the young composer could overcome his lack of feeling for harmony. Cage began composing music for percussion instruments and, consequently, began questioning Schoenberg's teachings on the structural character of tonality. He explains: What struck me all the more was (Schoenberg's) insistence on teaching tonality as structure, as a structural means. When you think about it, composing 9 with twelve tones is only a "method." But I found the obligation to continually submit to that theory to be exaggeratedly constraining. . . . I only truly detached myself from Schoenberg’s teachings on the structural character of tonality once I began to work with percussion. Only then did I begin to make structures. But structure then became rhythmic; it was no longer a tonal structure in Schoenberg's sense.1 Cage became increasingly interested in the possibility of utilizing noise in musical composition. Peter Yates has suggested that Cage's percussion music represents an extension of Schoenberg's philosophy of the emancipation of dissonance: "Cage said that Schoenberg, when he emancipated the dissonance, should have gone farther and emancipated music from its notes."15 Cage clarified his philosophy in the 1937 statement, "The future of music: Credo." . . . whereas, in the past, the point of disagreement has been between dissonance and consonance, it will be, in the immediate future, between noise and so-called musical sounds. The present methods of writing music, principally those which employ harmony and its reference to particular steps in the field of sound, will be inadequate for the composer, who will be faced with the entire field of sound. New methods will be discovered, bearing a definite relation to Schoenberg’s twelve-tone system and present methods of writing percussion music and any other methods which are free from the concept of a fundamental tone. The principle pg form will be our only connection with the past . . . During the summer of 1937, while also working as an accompanist at the Demonstration School of the University of California at Los Angeles, Cage held the position of instructor in percussion at the Virginia Hall Johnson School 7 of Dance in Beverly Hills.1 In the academic year 1937-38, he served as accompanist in the Santa Monica public 10 schools. Also, during the spring semester of 1938, Cage and his aunt, Phoebe James, taught an extension course at UCLA entitled, "Musical Accompaniments for Rhythmic Expres- sion."18 Cage found a great deal of interest and support for his percussion music within the dance community. He explains: I was married, and (my wife) Xenia and I went to live in a house in Santa Monica that was devoted during the day to bookbinding, and in the evening to making music. Some of the people who played in the percussion group had experience as modern dancers. And what we did then was to experiment with pieces of junk and a few rented instruments. I rented a timpani [sic], a gong, some cymbals and so forth. Many of the instruments we pged were like brake drums and things from the kitchen. . . . I wrote a few pieces for this dance group at UCLA, which was nearby, and also for the athletic department that had underwater swimmers who swam underwater ballet. That was how I discovered dipping a gong in a tub of water and making a sound that way. Because I found that the swimmers couldn’t hear the music when it was above water, but could if it was both in and out. So this connection with the dancers led me to the possibility of getting employment working with dancers. I went one day to San Francisco and got actually four jobs in one day and of the four I chose to work with Bonnie Bird, who had been in the Martha Graham grogg, and was teaching at the Cornish School in Seattle. Cage moved to Seattle in late 1938 to join the faculty at the Cornish School. The time he had spent in California in the years 1935-37 had yielded two compositions for percussion: the Quaptet (1935) and Igip (1936), each based on fixed rhythmic patterns for unspecified instruments. Cage’s compositional output for percussion and his continued interest in the medium increased dramatically in the years following his move to Seattle. 11 Cage chose to move to Seattle because of a large collec- tion of percussion instruments he found in a closet at the Cornish School.21 The instruments had been left there by a German dancer who had used them to accompany his chore- ography.22 Cage used these instruments as the foundation for his own collection of percussion instruments, which would eventually number over three hundred.23 With his newly-found collection of instruments, Cage organized a percussion orchestra comprising faculty members, students and dancers. Cage’s wife, Xenia, and dancer Merce Cunningham were among those who played in the ensemble.24 In addition to providing accompaniment to the dance, the percussion orchestra presented many of the earliest performances of experimental works for percussion. On December 9, 1938, at the Cornish School in Seattle, John Cage presented a concert of percussion music, the first complete concert of its kind in America.25 The concert program included five works for percussion ensemble. Those works are listed as follows: William Russell Waltz and Foxtrot Ray Green Three Inventories of Casey Jones Gerald Strang Percussion Music for Three Players John Cage Trio Quartet A single sentence of explanation appeared in the program: "Percussion music really is the art of noise and that’s what it should be called."26 The works presented at Cage’s first percussion concert required relatively modest forces. No work presented 12 required more than four percussionists, and the largest number of instruments employed in any given work was twenty-three, compared to VarEse’s Ion’ atio , composed in 1931, which requires thirteen players performing on forty percussion instruments. Nonetheless, the program presented at the Cornish School attracted attention and interest. Many more amateur percussionists volunteered to play in Cage’s ensemble, and Cage's invitation to composers for the composition of new works was met with enthusiasm.27 Cage presented his second percussion concert on Friday, May 19, 1939, at the Cornish School. A list of works performed on that program reveals the apparent success the percussion group enjoyed: William Russell March Suite Lou Harrison Counterdance in the Spring Johanna Beyer Three Movements William Russell Studies in Cuban Rhythms Lou Harrison Fifth Simfony Henry Cowell Pulse John Cage Trio William Russell Waltz and Foxtrot The works presented on the second concert required as many as nine performers and thirty percussion instruments. Cage’s percussion group performed a similar program at Mills College’s Bennington School of the Dance on July 27, 1939, and another at the Lial Studio in Monterey, California on August 5, 1939.28 Alfred Frankenstein, music critic for the Sgp Francisco thppipis, made the following observation regarding the Mills College program: 13 We are still very far from the subtlety of rhythmic speech the Arabs and Indians get out of their little hand drums or the symphonic grandeur of the Balinese percussion orchestras, but such experiments as thgg of last night point toward interesting developments. In the same article, Frankenstein commended modern dance: One might almost say that the modern dance discovered the possibilities of the battery for the Western world, wherefore the sponsorship of the concert by the dance organization. The modern percussion movement began with the reduction of dance accompaniment to simple, essential rhythms without melody. It should be emphasized that the players in Cage’s percussion group were not formally trained percussionists: neither was Cage himself. In a personal interview with the author, he explained: We could do anything in the way of counting, but we couldn’t roll. So, some of the pieces, like those sent to us by (Mexican composer) Chavez, we were unable to play. Cage also pointed out that while the early percussion performances were well received by the dance community, there was no interest among trained percussionists.3o In his review of the Mills College performance, Frankenstein expressed these sentiments regarding the performers’ technical skill: One suspects the whole thing will take on firmer outlines when dance agiompanists acquire a genuine percussion technique. On December 9, 1939, Cage presented his third concert of percussion music at the Cornish School. The program included: 14 Henry Cowell Pulse William Russell Fugue Mildred Couper Dirge Amadeo Roldan Ritmicas V and VI John Cage Construction in Metal Henry Cowell Return William Russell Three Dance Movements Cage’s third percussion concert required the largest ensemble of any previous performance. As many as eleven performers were employed (in Roldan’s Ritmicas), and fifty-eight different instruments were used (in Cage’s Qonsppuptiop ip Metsi). The following note by Henry Cowell appeared in the program: I honestly believe and formally predict that the immediate future of music lies in the bringing of percussion on one hand, and sliding tones on the other, to as great a state of perfection in construction of composition and flexibility of handling on instruments as older elements are now. 2 Shortly following the third concert at the Cornish School, Cage and his percussion group traveled to several colleges to present their program. In January and February of 1940, the ensemble performed at the Universities of Idaho and Montana, Whitman College in Washington and Reed College 33 in Oregon. Although the programs received mixed reviews, the overall reception to this experimental percussion music was positive. The program presented at Reed College, Oregon, included lengthy program notes which concluded with the following statement by John Cage: Listening to the music of these composers is quite different from listening to the music, say, of Beethoven. In the latter case, we are temporarily protected or transported from the noises of everyday life. In the case of percussion music, however, we find that we have mastered and subjugated noise. We become 15 triumphan§4over it and our ears become sensitive to its beauties. By the summer of 1940, Cage's arsenal of noises had expanded to well over 150 percussion instruments of both conventional and unconventional nature. A July 2, 1940, list of percussion instruments appears in Appendix A. In the years 1939 - 1940, Cage also expanded his compositional output for percussion. Imaginary Lgpdsgapg pr_1, for phonograph records of constant and variable frequency, large Chinese cymbal and string piano (a term borrowed from Henry Cowell denoting an instrument played from its interior) is considered to be among the first compositions of electronic music. In lmagipgzy Lspdscspe upy_l, Cage first employed a structure which would accommodate both noises and so-called musical sound. He began with a pre-compositional time frame in which appears four sections of three times five measures. Each fifteen-measure section is separated by interludes of one, two, and then three measures. The work concludes with a four-measure coda. By constructing first the time frame, then filling it with musical events (both pitched and non-pitched), Cage began to realize the ideas of non-discrimination between noise and tonality he had predicted in his 1937 statement, "The Future of Music: Credo." Cage extended his rhythmic structure in Figs; Constructiop (in Metal) for percussion sextet. This work 16 consists of sixteen large sections (the macrostructure), each of which comprises sixteen measures based on the durational proportions 4:3:2:3:4 (the microstructure). firs; Cpnsrrnpripn is analyzed in detail in Chapter Two. A similar structural process was followed in Secong Constrpctipn, which also employs a rhythmic structure of sixteen times sixteen measures. The technique of fashioning a rhythmic structure to be filled with musical events became ' known as the "square-root" formula. Cage would rely on the "square-root" formula of rhythmic structuring in his compositions over the following twelve years.35 Cage taught at Mills College during the Summer Session of 1940. He, along with Lou Harrison, served as instructor in a dance accompaniment course which dealt with percussion, techniques and problems of accompaniment and composition for the dance.36 On July 18, 1940, Cage, Harrison and William Russell presented a concert of percussion music, including three premiere performances: Chicago Sketches by Russell, Canticle by Harrison and snirs by Jose Ardevol.37 Additional performances included Enlss by Henry Cowell, ssspnd Construction by Cage, and Roldan’s Birmics V snd 11.38 The performance received a favorable, though light-hearted, review in Tins magazine: With ordered gusto they banged, rattled, beat, blew, stomped and rang their way through Henry Cowell’s Eniss, John Cage’s Second Construction, William Russell’s Cnipsgp sksrches, Lou Harrison's Canticle, Amadeo Roldan's Ritmicas V and VI. When ggey had finished, the audience gave percussive approval. 17 Rather than return to Seattle in the fall of 1940, Cage elected instead to remain at Mills College in order to establish a research laboratory of percussion and electrical instruments.4o Cage’s work at Mills was favorably received by columnist Peter Yates, who, in March, 1941, wrote: So today in the midst of us in California is being written a new technological and meaningful chapter in the history of the criitive organization of sound, out of which comes mu51c. While at Mills, in the spring and summer of 1941, Cage continued to concentrate on music for the dance. He and Lou Harrison accompanied the Marian Van Tuyl Dance Company in a concert for percussion and dance presented at Mills July 26, 1941. The program appeared as follows: Ritmicas Amadeo Roldan Dirge Mildred Couper 3rd Construction John Cage *Horror Dream John Cage 13th Simfony Lou Harrison Rumba Mildred Couper Three Dance Movements William Russell *Ritmicas Amadeo Roldan *Marian Van Tuyl and group Horror Cream is the title of the dance choreographed by Van Tuyl to Cage’s Imaginary Landscaps No. 1. In a brochure of upcoming events at Mills College, Van Tuyl explained, When facing a test situation such as an examination, speech or concert, many people have the most fantastic dreams. This is a choreographer’s dream of the hazards of performance. 2 The brochure went on to describe the music as "the re-recording of constant and variable frequencies, cymbals 18 and piano-sound effects which Mr. Cage insists are most appropriate."43 Although Cage’s music at this time was enthusiastically received by the dance community, music critics continued to take it lightly. A program of percussion music by Cage and Lou Harrison, presented May 14, 1941, was announced by the snn Fransissp Chronicis in the following manner: ". . . the orchestra will be composed of drums, gongs, bells, brake drums and sheet metal--and all selections will be original compositions of Cage and Harrison. . . . You'd think they could at least play 'Old Man River,’ ho ho."44 Further evidence of Cage’s struggle for recognition as a bona fide composer and musician appeared in the summer of 1941, when he applied for a position with the Works Progress Administration. According to Cage: When I applied to the W.P.A., they put me not in the music department, but in the recreation department. They didn’t consider my work as music. In the fall of 1941, Cage moved to Chicago to join the faculty of the School of Design. At this institution of related arts, Cage taught a class in improvisation and "sound experiments."46 He also established a percussion ensemble which performed several concerts worthy of note. Cage's first percussion concert in Chicago was presented March 1, 1942, under the auspices of the Arts Club of Chicago. The program received much advance publicity, as evidenced by the unusual number of newspaper articles and columns heralding the event. The program included William 19 Russell’s March Suite and Thres pangs Movements, Lou Harrison's Counterdance in the Spring and Canticle, and Cage's Construction in Metal and Imaginary Landscape no. . The concert received much public attention, both in Chicago and elsewhere. An unidentified New York critic began his article in the following manner: For the first time in the history of the Arts Club of Chicago, a beer bottle 295 broken in its auditorium last night and called mu51c. The critic was referring to the last of William Russell's Inrss Dangs Movemenrs, which requires the player to break a glass bottle into a metal washtub. Cecil Smith, of the Chicago Tribune, gave this summary: Of the final artistic result, I can only say that we went thru [sic] all this once before in the 1920's, when George Antheil and Edgar Varese werssat work, and I suppose we can go through it again. On March 18, 1942, Cage’s percussion ensemble performed for the first time on a mixed program shared with the University of Chicago Symphony Orchestra, under the direction of Frederick Stock and Charles Buckley. The program featured the music of Holst, Beethoven, Bach, Saint-Saens and Dvorak. Within the program were interspersed two selections of Cage's ensemble, Lou Harrison’s Canticle and William Russell’s Three Dance Movements. Again, Cage’s performance received a number of public reactions. Most critics reported on the novelty of a percussion orchestra which used such unconventional 20 "instruments" as flowerpots, automobile brake drums, thundersheets and beer bottles. Cage explained that, although there was some amount of attention given the ensemble’s work in Chicago, it never ventured beyond the aspect of novelty. "No one really took my music seriously," he said. "I think they much preferred the Dvorak."49 By December of 1942, Cage had moved to New York, where he continued to work with the dance and with music for percussion ensemble. One of his most notable performances was presented at the Museum of Modern Art on February 7, 1943, under the auspices of the League of Composers.50 The program appeared as follows: Construction in Metal John Cage Counterdance in the Spring Lou Harrison Ostinato Pianissimo Henry Cowell (first performance) Canticle Lou Harrison Imaginary Landscape No. 3 John Cage Preludio a 11 Jose Ardevol (first performance) Amores John Cage (first performance) Ritmicas V a VI Amadeo Roldan The Museum of Modern Art performance received immediate notoriety among critics, and established Cage as a leading exponent of experimental music. Although initially criticized as unmusical by a number of music journalists, many of the works presented by Cage’s ensemble in 1943 remain staples of the percussion repertory today. Soon after the concert at the Museum of Modern Art, Cage began to move away from percussion in order to focus on his works for prepared piano. Because of logistical problems 21 with instruments and rehearsal space in New York City, Cage eventually disbanded his percussion ensemble and donated his extensive collection of instruments to Paul Price, then percussion instructor at the University of Illinois.51 Between 1940 and 1943, Cage continued to employ the compositional techniques he had developed in his Firs; Cpnsrrnsripn (in Metal) and Imaginary Landscape Npr_1, both composed in 1939. The Construction series eventually numbered three, and was based exclusively on the "square- root" formula. The Imaginary Landscape Series, which eventually numbered five works, continued to use elements of rhythmic structuring, but began to move toward indeterminacy after the third work in the series. Each of the works entitled Imaginary Lsndscape employed some type of electronic devices in addition to percussion instruments. Other works from this time period include Living Bppn Mnsis (1940) for unspecified instruments; Doubis unsis (1941) for percussion quartet, written in collaboration with Lou Harrison: Crst in us (1942) for percussion quartet with electric devices, written for dancers Merce Cunningham and Jean Erdman: Eprsver sng sunsmeii (1942) for voice and percussion duo; Ens Wonderful Wigpy pr Eighteen Springs (1942) for voice and closed piano; sns is Asleep (1943) for voice, prepared piano and quartet of twelve tom-toms: and Anores (1943) for prepared piano and percussion trio. Cage did not write another work for percussion alone until 1956, 22 when he composed a solo work entitled 27' 1Q,§§5" fig: s W. The percussion works of 1935 to 1943 served as a springboard for Cage's ideas on music and art in general, will become apparent in Chapter Six. Cage's performances with the percussion ensemble fostered works by many other composers interested in promoting experimental music, and the process paved new ground toward the public acceptance percussion as a legitimate art form. as in of Endnotes - Chapter One 1Richard Kostelanetz, ed. Conversing Wirn ngs (New York: Limelight Editions, 1988), 2. 2Ellsworth J. Snyder, "Chronological Table of John Cage’s Life" in gpnn Cngs, edited by Richard Kostelanetz [Documentary Monographs in Modern Art] (NY: Praeger, 1970), 36. 3Kostelanetz, Conversing flirn ngs, 3-4. 4Snyder, "Chronological Table" in Cpnn ngs, 36. 5John Cage, "Indeterminacy" in Siisnce: Lsctnres nng_flrirings (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), 273. 6John Cage, For the Birds: In Conversation With Daniel Charles (London: Marion Boyars, 1981), 70. 7Ibid. 8Ibid. 9Deborah A. Campana, "Form and Structure in the Music of John Cage," Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1985, 20. lolbid, 20-21. 11John Cage, "Personal History" in File 1942, John Cage Archive, Northwestern University Music Library, Evans- ton, Illinois. 12Richard Kostelanetz, ed. gpnn ngs, pocumenrary Monograpns in Modern AIL (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1970), 53. 13Cage, Eor the Birds, 73. 23 24 141616, 72—73. 15Kostelanetz, ngs, 59. 16Cage, silsnss, 3-6. 17Brochure, "Percussion Course by John Cage," 27 June- 30 July, 1937, at Virginia Hall Studio of Dance, Beverly Hills, California, in Notebook, John Cage Erpressor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, John Cage Archive. 18Campana, 29. 19John Cage, interview with author, 6 June 1988. 20Kostelanetz, Conversing With Caqe, 9. 21Interview, 6 June, 1988. 22Ibid. 231bid. 24Programs of Concerts in Notebook, John Caqe Professor Msssrrp Eercussionist Com oser, Vol. I, J.C.A. 25Press release, John Cage Percussion Group, in Notebook, Jpnn ngs Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 26Program, "Percussion Concert," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 9 December, 1938 in John Caqe Professpr Maesrrp Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 27Press release. 28Programs of concerts in Notebook, John Caqe Professor Masstrg Eercussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 29Alfred Frankenstein, "A Program of Percussion," gsn Francisco Chronicle, 28 July, 1939, in Notebook, John 25 Cngs Professor Maestro Percussionisr Co ose , Vol. I, J.C.A. 30Interview, 6 June, 1988. 31Frankenstein, "Program of Percussion." 32Program, "Third Percussion Concert," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 9 December, 1939, in Notebook, gpnn Cngs Professor Maestro Percussionisr Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 33Cage, "Personal History." 34Program, "Cage Percussion Players," Reed College, Portland, Oregon, 14 February, 1940, in Notebook, QQDD ngs Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 35Paul Griffiths, ngs (London: Oxford University Press, 1981), 8. 36Brochure, "Mills College Summer Session," 1940, in Notebook, John Caqs Professpr Maestrp Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 37Program, "Percussion Concert," Mills College, 18 July 1940, in Notebook, Jpnn ngs Professor Maestro Esrcussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 381bid. 39Magazine article (unsigned), "Fingersnaps and Foot- stomps," Tins Magazine, 29 July 1940, in Notebook, gpnn ngs Professor Maestro Percussionisr Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 26 40Newspaper article (unsigned), Lps Angeles rings, 1 September 1940, in Notebook, gpnn Caqe Profssspr Msssrrp Esrcussipnisr Com ose , Vol. I, J.C.A. 41Peter Yates, "Organized Sound: Notes in the History of a New Disagreement Between Sound and Tone." Csiirprnig Arrs snd Architecturs 65, 11 (March 1941), 18. 42Brochure of upcoming events, Mills College, 23 July 1941, in Notebook, John Caqs Profssspr Maestro Bsrpussionist Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. 431bid. 44Herb Caen, Ins ssn Francisco Chronicle, undated clipping in Notebook, John Caqs Professgr Maestro Psrcussionist Composer, Vol. II. J.C.A. 45Interview, 6 June, 1988. 46Brochure from School of Design in Chicago, in Notebook, John Caqs Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. 47Newspaper article, "They Break Beer Bottles Now to Make Music in Chicago," New York World-Telegram, 2 March, 1942, in Notebook, John Cage Erofessor Maesrro Percussionist Com oser, Vol. II, J.C.A. 48Cecil Smith, newspaper article, Chicago Qsiiy Tripune, 2 March, 1942, in Notebook, gpnn ngs Professor Masstro Percussionisr Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. 49Interview, 6 June, 1988. 27 50Program, "Percussion Music Directed by John Cage," presented by the League of Composers in association with the Museum of Modern Art, 7 February 1943: Notes Here and Afield," Nsy Tprk Tings, 31 January 1943, in Notebook, John Cags Professpr Maestro Eercussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 51Interview, 6 June, 1988. Chapter Two An Analysis of first Mien (In Baal) Cage applied his concepts of rhythmic structuring most completely in Eirsr Consrruction (Tn usrni), composed in 1939. The principles of organization found in F' t Constrnction may be applied to other works in the Construstipn and Landscape series. Instrumentstion First Construction is scored for six players performing on a total of fifty-eight metal instruments. A list of instrumentation for the work appears below. Par; Tnsrrumentsrion Player 1 Thundersheet, orchestral bells Player 2 String piano with assistant Player 3 Thundersheet, sleigh bells, 12 graduated oxen bells Player 4 Thundersheet, 4 graduated muted brake drums, 8 graduated cowbells, 3 graduated Japanese temple gongs ‘ Player 5 Thundersheet, 4 graduated suspendsd Turkish cymbals, 8 graduated muted anvils , 4 grad- uated suspended Chinese cymbals Player 6 Thundersheet, 4 graduated muted gongs, water- gong, tam-tam, suspended gong Figure 2-1. Instrumentation for First Cpnsrrnction (Tn Metai) In Eirst C nst uctio , Cage employed a combination of traditional orchestral instruments, exotic ethnic instru- ments and non-traditional "found" instruments. The following is an explanation of each instrument or instrument group. 28 29 Thundersheet - Five graduated lengths of thin sheet metal suspended from a frame. The instruments employed by Cage's ensemble ranged in size from approximately three by twenty-four inches to twelve by forty-eight inches.2 The score specifies that player one use the smallest thundersheet, with each consecutive player employing a larger instrument. Orchestral Bells - A standard set of orchestral bells, or glockenspiel. The pitches employed range chromatically from written d1 to £2. String Piano - In the explanatory note included in the score, Cage refers to "Henry Cowell’s term for an ordinary grand piano, the strings of which are performed upon."3 Cage offers the following information to the pianist's assistant: "The assistant applies a metal rod firmly on the strings used, producing harmonics. A andV indicate slow slides of the rod away from or toward the center of the string's length, producing, respectively, ascending and descending siren-like sounds. Any jangling sound is avoided by increasing the pressure on the strings. If, because of the piano construction, the tones notated do not permit the free use of the rod, use other tones that do. The second player plays at the keyboard, except, as in G, when he sweeps a gong beater across the bass strings."4 Sleigh Bells - In the score, Cage specifies a "suspended string of small sleigh bells." The conventional 30 instrument with bells attached to a wooden handle will suffices. Oxen Bells - Spherical metal bells without clappers rang- ing in diameter from approximately two inches to four inches. Cage mentions in the score that Balinese button gongs suspended horizontally may be used as a substi- tute. Lou Harrison, when employing oxen bells in his works, has specified a "dry" sound from the instru- ments.6 When questioned about this delineation, Cage ‘responded, "It’s so hard sometimes to tell what is dry and what is wet."7 Brake Drums - Graduated automobile brake drums placed on a padded table and/or muted with a cloth. If the instruments are placed on thick foam rubber pads, further muting may not be necessary. Cowbells - Graduated Cuban cencerros or German Almglocken may be used. The German Almglocken may require additional muting. Japanese Temple Gongs - Also known as cup bells, or dobachi, these instruments sit on doughnut-shaped cushions or padded table. Suspended Turkish Cymbals - Standard orchestral cymbals suspended on gooseneck or conventional cymbal stands. Muted Anvils - Graduated lengths of cylindrical metal pipe placed on a padded table. In the score, Cage specifies that the anvils be made of non-resonant metal. 31 Suspended Chinese Cymbals - Unlike the standard Turkish cymbals, these instruments have a wide, upturned flange at the edge of the bow. The instruments may be sus- pended on gooseneck or conventional cymbal stands. Muted Gongs - Balinese-style gongs with raised center placed on a padded table. As with the brake drums, thick foam rubber pads provide the best muting material. Water Gong - A twelve- to sixteen-inch Chinese gong which is raised out of, or lowered into a tub of water during tone production. Cage discovered this unique applica- tion of a fairly conventional percussion instrument while working with underwater ballet at UCLA in 1938.8 Tam-Tan - A flat, gong-like instrument, without raised center and of Turkish or Chinese origin, suspended on a standard gong stand. Suspended Gong - A Balinese-style or Chinese gong with raised center, suspended on a standard gong stand. The following chart illustrates Cage’s combination of orchestral, ethnic and "found" instruments in Tirsr Cpnstrncrion by listing each instrument categorically according to its origin. It should be understood that some instruments could logically fit into more than one category. 32 Traditional Orchestral Ethnic Found Instrnments Instruments Instrumsnrs orchestral bells oxenbells (12) thundersheets (5) sleigh bells cowbells (8) brake drums (4) Turkish cymbals (4) Japanese temple anvils (8) tam-tam gongs (3) water gong piano Chinese cymbals (4) muted gongs (4) suspended gong Figure 2-2. Grouping of instruments used in Tirsr Construction according to origin. It was Cage’s intention that each player accumulate sixteen sounds during the course of the work. If the thundersheets are not included among the sixteen accumulated sounds, one finds that this intention is indeed realized mathematically in all but one case: Player four utilizes four graduated muted brake drums, eight graduated cowbells and three graduated Japanese temple gongs, thus accumulating only fifteen sounds. Cage explained that he only had three temple gongs and could not obtain the additional instru- ment.9 In organizing the work so as to accumulate sixteen sounds in each part, Cage included such factors as beater choice and playing area on the instruments. The following chart illustrates how the sounds are accumulated in each part. Pl. 1 orchestral bells - 14 pitches. 2 pitches played with metal and rubber heaters. 33 Pl. 2 string piano - 13 pitches, slides produced with rod, wavering harmonics, sweep of bass strings with gong beater. Pl. 3 sleigh bells, 12 graduated oxen bells (rubber beaters), 3 oxen bells played with metal heaters. Pl. 4 4 graduated muted brake drums, 8 graduated cowbells, 3 graduated Japanese temple bells. Pl. 5 4 graduated Turkish cymbals, 8 graduated muted anvils, 4 graduated Chinese cymbals. Pl. 6 4 graduated muted gongs (soft beaters), 4 graduated muted gongs (hard beaters), water gong (2 pitches - raised, lowered: also played at center and edge), tam-tam (played at center and edge), gong (played at center and edge). Figure 2-3. Distribution of sounds in Eirst Construsrion. When these sounds are redistributed according to sus- taining and non-sustaining quality, the following configuration occurs: 21.; Pl.2 Pl.3 P1.4 21.5 P1.6 Totals Sustained Quality 16 16 1 3 8 8 52 Non-sustained Quality 0 0 15 12 8 8 43 Totals 16 16 16 15 16 16 95 Figure 2-4. Redistribution of sounds according to sustained and non-sustained quality. NOTAT ON The piece is notated on twelve-stave score paper, with two grand staves of six parts appearing on each page. 34 Appropriate clefs are used for the instruments of definite pitch (orchestral bells and string piano). All other instruments, being of indefinite pitch, are notated with neutral clefs. All instruments are notated on a five-line staff, with note heads being placed on the lines or spaces of the staff. For an example of an instrument layout, see Figure 2-5. .' .— ‘ji. ir-IFJ! “1“ Tk I 1 _ .41”. .___J L _ . 3Jqu~3¢u TIMVIC'UIS 4 5“.th $ Cm‘DQIIS 1kMk¢£+ Figure 2-5. Example of instrument notation, Player 4. The work is notated using conventional notes, rests, dynamic markings, accents and roll indications. Mallet specifications are indicated in respective parts as soft, hard, rubber, metal, leather-covered, hard rubber and gong beater. Rehearsal letters appear with every sixteen-bar section, thus marking significant structural points in the work. The time signature of 4/4 is used throughout the piece. Notations for glissandi on the water gong are indicated by instructions for the player to lower or raise the instrument into or out of the water, and by arrows indicating the rise or fall of pitch. The pitch rises as the gong is lowered in the water and falls as it is raised out of the water (see Figure 2-6). 35 uwnwwmxmwms awn Y'Uflg, 83%” 51 2‘ jar/“12c 4* * ‘ Lea-191 ,A :2 1 [4 t 1 if :4 l ’3; 1 \ f ag::::==_ -<:::f:::::=sss Figure 2-6. Notation for water gong. Player 6, measures 45-51. A similar notation is used to indicate glissandi pro- duced on the string piano by means of sliding a metal rod away from or toward the center of the string’s length. Directional indications mentioned in the composer’s intro- ductory note instruct the assistant as to which direction is desired, and arrows are used to indicate the rise and fall of the pitch (see Figure 2-7). V’ .A (Team54o o 44. 9° L19: Figure 2-7. Notation for string piano glissandi. Player 2, measures 40-41. Wavering harmonics from the piano’s interior are produced when the assistant applies the metal rod firmly to the string indicated. A wavy line is used to indicate these harmonics (see Figure 2-8). 36 L4... .LJ... 1...]... Jul... wt Figure 2-8. Notation for string piano harmonics. Player 2, measures 101-104. The string pianist is also instructed to sweep the bass strings of the instrument with a gong beater. This effect is notated by conventional roll indications (see Figure 2-9) . 68' £6; 61 0| t c~ .4 I pl Figure 2-9. Notation for string sweep on piano. Player 2, measures 67-69. Two types of notation are used to indicate muting instructions for cowbells and cymbals. Specific notes are indicated as muted (+) or open (0), and whole passages are given written instructions (see Figures 2-10 and 2-11). 0 0 e 4- r e , . O 9 - 9 * 33 >§ '54 '5‘." '56 Figure 2-10. Notation for muting instructions. Player 5, measures 33-36. 37 SufiUW'HVflfi I45 I11 I48 I41 Figure 2-11. Notation for muting instructions. Player 5, measures 146-149. Written instructions are also used to indicate the desired playing area on the gong and tam-tam (see Figure 2-12). , so: ‘1‘ sob 7'“ ‘9‘ z... ’Figure 2-12. Notation of playing area. Player 6, measures 200-203. Although Tirsr Construction employs mostly conventional rhythmic notation, grupetti, or cross rhythms, frequently appear as numbers in brackets indicated above or below the note heads (see Figure 2-13). 99"» Figure 2-13. Notation of grupetti. Player 5, measures 17-20. 38 In Eirsr Cpnsrrppripn, Cage employed a system of composition, called the "square-root" formula, which would allow pitched sounds to co-exist along with unpitched sounds, and sound to co-exist with silence. In an effort toward non-discrimination between noise and tone, or sound and silence, Cage constructed a time frame of sixteen sections, each of which was divided into sixteen measures grouped according to the proportional division 4:3:2:3:4. The rhythmic events occurring within the smaller sixteen- measure sections (the microstructure) define the proportional divisions as illustrated in Figure 2-14. 39 r135? cossrsuCTxon (1n ntfnt) by xnumatmfl 4, xwuua ‘9. 1" -/ (*1! "I '. 53.5 1W2 j V" f 3 Bi: ‘ I T ‘ ti ‘ ' ‘j 21’ A how-(M I 1.16: H. Emma: PM- .v.- 7-: ?a15 \\-hn¢ .\ nu" \uu- '. u" J- ‘. :' i"."a'n'.l' 0' \Yt:'fl 5n nf-._ ". '1,g?'. PAW" w” Figure 2-14. Proportional Division 4:3:2:3:4 found in the first sixteen-measure section of First Construction, measures 1-16. 40 Figure 2-14 (Continued) The proportional division 4:3:2:3:4 also applies to the grouping of the sixteen large sections (the macro- structure). According to Cage, the first four segments of the macrostructure serve as an exposition (1-1-1-1) followed by a development (3-2-3-4). The work ends with a nine- measure coda or extension, which is grouped 2-3-4.10 The division of the macrostructure can most easily be observed through the changes in tempo which Cage marked in the score at the major structural points. A chart of these large- scale structural divisions appears in Figure 2-15. 41 16-Bar Rehearsal sspripn Letter Tempo Marking 1 I Exposition 2 II A J=96 Moderately Fast 4 3 III B 4 IV C 5 V D A Little Faster Development 6 VI E 3 7 VII F Slowing Down Very Much 8 VIII G Suddenly As Fast as At D 2 9 IX H 10 X I A Little Faster 3 11 XI J 12 XII K 13 XIII L Faster 4 14 XIV M 15 XV N 16 XVI 0 Coda 9 Bars P Slowing Down Very Much (2:3:4) To The End Figure 2-15. Outline of macrostructure divisions found in First Construction. fiirsr Construction is organized in such a way that each new sixteen-measure section introduces four motives, so the exposition, which takes up the first four sections of the macrostructure, contains a total of sixteen motives. Once the motives are presented, they do not undergo further rhythmic development or manipulation, other than their placement within a given measure of 4/4 time. Cage explains: "There is no motivic development in my work. (The motives) are static, unchanging. I used them like building blocks."11 42 By combining these static motives, Cage created a unique rhythmic counterpoint among as many as six voices. Figure 2-16 shows how this procedure unfolds in the first sixteen- measure section. The first four motives are presented in the string piano part during the first four measures of the microstructure and are then taken up by various other instruments. Figure 2-16. Motives found in the first sixteen-measure section of First Construction. 43 ‘I—J [—4——J Lumuurm- wvi—_4'—_J '— 1"— z_JLz.J LIL—J ”m .1 :11 L ,5 AL I - IV 1.1 4 1 111 I. . 1. I'L is l— a}, 1 ’ inr‘. ,. AIL. . y ,1. 14 “No...— L: Y.flu... 1:: ,3, 1.1 1*- 1441—1 v 11' I. ft 1. l I if I“ A}. 14 45 1T1 17' JUI' 411:. Isms 1 x 111W . 1. . nr 1; 41- e1: 11’- IIJV P ‘I 111 16 Te {1 I “S i.— E1 I I T1 71 4- f JD ll II ' L Figure 2-16 (Continued) 44 The four new motives presented in the second sixteen- measure section of the work are longer and more complex than those presented in the first section. Motive 5, presented in the cowbells at the outset of Section II, contains rhythmic elements suggesting a correlation with motives 1 and 2. At the same time that motive 5 is presented in the cowbells, an elaborated or extended version appears in the anvils. Motives 5a and 5b are lengthened by grupetti of four-against-three and five-against—four, providing an interesting polyrhythmic accompaniment to the original motive (see Figure 2-17). nn_---l-—.— ---------I —.I_ --I---_'—I-_ ‘ ' -— Figure 2-17. Presentation of Motives 5, 5a, and 5b. Players 4 and 5, measures 17-21. The next three-measure subsection of the microstructure returns to the familiar rhythmic counterpoint of the static motives presented in Section I (see Figure 2-18). 45 L..z_JL._J_Jl__lL__J\._ t-3—1 r—3-1 I'3‘I I"-3"'I r2"! Figure 2-18. Motives presented in the first three—measure subsection of Section II, measures 21-23. The next subsection of Section II, a two-measure phrase, presents two new motives simultaneously in the cowbells and anvils. Motive 6, presented in the anvils, contains two adjacent five-note ideas, each occurring over the span of four beats. This motive is accompanied in the cowbells by motive 7, a steady off-beat pattern (see Figure 2-19). 1r ‘n Figure 2-19. Motives presented in the two-measure subsection of Section II, measures 24-25. 46 The two remaining subsections, respectively three and four measures in length, show a skillful integration of all motives presented in the first two sixteen—measure sections. Motives 6 and 7, which appear initially in the anvils and cowbells in measures 24 and 25, reappear in exchanged voices in measures 27 and 28. Another example of voice exchange occurs in the string piano and oxen bells (players two and three) in measures 26 and 27. The final motive presented in Section II (motive 8) seems to evolve out of motive 5, but its recurrence in Section III warrants its consideration as an independent rhythmic idea. The longer rhythmic passage found in the Turkish cymbals of player five serves an an accompanying figure in this complex contrapuntal fabric. L14 2.; L3_IL_3_JI.3_JI_3_J Figure 2-20. Integration of motives found in the final three- and four-measure subsections of Section II, measures 26-32. 47 2—1 zfi so 3| :2 Figure 2-20 (Continued) Section III, like its predecessors, presents four new motives in its phrase construction of 4:3:2:3:4. The motives presented here bear a striking resemblance to those of Sections I and II, but their minor durational alterations give them a separate identity. As motive 8 seems to grow out of motive 5 in Section II, motives 9, 10 and 11 find their origins in motive 8. Motive 12 also contains elements of motive 6. The accompanying figure of the Turkish cymbals found at the end of Section II continues in the first four-measure subsection of Section III. An additional accompanying figure occurs during the same subsection in the orchestral bells. The water gong makes its first appearance in the second subsection and continues until the end of the sixteen measures of the microstructure. The two-bar sub- section found at the center of the microstructure is offset 48 by the appearance of thundersheet and slides in the string piano (see Figure 2-21). ° 0 c O 0 0 ‘P ' n- 1» f j )4 o I J 1 1 L 1 fi 1 _Lfi 3 J 1 j J J jfi 1 n T I I 1 1 4 1 I 3 L‘I I H v . I j I A j A fi .. 1 1 1 11 A ‘J‘l‘fl 111 f *- J ‘ 1 " ——1 a; uFV; ’)L I I j ‘— v v i: I A j ‘ ‘—. ‘ ‘- l—l‘.—---.“------I ‘ -.-—--—-o ----—----_ I-— .- Figure 2-21. Motives found in Section III, measures 32-48. '2’ ‘ 0' _ 11’ ‘n' ‘ a: ‘ 0’ ‘9. 33;; 3 3355355 44:? E3gE5555EIEEEEEEEEZEEEEEiEEEEEEE Q 4,) <’ 42. 44 4: 46 47 1! t n ‘17 J I _u_L +4Ju I kr- I II Section 2-21 (Continued) Section IV, the final section of the exposition, is the least economical in terms of rhythmic material. The section begins with an ostinato in the oxen bells (player three). Because of its extremely static nature, the ostinato is considered an accompanying figure much in the same character as the sustained rumblings of the thundersheets. The first actual motive is found in the orchestral bells in the second subsection. Motive 13 appears first as a two-bar motive, then appears three more times in fragmented form. Motives l4 and 15 are closely related in their use of steady eighth notes followed by grupetti of five-against-two and nine- against-four, respectively. These grupetti, which also appear in the ostinato pattern of the oxen bells, give the effect of a measured accelerando. Motive 16 appears in the oxen bells as a sequential, quasi-melodic stream of eighth notes. A similar pattern appears in the anvils (player 50 five) during the last two measures of the exposition. Accompaniment is provided by thundersheets, sleigh bells, Japanese temple gongs, water gong, Chinese cymbals, tam-tam, suspended gong and string piano. The static motives presented in the first four measures of the exposition, which permeate the texture of the first three sections, are conspicuously absent in Section IV (see Figure 2-22). //lfl .Jd Figure 2-22. Motives found in Section IV, measures 48-63. 1 - 1‘ //l1 H: J- r' fa: W1 _ '.-_£ fA 117-7* 35' l I so 6| 6?. ‘9 63 .A. 58 S‘I Figure 2-22 (Continued) In the development, the organization of the macro- structure becomes apparent as the initial sixteen motives of the exposition are presented in the corresponding sections of the proportional division 3:2:3:4. The first four motives presented in Section I reappear in Sections V-VII. Sections VIII and IX contain the motives presented in Section II. Motives 9 through 12, which originally occur in Section III, return in Sections X-XII, while the final four motives found in Section IV of the exposition recur in Sections XIII-XVI. Each sixteen-measure section of develop- ment continues to adhere to the durational proportion 4:3:2:3:4. The phrases of the nine-bar coda are grouped 2:3:4. The same procedures of motivic manipulation established in the exposition continue in the development in expanded form in order to accommodate the larger time 52 frame. A closer look at the first section of the development, occupying Sections V-VII, reveals its close relationship with the first sixteen-measure section of the composition. Motive 1, originally presented in the string piano, is now found in the oxen bells. The 3 1/2 beat motive is repeated several times, displacing itself within the bar with each repetition (see Figure 2-23). ‘1uusunue f [9 as (,5 6'1 68 Figure 2-23. Manipulation of motive 1 showing metric displacement, player 3, Section V, measures 65-68. The following section of the microstructure, occupying three measures, presents motive 2 in the muted gongs as motive 1 continues in the oxen bells. These activities are further accompanied by the thundersheet and the sweep of bass strings on the piano (see Figure 2-24). é r11 rl-I Fin r‘n r-‘n r11 b “bth bfi 10 1! Figure 2-24. Motives found in the first three-measure subsection of Section V, measures 69-71. 53 This activity continues in the next two-bar subsection as motive 1 is passed to the orchestral bells (player one), while the oxen bells (player three) take up motive 4 (see Figure 2-25). 'A 31 4'4 v W 9... .9. 9 A 71 I I J L _I I I 11 LL.) F é~ — ' 4 ‘2' j‘ YA A I: 4" _ . _J m 71 4 mm L I’bfi F1'1F1‘1r'z-I ' 72 73 Figure 2-25. Motives found in the two-measure subsection of Section V, measures 72-73. Motive 3 is reintroduced at the outset of Section VI in the muted gongs (player six). Motive 1 continues in the orchestral bells (player one) and also appears in the oxen bells and brake drums (players three and four). Because of the continuing metric displacement in the orchestral bells, these two appearances of the same motive are displaced by one beat. At the same time, the string piano (player two) presents a verbatim return of its original four motives found in measures 1-4 before joining players three and four in the repetition of motive 1 (see Figure 2-26). E ‘u :1 83 1_.| [—34 1— i 1—4 L-1 l-1-- V, IIIJVJ Ll_l_l >II 7111! II II T' I . T. v V 7 1‘; SEE:;, 44 l #. T3—I r3—1r-‘f—I r3“! [‘3‘ L__i .— '4‘ 1‘ fl ‘1 U V I v v Figure 2-26. Motives found in Section VI, measures 81-88. Section VII serves to offset the ensuing second part of the development by gradually reducing both tempo and activity. The muted gongs of player six continue the repetition of motive 3, which displaces itself metrically in the same fashion as does motive 1 in the string piano at the 55 beginning of the development. This activity gradually winds down, giving rise to a unison passage of stark, almost suspended motion, marked "exceedingly slow," in the parts of players 2-6 (see Figure 2-27). sammnxnunun: Ii q1 q: t—3n r-3-1 r3— b 1!) I03 I64 [0; .LJ. .LJ... .LJ... LI. «LA. .L—IL If It is # ‘-1t'3‘1t-'3-1r-3-1 '9) e a "“ Figure 2-27. Activity found in Section VII, measures 97-106. 56 The same developmental procedures continue throughout the remaining three large sections (2:3:4), reintroducing and manipulating the motives found in the corresponding sections of the exposition. The resulting effect is one of expansion of structural duration and complexity of rhythmic counterpoint. A closer observation of the last sixteen- measure section (Section XVI) shows its relationship to Section IV of the exposition. The first four measures of Section XVI contain accompaniment figures in the string piano, sleigh bells, thundersheets, temple gongs, Chinese cymbals and tam-tam. This activity corresponds to that of the first four measures of Section IV, which also contain accompaniment figures without motivic activity. In the second subsection, the orchestral bells present a verbatim repetition of motive 13, originally found in the same voice in the corresponding subsection of Section IV. As in Section IV, motive 14 appears at the fourth subsection, the second three-bar phrase of the microstructure. The first half of motive 15 is presented in the third measure of that subsection, but rather than continuing with the grupetto as in Section IV, the part abruptly shifts into motive 16, which originally appears in the oxen bells. Now presented in the orchestral bells, this motive takes on a fully melodic character and undertakes a two and one-half stage sequence. The coda is marked by the repetition of motive 14, interspersed occasionally with the nine-against-four grupetto of the second half of motive 15. This activity 57 takes place on a single pitch in the orchestral bells and gradually slows to a stop amid the continuing, but fading sustention of tam-tam, Chinese cymbals, Japanese temple gongs, sleigh bells, thundersheets and the siren-like slides of the string piano (see Figure 2-28). 244 241 24! 249 3:0 ~ // a s! Figure 2-28. Final sixteen-measure section and nine- measure coda, measures 241-265. 58 I THE 1 Hfi-fi A ‘D ‘0 ‘ —-=”'_-.- - “‘ '. - ” 5’...— Figure 2-28 (Continued) 59 novenack,rqsq saATTLc,wAsntncTon Figure 2-28 (Continued) In Tirsr Cpnstruction, Cage devised a technique of composition which was divided into four components-- structure, method, material, and form. In his first book, Silenss, Cage described these components: "By ’structure’ was meant the division of a whole into parts: by ’method,’ the note-to-note procedure. Both structure and method (and also ’material' - the sounds and silences of a composition) were, it seemed to me then, the prOper concern of the mind (as opposed to the heart) (one's idea of order as opposed to one’s spontaneous actions); whereas the two last of these, namely method and material, together with 'form' (the morphology of a continuity) were equally the proper concern of the heart. Composition, then, I viewed . . . as an activity integrating the opposites, the rational and the irrational, bringing about, ideally, a freely moving continuity within a strict division of parts, the sounds, their combination and succession psing either logically related or arbitrarily chosen." 60 firs; Cpnsrrnpripn applies the four components through its structure (the 162 time division), material (the sixteen motives and sixteen sounds found in each part), and method (the construction of a six-voice contrapuntal texture). The form, as Cage suggests, being the "morphology of a continuity," may be found in the integration of all the components perceived as a whole. Thus, the aural perception is one of various rhythmic events occurring within divisions of time which are defined by changes in timbre and rhythmic complexity. Cage reasoned that of the four parameters of sound (pitch, amplitude, timbre, and duration), the only one shared by both sound and silence was duration.13 The compositional technique employed in Eirsr Cpnstrncrion, being based on duration, proved equally hospitable not only to sound and silence, but to noises as well as pitched sounds. Therefore, the "square-root" formula of composition proved an ideal vehicle for the expression of Cage's musical instincts first communicated in his 1937 prophecy, "The Future of Music: Credo." Endnotes - Chapter Two 1Cage's explanatory note in the score lists only four anvils, but the part is notated for eight instruments of graduated pitch. 2Interview, 6 June, 1988. Cage illustrated with his hands the approximate size of the instruments he had in mind. The dimensions mentioned here are based on the author's estimation of Cage's visual illustration. 3John Cage, Eirsr Consrruction (Tn Msrsi), (New York: Henmar Press, 1962). 41bid. 5Interview, 6 June, 1988. 6Don Russell Baker, "The Percussion Ensemble Music of Lou Harrison," D.M.A. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1985, 153. 7Interview, 6 June, 1988. Although Cage views his motives as static and therefore non-developmental, one could interpret the fragmentation and displacement of rhythmic motives as developmental procedures. 8Kostelanetz, Conversing flirn Cngs, 9. 9Interview, 6 June, 1988. 10Cage, Eirsr Construction. 11Interview, 6 June, 1988. 12John Cage, "Composition as Process," Silencs (Middle- town: Wesleyan University Press, 1961), 18. 13Cage, For the Birds, 73. 61 Chapter Three An Analysis of Anprss In Anorss, for percussion trio and prepared piano, one may see a representative cross-section of Cage’s early compositional styles. Composed in 1943, the work contains four movements: I. Solo: Prepared Piano II. Trio: Nine Tom-toms, Pod Rattle III. Trio: Seven Woodblocks (not Chinese) IV. Solo: Prepared Piano In nnprss three distinct compositional styles are employed. Movements one and four, for prepared piano, utilize the technique of rhythmic structuring found in Eirsr Cpnstrpctipn, which relies on the "square-root" formula. This compositional technique represents the majority of Cage’s early percussion works, including the entire ansrrnsrign and Lsndscaps series. The third movement originally appeared as the last movement of Trio (1936) and was entitled "Waltz." The movement is based on the manipu- lation of fixed rhythmic patterns and is representative of Cage's earliest percussion writing. In the second movement Cage used a method borrowed from Lou Harrison known as "icti-control" in which each player is assigned a certain number of attack points within a given period of time. The "icti-control" method was also employed in Qnsrrsr rQr Tweivs Tom-toms, composed in the same year as Amores. 61a 62 Anprss, in addition to being a major representation of Cage's compositional styles, is also a pivotal work in the composer's career. Shortly after the work’s premiere (at the famous concert held at New York’s Museum of Modern Art on February 7, 1943), Cage disbanded his percussion ensemble and began focusing his attention exclusively on works for prepared piano. He explains: In New York it was impossible to get a group of people together to work. It was next to impossible to have rehearsals. There was no place to put the instruments. I finally gave them away. It is interesting to note that of the only two percussion works Cage composed in 1943, Amores and sns Ts Asleep, both contain percussion and prepared piano in separate movements. The movements in both works also seem to be optionally autonomous, having been performed as separate works.2 Cage continued to write for prepared piano until 1948, culminating his compositional activities for this medium with Sonatss and lnterluges, composed from 1946 through 1948. Although the study of Cage’s works for prepared piano is beyond the scope of this document, a cursory analysis of the two outer movements of Amores from the standpoint of form and structure is included in this chapter to aid in the study of the work as a whole. 63 Movement I Solo: Prepared Piano Although movement I does not adhere completely to the "square-root" formula described in Chapter Two, many of the same compositional procedures are followed. The movement, consisting of fifteen measures of 4/4 time, may be divided into three large sections of five measures each. Each large section is grouped proportionally according to phrase lengths. The divisions of the three large sections appear as follows: Section I Measures 1 - 5 1:2:2 Section II Measures 6 - 10 2:3 Section III Measures 11 - 15 2:1.5:1.5 When the work is condensed into its purely rhythmic activity, the three divisions become apparent (see Figure 3-1). The division of the work into phrase groupings found in Figure 3-1 is further reinforced by the appearance of a dotted rhythmic figure at the end of significant phrases. A figure involving the dotted eighth note followed by a sixteenth note marks the ends of phrases in parts I and II (measures 3, 5 and 7), while its retrograde (the sixteenth- note followed by a dotted eighth) marks phrase endings in part III (measures 12 and 14). In Figure 3-1, these occurrences are marked with an asterisk. 64 2 G j ,1 > $15,)" II I. 575:” > ” > > it “IEVTT‘x P7oJUIuJ¢ 7flv fl flu-5'7 P 7y:fi]L M? w:* ‘I n ., 7:— a D 9 \ I \fi ‘1 N I j OOOIIIIOIOIJJJIIJ lltdroarltooooaal ”'4le loop I! 4| 444'! JUJ l Y r; 7 . __¥ 5 yJ 21 oanagillojlllaIOO ll aIuUJ on a a“ «.— (J 37-; “ E. vs '0 [m mmmlmm mini II 5mm minim m in all“ }? If Figure 3-1. Rhythmic reduction of Amores, movement I, showing proportional phrase divisions 1:2:2/2:3/2:1.5:1.5. 65 The three large sections of the movement are distinctly different from one another in terms of character. Section I may be characterized as erratic, consisting mainly of aperiodic rhythms. Section II is marked by very agitated, machine-like passages of reiterated thirty-second notes sounded on a single pitch, interrupted briefly by an accented triplet figure followed by the recurring dotted rhythmic figure. The contrasting dynamic marking of fortissimo along with the extreme rhythmic regularity found in Section II distinguishes it clearly from the preceding section. Section III is more subdued in character than either of the two preceding sections. Its rhythmic regularity is emphasized by pulsating quarter notes in the left hand over which a flowing pattern of sixteenth notes sounds. The familiar dotted rhythmic figure signals the final cadential motive which begins in the second half of measure 14 and continues to the movement's conclusion. This cadential motive is significant, as it returns in expanded form in the last movement. One will notice that measures of unusually low rhythmic activity occur at three points during the movement (measures 1, 5 and 10). Because these measures seem to offset the ensuing sections of greater activity, they can be said to function as an anacrusis. When viewed in this manner, the work takes on the proportional division 1:3:1:4:1:5. The single measures of low rhythmic activity tend to mark sections of greater activity which grow progressively 66 longer with each appearance (see Figure 3-2). A somewhat similar procedure is used in Imaginary Landscaps npi_i (1939), in which interludes of progressively greater length tend to signal the major divisions of the piece. The anacrusis function may account for the double bar which appears following the first measure in Angrss. Either view of the movement’s phrase structure indicates a tripartite construction. In terms of rhythmic activity, the movement reveals a symmetrical construction, with the greatest amount of activity found in Section II. 67 W r—1_“ll ' 3 Q Q, Q 7' > 1 1P7 } (J, DIE WEI J” I“: K vii—f1, “I I T 2. >__?_’ '> > 5 j YaJJJ-gadda7fivn ill J-Byyqyyfi] P j: ) I 4 I_‘1_‘I\I, M 3? ‘ via,— my) 0' a; cccccc I JJ J l‘ttia‘loatillofo)‘ l 5"? $1» 5 32 so 3“ ___ w___ , my!) on») I I d a] JIALUJ : I 4H4 U l P 1 £7. 2 72. § ’ ~, . fil “‘1 W EL: ”Junk... I II} II jaU ‘I -- CJ $7. 4 I32. 93—” I f 513 HEW ..,. ,IIIITFI 55,1 DI III III .55,mliln Emmi-m” $>MQI3 WIS Figure 3-2. Rhythmic reduction of Amores, movement I, showing proportional phrase divisions 1:3:1:4:1:5. 68 The piano preparations for movements I and Iv of Amores create five timbres which vary according to the material placed between the strings. The five timbres are as follows: screw, rubber, bolt, unprepared strings, and two screws, one with loose nut. An analysis of Amores by Thomas Moore is based on density and reveals that variations in timbral density also support a tripartite construction of the opening movement.3 Movement II Trio: Nine Tom-toms, Pod Rattle The second movement of Amores is scored for three percussionists, each playing three tom-toms. Cage specifies in the performance note that the drums be graduated in pitch and size and arranged with the lowest and largest instrument to the player's left, the highest and smallest to the right.4 Each player strikes the instrument in the center and on the edge of the head, producing low and high pitches, respectively, thus accumulating six sounds. Each player reads from a full score which is notated conventionally on three five-line staves. Each space indicates a sound produced at the center of the drum head, while each line represents a sound produced at the edge. For an example of an instrument layout, see Figure 3-3. 69 TiwvHBMa I: low-l I—MXJAk-j r—kzjk l4fl‘b den-Ivar Figure 3.3. Example of instrument notation. Except for occasions when the third percussionist is instructed to play with a brush, all drums are struck with the fingers, creating a very delicate sonority. In the performance note, Cage makes the following suggestion regarding tone production: Since the sound produced is most resonant only if the skin is allowed to vibrate freely, one should be careful to play elastically, the fingers leaving the drum head as soon after hitting it as possible. A "glancing-off" technigue is particularly successful when playing at the edges. The roll (or what Cage refers to as the "tremolo") is to be produced by the rapid alternation of two fingers of the same hand. ‘Rolls are notated with conventional slashes (E). In the third player's part, J indicates a sound produced by a wire brush on the drum, while va~w indicates a "drag of the brush across the drum head."6 On one occasion (measure 31), the first percussionist is instructed to play a "trill," or glissando by "skidding the middle finger across the drum head, a small roar-like sound +(wu- being produced."7 This technique, notated cl , is 70 fairly common in hand drumming and is particularly associated with conga drumming. The sustained sound, sometimes referred to as a ”moose," is produced by friction created when the moistened tip of the middle finger, the skin of which is held taut by the thumb, glides over the surface of the head. In addition to the three drums, the second percussionist also plays a pod rattle. The notation for this instrument appears on the top space of the staff. In the performance note, Cage gives a detailed explanation of the instrument desired: ... the pod rattle contemplated is obtained from tropical poinsettia [sic] trees growing in Mazatlan, Mexico. It is from 12 to 18 inches in length, very thin, and about 2 1/2 inches wide. The sound is dry and like the rattle of a snake. A small maraca (Cuban rattle) held against the knee, or placed éightly on a pad, and then tapped, may be substituted. The pod rattle is most effectively played by alternating the strokes between the hand and the knee, much in the same way that rapid rhythms are executed on a tambourine. Movement II, at first glance, seems to be structured according to the "square-root" formula. The piece consists of one hundred measures grouped, in all but one case, into ten-measure sections marked by double bars. (There is no double bar between measures fifty-nine and sixty.) Beyond what appears to be a 102 time division, the similarity to the "square-root" method ends. There can be found neither a 71 logical grouping of large sections nor a consistent grouping of measures within a given ten-measure subsection. Cage has said that he used "icti-controls" in the second movement of Amores.9 This compositional method, which Cage adapted from a similar method used by Lou Harrison, predetermines the number of attacks per player within a given period of time. In order to facilitate a discussion of Cage’s use of "icti-controls" in the second movement of Amores, it will be helpful to refer to an analysis by Stuart Saunders Smith of Quartet for Twelve Tom-toms (1943) in which Cage employed the same compositional method. According to Smith, Quartet for Twelve Tom-Toms is divided into "four, thirty-nine-measure sections . . . each divided into nine smaller sub-divisions."10 In a manner similar to the process employed in the "square-root" formula of composition, each large section is divided into an identical number of phrase-lengths. Smith explains the process thusly: The nine sub-divisions in the 39-measure sections are grouped into 4,7,2,5: 4,7,2,3, and 5 measures. Each sub-division was assigned a certain number of attack- points (icti) per player. The first four measures of Section I has eight tutti attacks. In the next seven measures, player A and player C have 34 attacks while player B has 20 and player D has 14 (the addition of player B and player D is 34 attacks). One may count the numbers of attack-points in each remaining phrase of the sequence (disregarding duration) and find a mathematical relationship from player to player 72 throughout the composition. For instance, in each five- measure phrase, player A has 24 attacks while the total number of attacks assigned to players B, C and D comes to 24.12 In Quartet for Twelve Tom-Toms, Cage applied the "icti- control" method in a most thorough and consistent manner. In the second movement of Amores, however, the method seems to be used sporadically, interspersed with instances of motivic recursion. The movement clearly divides into two parts of equal length. Part One, occupying measures 1-50, consists of five ten-measure sections each of which is defined by the appearance of a double bar. Part Two, occupying measures 51-100, consists of one twenty-measure section which is followed by three ten-measure sections (see Figure 3-4). Part One Part Two Section Measures Section Measures - I 1 - 10, VI 51 - 70 II 11 - 20 VII 71 - 80 III 21 - 30 VIII 81 - 90 IV 31 - 40 IX 91 - 100 V 41 - 50 Figure 3-4. Diagram of large formal divisions found in movement II of Amores. The first ten-measure section demonstrates Cage's tendency to mix "icti-controls" with motivic recursion. In the first three measures of the work, player B (pod rattle) has twenty—two attacks while player A has nine and player C 73 has thirteen. The sum of attacks found in the parts of players A and C is twenty~two (the simultaneous attacks of the brush and finger of player C in the first measure count as one attack). Also, in the following measure (measure 4), player A has eight attacks while player B has one, and player C has seven. Beyond these instances, the technique does not seem to be applied. One will note that the method of "icti-control” employed in Quartet for Twelve Tom-Toms depends upon a well-defined and consistently-applied phrase structure. In movement II of Amores, a logical grouping of measures is not discernible beyond the first three (a clearly-defined phrase). Furthermore, no mathematical relationship such as that found in the first three measures appears in the remaining seven measures. There are, however, some interesting numerical occurrences when all three parts in a selected phrase grouping are added together. For instance, all attacks found in measures 4-5 add up to 27, and all attacks found in measures 6-7 total 31. If measures 8-10 are added together, the total is again 27 (rolls are counted as a single attack). The numbers 31 and 27 reappear on several more occasions throughout the movement when the same counting procedure is applied. Because the rhythmic material found in movement II is often extremely aperiodic, creating complex polyrhythms among the three players, it would be logical for one to assume that some type of mathematical pre-compositional 74 procedure was applied. Such a procedure would make possible an infinite number of vertically-perceived rhythmic aggregates. While such complex rhythmic combinations do exist in movement II, the work seems to have been conceived linearly, with the vertically-perceived rhythmic aggregates serving either an embellishing function or as a means of motivic generation through the process known as durchbrochene Arbeit.13 As will be shown in the remainder of this analysis, the recurrence of certain key motives and the manipulation of particular rhythmic events supersedes their integration with the precompositional method of "icti-control" in terms of aural perception. Therefore, the analysis presented here will be concerned primarily with motivic manipulation and recursion. Evidence of the presence of "icti-controls" will be presented as it occurs in conjunction with such. During the first three-measure phrase, the predominant rhythmic motive is found in the pod rattle (player B). 4? 1 Figure 3-5. Pod rattle motive (player B) found in the first three measures of Aggrgg, movement II. The phrase is rhythmically stratified, with player B performing the most active role and player A the least active. Player C serves to support the metric inflections implied by the predominant rhythms of player B. For 75 instance, player C marks the downbeat of measure one and again provides emphasis on beat 3 of the same measure with a brush slide which coincides with the second grouping of sixteenth notes found in the pod rattle motive (see Figure 3-6). Jun Figure 3-6. Measures 1-3 of Amores, movement II, showing rhythmic stratification. In measure 4, the rhythmic emphasis shifts to the part of player C with a two-bar motive consisting of a gesture of three eighth-notes followed by grupetti of five-against-two and ten-against-three. This motive is repeated in measures 3-4, this time with the 10:3 grupetto displaced by 1/10 beat, allowing the gesture to carry over into the downbeat of measure 8. At measure 8, each player has two tutti attacks falling on the downbeat of the measure and on the second half of beat 3. This measure seems to serve a cadential function as it brings together all three parts. Its return later in the piece will support this observation. '76 Figure 3-7. Measures 4-8 of Amores, movement II. Following the tutti attacks of measure 8, the two-bar motive found in player C in measures 6-7 returns in measures 9-10, the displaced version of the 10:3 grupetto leading into the downbeat of Section II. M; \o Figure 3-8. Measures 9-10 of Amores, movement II. In referring back to figures 3-7 and 3-8, one will notice that the accompanying figures to player C’s recurring motive vary with each appearance. The texture remains stratified, as it is in the first three-bar phrase, and both the principal and accompanying motives have become more aperiodic. This tendency toward greater aperiodicity continues in Section II. The first four measures of Section II reveal the presence of "icti-control" procedures. In this phrase 77 player A has thirty-one attacks while player B has twelve and player C has nineteen (the sum of the latter two players’ attacks is thirty-one). An interesting example of motivic recursion appears in measure 12. Player C has a complete version of the 5:2 grupetto which originally appears in the same part in fragmented form in measure 4. The completion of the motive as it appears in measure 12 could be said to account for the concurrent number of attacks appearing in the phrase. The original fragmented form of the same grupetto appears again in measure 14 (player A). This time, the grupetto appears at the beginning of the measure (now without its eighth—note anacrusis) and is followed by a pair of eighth-note triplets. This motive is accompanied by a pattern of eighth-notes appearing in durchbrochene-Arbeit fashion (see Figure 3-9). A, 6‘ 3! .— Whack} k? \\ ‘ IL ‘3 , H Figure 3-9. Measures 11-14 of Amores, movement II, showing "icti-controls" and motivic recursion. In the next two-bar phrase (measures 15-16), evidence of "icti—control" is not apparent. Rather, the fragmented 5:2 grupetto followed by eighth-note triplets from measure 14 (player A) reappears in the same part in measure 16. The 78 accompanying eighth-note pattern in durchbrochene-Arbeit continues in the lower two parts (see Figure 3-10). IS "’,;——~, Figure 3-10. Measures 15-16 of Amores, movement II, showing motivic recursion and accompanying figures in durchbrochene- Arbeit. The next two-measure phrase (measures 17-18) unfolds in a manner similar to that found in the preceding phrase. Measure 17 contains the sparse eighth-note accompaniment figure in durchbrochene-Arbeit. In measure 18, all three parts bring back previous rhythmic motives. Player A’s septuplet figure first appeared in the same part in measure 4 (the 7:4 grupetto will become increasingly more prominent in Sections IV and V). The triplet figuration in player B's part has its origin in measures 14 and 16 (player A) in conjunction with the familiar quintuplet grupetto. There the figure appears alone and is extended by one beat. Player C brings back the displaced version of the 10:3 grupetto found originally in measure 7. This descending motive now establishes a clear cadential function as it signals the approaching end of the section (see Figure 3-11). The presence of "icti-control" is manifested by the recurring sum of 31 attacks in the two-bar phrase. I1 "I 137- Figure 3-11. Measures 17-18 of Amores, movement II. The final two-bar phrase (measures 19-20) also contains a total of 31 attacks. Like the preceding phrase, it begins with a fragmented eighth-note accompaniment and proceeds in nearly identical fashion to recall the same motives which recurred in measure 18. The septuplet of player A returns in the same part. The triplet figure of player B now appears in player C’s part in a form which suggests the motive’s gradual dissipation. The originally paired triplets are broken up and separated by a rest before losing their identity entirely, being replaced by a three-note sixteenth figure. The familiar 10:3 grupetto now firmly establishes itself as a cadential motive, reappearing in player B (see Figure 3-12). I I 9 \c\ 20 Figure 3-12. Measures 19-20 of Amores, movement II. 80 Section III is the least active in terms of rhythmic density. In each of the ten measures found in this section, player A has'one attack, player B has two and player C has four. Working within the limitations fashioned by "icti- controls," Cage devised an interesting procedure for motive manipulation in each individual voice. For instance, the single eighth-note found in player A's part begins on the second half of beat four in measure 21 and moves up one-half beat in each consecutive measure. The figure reaches beat one in measure 28 and repeats on the downbeat in the remaining two measures (see Figure 3-13). g! 0 I17— M Jot. P In “I HHHn I I fir 2\ I 21 23 2% 2§ L a P Hu J 1 P (Ht-imp Ia H i as 2'1 22 zfi - 30 Figure 3-13. Measures 21-30 of Amores, movement II, player A. Player B’s part has a static pattern consisting of two rhythmic figures used interchangeably. These two figures could be said to form a symmetrical three-bar phrase (measures 21-23) which is repeated (measures 24-26). In the last measure of this repetition (measure 26), the figure elides with itself so that measure 26 comprises simultaneously the end of the second statement and the beginning of the third. This process apparently completes 81 itself at measure 28, the third statement ending with an altered version of the original. In like manner to the process found in player A’s part, the concluding bar is repeated in the remaining two measures (see Figure 3-14). / ' A 2‘ 22 z 5 Z1 25' [‘4 I; J J. 3 1 L I L J W‘ 5 ,5 - g i T ' : 1 L j x 26 21 Z? 29 So Figure 3-14. Measures 21-30 of Amores, movement II, player B. Player C’s part in Section III consists of three rhythmic motives, each two measures in length. Each measure expresses the manipulation of the prescribed number of attacks (four) in a different way while maintaining motivic integrity within each two-bar phrase. The first phrase (measures 21-22) contains a figure consisting of an eighth- note down beat followed by a quarter-note triplet figure spanning beats 3-4 with a descending contour. The same figure appears in the next measure in a literal retrograde of both rhythm and contour (see figure 3-15). z’”“\ 8 I" A ’3 1 ' ‘4 . 5‘7 5 ; fl: I *IJ' 1' l C V 4- f - b~ ";: L5:3' ‘ A4 2‘ 22 Figure 3-15. Measures 21-22 of Amores, movement II, player C. 82 The next two-bar phrase (measures 23-24) contains two versions of the same rhythmic motive consisting of a single eighth-note followed by a group of three eighth-notes arranged in a descending-ascending contour (see Figure 3-16) 0 2.3 2—1 Figure 3-16. Measures 23-24 of Amores, movement II, player C. The third two-bar phrase found in player C's part consists of two rhythmic components. The first is a 4:3 descending grupetto accompanying beats 2-4 of the first measure. The second is a version of the very first motive found in player A’s part, measure 1. This motive is extended in measure 26 by the addition of a single eighth-note on beat 3. The same two-bar phrase is repeated in measures 27-28, with the single eighth-note in the second bar of the phrase moved over to the second half of the third beat (see Figure 3-17). 25 26 21 2: Figure 3-17. Measures 25-28 of Amores, movement II, player C. As in the two voices previously discussed, the concluding rhythmic figure in measure 28 repeats in the 83 final two measures. This time the second half of the two-bar phrase (the extended version of player A's part, measure 1) takes over in measure 28, is repeated in slightly altered form in measure 29 (the eighth-note extension now appearing on beat 4) and again appears in measure 30 as it did two bars earlier (see Figure 3-18). 2‘3 23 3° Figure 3-18. Measures 28-30 of Amo es, movement II, player C. The aural effect of Section III is that of a single rhythmic line projected among three voices in durchbrochene- Arbeit fashion. All of the rhythmic material is presented in the first eight measures, the last of which is repeated as a cadential extension to fill up the ten-measure structure. As mentioned earlier in this discussion, the presence of "icti-control" makes possible a myriad of vertically-perceived rhythmic aggregates within a linearly- conceived motivic construction. The predominantly periodic rhythms of Section III are contrasted in Sections IV and V by increasingly aperiodic patterns. The septuplet figure which appeared on the highest drum of player C in measure 13 returns in measure 31, now on the middle drum of player B. The grupetto continues in measure 32 in a sub-divided fragmented form (see Figure 3-19). 84 Figure 3-19. Measures 31-32 of Angles, movement II, player B. The subdivision and fragmentation of grupetti generate an increased feeling of aperiodicity in Sections IV and V. Furthermore, motivic recursion is less frequent, and the motives presented are often fragmented, contributing to a generally amorphous character to the sound of these sections. There are, however, a few instances of motivic recursion which warrant closer scrutiny. In the first five measures of Section IV (measures 31-35), player A presents the same accompaniment figures that first appeared in player B’s part at measures 6-10, only now the rhythms appear entirely on drums, whereas the original presentation began with pod rattle in the first two measures (see Figure 3-20). 7; A 3! 1 32 1 3 3 1 34 3; P3: r 14 ‘- .. r‘x v i L . J! v : Figure 3-20. Measures 31-35 of Amores, movement II, player A. The opening motive found in player A’s part on the downbeat of measure 1 returns in player C’s part in the middle of measure 34. The same figure appears in player B’s 85 part in the next measure on the second half of beat 1 and again on beat 4. This occurs over a fragment of the motive which originally appeared in player A's part in measure 2. In measure 35, this motive appears in player C’s part (see Figure 3-21). 34 35' . n; 7 Figure 3-21. Measures 34-35 of Amo es, movement II. Player B’s septuplet figure reappears in measure 36, the individual sounds now projected among the three drums. The accompaniment rhythm of player A creates a polyrhythmic effect which continues in the subsequent measures of the section. Player B's septuplets give way to eighth-note quintuplets appearing below quarter—note triplets in player A's part, while player C recalls and expands the motive originally found in measure 2 of player A (Figure 3-22). 31 ,'—~ 35 //" rif"\ I ”'—‘\\ "c \ ./ Figure 3-22. Measures 36-37 of Amores, movement II. 86 The septuplet figure of player B returns once again in measure 38. The following two measures present a winding- down of dynamic intensity and motivic activity. The 9:4 grupetto which originally appeared in player A's part, measure 6 returns in its same configuration in player C's part, measure 39. A fragmented septuplet appears above this grupetto in player B's part, while player A produces the glissando-like roar called the "moose" in the second half of the measure, the only occurrence of the effect in the entire movement. Measure 40 concludes the section with a restatement of the movement’s first motive (from player A, measure 1) in player C's part. The rather sparse final measure of Section IV leads into the most aperiodic section in the movement (see Figure 3—23). /'—\. $5 K‘ Figure 3-23. Measures 38-40 of Amor s, movement II. From the standpoint of "icti-control," Section IV presents some interesting numbering when all parts are added together. The first two measures (31-32) yield 20 total attacks. The following three-bar phrase (measures 33-35) totals 27 attacks, a number which appeared earlier in 87 Section I. In measures 36-37, players A and B each have 17 attacks, while player C has 8 (this combination recurs in Section V). The final three measures (38-40) yield a total of 31 attacks, a number which occurred frequently in Sections I and II. Section V shows a similar construction in terms of "icti-control." The first two measures (41-42) contain a total of 31 attacks. In the following two-bar phrase (measures 43-44), players A and B each have 17 attacks, while player C has 8 (this combination was seen earlier in measures 36-37 of Section IV). In the next phrase, comprising three measures (45-47), player B has a total of 14 attacks, while player A has 4 and player C has 10. The final three-bar phrase (measures 48-50) contains a total of 27 attacks. Because of the presence of septuplet figures in all but the final measure, Section V can be considered the most aperiodic section in the movement. As in Section IV, these grupetti undergo subdivision and fragmentation in a variety of combinations (see Figure 3-24). E 7 L .4 I E II 0% i 1 x r A; v .7 a!!——— A‘ A i? i A44" 7 W m " "imit- 4: M- a K A A A . __.“1. J. 1 ,4141 A _. .J . m E If: {tcc‘j:‘c — --vl::v:: :c1fc.jfi - A g a as. - I - I 4b 41 LM' 4‘ 4“ P? 50 Figure 3-24. Measures 41-50 of Amores, movement II, player B. 88 Although the persistent septuplets dominate the texture in terms of aural perception, some interesting instances of motive recursion also appear in Section V. The 9:4 grupetto, seen earlier in measure 6 and again in measure 39, reappears in its original contour in measure 41, player C. At the same time, player A begins a retrograde of rhythmic events which originally appeared in the pod rattle of player B in the first four measures of the movement. Measures 41 and 42 bring back the pod rattle figures from measures 4 and 3, respectively. Measure 43 contains the same rhythm found in measure 2, now in a displaced retrograde. Measure 44 contains a literal retrograde of events first appearing in measure 1 of player B (see Figure 3—25). ans. 4! 42. 4% Figure 3-25. Measures 41-44 of Amores, movement II. As in Section IV, the motivic activity and dynamic intensity gradually diminish in the final measures of Section V, ending with a singular statement in player C’s part. A silent fermata marks the end of Part One (see Figure 3-26). Figure 3-26. Measures 45-50 of Amo e , movement II. Part Two begins with an extended twenty-measure section which presents a verbatim return of the opening material from measures 1-8. At measure 58, where one would expect to find the cadential grupetti from measures 9-10, the same eight measures are repeated. Following the two tutti attacks in measure 66 (originally found in measure 8), the cadential grupetti from measures 9-10 reappear slightly altered in a four-bar gesture which closes the section. The 5:2 grupetto from measure 9 reappears in measure 67 with its three-note anacrusis now presented in triplet form. The accompanying figure from player A in measure 10 reappears a measure earlier in the return (measure 69), sustaining a roll through the final measure of the section. The familiar 10:3 grupetto takes on a new contour in measure 70, steadily rising toward the downbeat of Section VII (see Figure 3-27). Section VII, occupying measures 71-80, bears a strong resemblance to Section III. The rhythmic activity is sparse, each player having the same number of attacks in each measure in all but two instances. Players A and C each have three attacks except in measure 71, where player A has four due to the release of a roll from the previous section. Player B consistently plays two attacks per 90 measure except in measure 78, where three attacks occur. The simple, almost strikingly periodic rhythms are perceived as occurring compositely, appearing among the three parts in durchbrochene-Arbeit fashion (see Figure 3-28). Figure 3-27. Section VI, measures 51-70 of Amores, movement II. 91 ”2‘1 78 79 3° 80 Figure 3-28. Section VII, measures 71-80 of Amores, move- ment II. Section VIII seems somewhat related to Section IV in that the recurrence of motive fragments appears along with a gradual increase in aperiodicity. As in Section IV, a fragment of the original pod rattle motive from Section I reappears in Section VIII. In measures 82-84, player B has the original pod rattle motive from measures 5-7, now appearing on the highest-pitched drum. Player A's initial three-note motive from measure 1 reappears in various guises in measures 83, 84, 86 and 88. The original descending 10:3 grupetto from measure 5 reappears in measure 88. All of the rhythmic events in Section VIII are held together and propelled forward by the steady repetition of player C's very first motive from measure 1, appearing in the same part 92 in this penultimate section. The slide of the wire brush on beat 3, hardly noticeable when it first appears in measure 1, now seems to permeate the entire timbral fabric of Section VIII with its hypnotic repetition. The appearance of the pod rattle's sustained roll on the last beat of measure 89 anticipates the ensuing events of the final section (see Figure 3-29). ...—L— E 4: j S 5 I— W ;—‘ .fi Figure 3-29. ment II. Section VIII, measures 81-90 of Amores, move- 93 The final ten-measure section presents yet another return of the movement’s first eight measures, extended now by a two-bar repetition of the tutti attacks originally found in measure 8 (see Figure 3-30). The attacks on the second half of beat 2 occur on the edges of the upper, middle and lower drums, respectively, in each measure. 41 ' fiz' ' ‘tq. ’ 100' Figure 3-30. Section IX, measures 91-100 of Amor , move- ment II. Although the use of the precompositional method of "icti- control" may have been the foundation upon which Cage . originally conceived the second movement of Amores, the appearance of motivic and sectional recursion provides a solid structural framework for the movement. The following 94 diagram demonstrates how the recurrence of the first eight-measures (represented by "A”) combines with the gradual shift from periodic to aperiodic rhythms to create the work's structure (Figure 3-31). onIC afefl'maht patina“ ac MA 4. I A llbfififl 4.,“ aligfi 11$(C\U&(A') u H r II 1 $1 71 1u> Figure 3-31. Diagram of structure for Amores, movement II. The use of motivic and sectional recursion provides unity while the gradual shift from periodic to aperiodic rhythms through the imaginative employment of grupetti provides variety in the second movement of Amgres, clearly the work of a highly skilled percussion composer. Movement III Trio: Seven Wood Blocks (not Chinese) For the third movement of Amores, Cage used a movement from an earlier work, the Trio of 1936. When asked why he chose to bring back a portion of the earlier piece, he responded, That enabled me to write the work quickly. I had that movement and I had the idea for the work and it was three (voices) and there were three players. In the title of the movement, Cage specifies that the work is written for wood blocks, but not of the Chinese 95 variety. In the performance note, he clarifies his intentions: The graduated pieces of wood (three in the case of the first player, two in the other cases) are placed on cloth pads on benches in front of the players. They are arranged according to pitch, low to high, left to right: the notation is on the 2 or 3 lowest spaces of the staff, as the case may be. The ends of the pieces should face the players and slightly overhang the benches. The players, using small hard-wood beaters (e.g. cup gong beaters), may then conventionally hit the edges of the pieces, obtaining the desired resonance. Other arrangements may be invented. What is not desired, however, is the extreme richness of, e.g., the marimba or xylophone, nor, on the other hand, the extreme sharpness of the conventional Chinese wood block. 5 When questioned further about the type of wood block he preferred, Cage responded, They happen to be wood blocks which were used for the backs of books. You remember, I told you that I worked with book binders during the day and we played percussion at night, so those wood blocks were part of the book binding. ...Off hand, I like the Tgio best when it is played, not with a mallet, not with the ends of the sticks, but with the handles, so the wood blocks become extrgmely quiet, not brilliant, but almost inaudible. As mentioned in the performance note, the graduated pitches are notated on the lower spaces of a five-line staff with a neutral clef. In Trio, the movement is notated with the rhythms appearing on a single line for each pitch without a clef17 (see Figures 3-32 and 3-33). 96 Figure 3-32. Example of notation used in Amores, movement III (measures 1-3). WALTZ J-u 1 5h 7 £3 3' .K " F- ' Wood moani 2 F T) 3 F 3. ) p> ' > *I* 3 Wood Mocks Wood Blocks! Figure 3-33. Example of notation used in TTTQ, movement III (measures 1-3). I The movement is thirty-three measures long, with a time signature of 3 and metronome indication of J = 84. The dynamics range from? in the opening bar to fff‘p in the closing bar. Movement III of Amores is built entirely on two rhythmic motives which are manipulated according to their placement 3 within a measure of 4, time. The motives, labeled X and 2, appear in their original form in Figure 3-34. 97 Q 211%P4‘l % II??? It” Moi-Ne. x Moi-Ede. 3: 1». Figure 3-34. Motives found in movement III of Amores. Each motive appears in six different locations within a given measure during the course of the work. A chart of these permutations appears in Figure 3-35. 54-1.}; ..7'P7l 551 3.I,,I]7,v if} \ /? X‘Z- 3 7..77PI1 31 3 7 E337. I III} 4| n ‘I W 4 ”3‘ X‘3.2}"%‘P7 23‘3% IIIIIYI‘\71FBm ”If, %7n?I7P7 “3,3 I IIH 7 ”57's. x512 __ DI? P7 2-5 3 __L “III? P7”) fl X’L.§‘_-_ 7 ’77 P? 2'63 -. 7 If} fi7P7lll Figure 3-35. Permutations of motives found in movement III of Amores. The work may be divided into three sections of varying length, each of which is defined by the appearance of motive X alone in no more than two of the three voices. Sections I and II are subdivided into phrases defined by rhythmic 98 activity, while Section III consists of a single five—measure phrase. The major sections and their divisions appear as follows: Section I measures 1 - 12 3:5:4 Section II measures 13 - 28 3:7:6 Section III measures 29 - 33 5 Section I begins with a three-measure phrase in which player A states motive X-l three times. This motive is passed to player B in measure 4 while player C states motive Z-l. Player B continues to repeat motive X-l in measure 5 and again in measure 6 as player C takes up motive X-4 in measure 5, repeating the motive in the next two measures. Meanwhile, player A re-enters at measure 7 with motive X-3 as player B states motive z-s, ending the five-bar phrase (see Figure 3-36). It“ 6 7 3 Figure 3-36. The first two phrases found in Section I of Amores, movement III, showing motives and their permutations. 99 In the final four-bar phrase of Section I, player A continues to state motive X-3 while player B begins motive X-S and player C has motive X-6 (measure 9). Each player continues to state the motive three times. Player A completes the final repetition on the downbeat of measure 10, then states motive z-3 in the middle of measure 11. In measure 12, player B completes the cycle of repetitions on beat 2 and player C one-half beat later. The completion of the cycle marks the end of Section I (see Figure 3-37). x-3——-—-‘ ,———2.3—m-, ‘3 '0 11 12 Figure 3-37. Motives found in the final four-measure phrase of Section I in Amores, movement III (measures 9-12). Section II begins, as did Section I, with a single statement of a version of motive X which is repeated twice. After player B states motive X-2 in measures 13-15, a seven- bar phrase of overlapping motives ensues. The X motives (X-2, X-6, X-S and X-3) continue to undergo a cycle of three statements with each presentation in this phrase. The Z motives, previously presented in single statements, begin to undergo repetition in Section II. Player C states motive z-1 twice in measures 16-17, and player A has three statements of motive z-s in measures 19-22, ending the phrase (see Figure 3-38). 100 Figure 3-38. Motives found in the first two phrases (measures 13-15 and 16-22) of Section II in Amores, movement III. The final six-bar phrase of Section II begins on the downbeat of measure 23 with the concluding note of motive X-3 in player B’s part. Player C then begins two statements of motive Z-3 while player A has three statements of motive X-4. In measure 25, player B enters with two statements of motive X-l and begins a third statement before shifting to motive X—5 on beat 3 of measure 27. Meanwhile, player C has a single statement of motive Z—4 beginning in measure 25 followed immediately by motive Z-6 at the end of measure 26. Player A states motive Z-2 in measure 27. As player B continues with motive X—5, player C begins a statement of motive X-4 in measure 28 (see Figure 3-39). 101 Z-b '- 26 2‘1 22 M- Figure 3-39. Motives found in the final six-measure phrase of Section II in Amores, movement III (measures 23-28). Section III begins in measure 29 with the conclusion of player B’s three statements of motive X-S which began in measure 27. Player C continues with motive X-4 in measure 29, and after two statements of the motive, deviates from the pattern with fragments of previous motives in measures 30-31. As the dynamic level diminishes, player C settles into a final statement of motive X-3, while players 8 and A wind the movement down with three statements each of motives X-6 and X-2, respectively (see Figure 3-40). I )GZI_‘ X4: x. 24 32 ,, 33 Figure 3-40. Motives found in Section III of Amores, movement III (measures 29-33). 102 The aural effect created in movement III is one of a complex collage of composite rhythms produced by the juxtaposition of the two static motives and their permutations among three voices. A somewhat similar effect occurs in Henry Cowell's erinarg Bigniggimg (1934) in which ostinati of differing lengths are recycled to create a variety of vertically-perceived rhythms. The technique of recycling static motives to create altered perceptions of rhythmic motion has become associated with a current compositional trend, known by some as minimalism, which has been explored by composers such as Terry Riley, Philip Glass and Steve Reich. Movement IV Solo: Prepared Piano In the fourth movement of Amores, scored for prepared piano, Cage employed the "square-root" formula in a manner similar to that found in Firs; Construction. The movement comprises one hundred measures, divided into ten sections of ten measures each grouped according to the proportional division 3:3:2:2. The rhythmic events occurring within the smaller ten-measure sections (the microstructure) define the proportional divisions as illustrated in Figure 3-41. 103 I! SOLO. PREPERED PIHI‘IO 3 '1! ...—r6_u_-_ Figure 3-41. Proportional division 3:3:2:2 found in the first ten-measure section of Amores, movement IV (measures 1-10). ' The proportional division 3:3:2:2 also applies to the grouping of the ten large sections (the macrostructure). Figure 3-42 illustrates the division of the macrostructure. Isnzneasure_§estien Mséfiflxsfi 3 1 1 - 30 {2 3 3 4 31 - so {5 6 e1 - so 2 I? 8 81 - 100 2 I 9 10 Figure 3-42. Outline of macrostructure divisions found in Amores, movement IV. 104 Cage clearly adheres to the "square-root" formula throughout the movement, both in the macrostructure and the microstructure. His employment of this compositional technique has been discussed in detail in Chapter Two. Movement IV serves to unify Amores by recalling thematic material from movement I. Beginning in measure 61, material from measures 11-13 of movement I appears in rhythmic augmentation. In measures 61—64, the material from measures 11-12 of movement I is presented in its entirety. At measure 65, where one would expect to find material from measure 13 of movement I, the motive from the second half of measure 12 is repeated to accommodate the phrase structure. The material from measure 13 of movement I reappears in measure 66 in a slightly altered rhythm. Measures 67-68 recall the remaining material from measure 13 and the first figure of measure 14 before diverting from the pattern in measure 69 (see Figures 3-43 and 3-44). Figure 3-43. Measures 11-15 of Amores, movement I. 105 ‘7 o o bx o . 6" o I 10 a Figure 3-44. Measures 61-70 of Amores, movement IV. The concluding motive of movement I (measures 14-15, Figure 3-43) forms the basis for the last two sections of macrostructure in movement IV, bringing the last movement and Amores to a close (see Figure 3-45). —--.1 Figure 3-45. The final two sections of macrostructure found in Amores, movement IV (measures 81-100). Cage has stated that Amores is "an attempt to express in combination the erotic and the tranquil, two of the permanent emotions of Indian tradition."18 He had been introduced to Indian music and philosophy through Gita Sarabhai, a young Indian woman who had come to America to study Western music.19 Cage's interest in non-Western thought is discussed in greater detail in Chapter Five. When questioned about how the attempt is realized in Amores, Cage responded: It is just realized as far as one's intentions go, which often fail for anyone but the person who has the intentions; and it was that fact, that the intentions one has are not always recognized by a receiver, that led me to use SBance operations and renunciation of communication. Endnotes - Chapter Three 1Interview, 6 June, 1988. zgohn Cage, compiled by Robert Dunn (New York: Henmar Press, 1962), 33. Dunn cites several performances of Amores in which only movements I and IV were presented, including the Town Hall concert in New York, December 22, 1948, and a number of dance performances with Merce Cunningham. The Quartet fig; Twelve Tom-toms from fine lg Asleep is also published separately. 3Thomas Moore, "Rhythmic Structures in John Cage’s Amores" Master’s thesis, University of Maryland, 1987, 20-25. 4John Cage, Amores (New York: Henmar Press, 1960). 51bid. 6Ibid. 71bid. 8Ibid. Mr. Cage is referring to Poinciana trees. 91nterview, 6 June, 1988. 10Stuart Smith, "The Early Percussion Music of John Cage," Percussionist 16, 1 (Fall, 1978), 16-27. 11Ibid, 21. 12Ibid, 22. 13Durchbrochene Arbeit is a term denoting the process by which a melodic or rhythmic line is projected into two or more different colors. Literally translated as "broken, pierced or perforated work," the term refers to a lace or filigree effect. 107 108 14Interview, 6 June, 1988. 15Cage, Amores. 16Interview, 6 June, 1988. 17John Cage, Thie (New York: Henmar Press, 1977), 7. 18Dunn, 33. 19Calvin Tomkins, The Bride and the Bachelors: The heretieal Courtship Th Modern Art, (New York: The Viking Press, 1965), 98. 20Interview, 6 June, 1988. Chapter Four Cage’s Other Percussion Works, 1935-1943 In addition to First Construction and Amores, Cage composed thirteen other works using percussion between 1935 and 1943. Eleven of these works are for ensembles of three or more percussionists. Two works are for percussion with vocal soloist. In this chapter, each of the thirteen works is discussed in terms of notation, instrumentation and compositional style with reference to specific information presented in Chapters Two and Three regarding Tigeh th- shruchieh and Amores. QQQLLQL (1935). 4 players, no specific instruments. 4 movements: I - Moderate, II - Very Slow, III - Slow (entitled "Axial Asymmetry"), IV - Fast. Duration: Approximately 20 minutes. Quagtet, Cage's first work for percussion, was composed in Santa Monica, California in 1935. The title page indicates that the work is for unspecified percussion instruments and that either one or both slow movements may be used in performance. In an interview with the author, Cage explained the environment in which the work was conceived: 109 110 Then I lived in Santa Monica in a house that was devoted during the day to book binding and in the evening to making music, and some of the people who played in the percussion group had experience as modern dancers. What we did, then, was to experiment with pieces of junk and with a few rented instruments. I rented a timpani [sic] and some gongs and cymbals and so forth, but a lot of the instruments were things like brake drums and things from the kitchen, etcetera. The work is notated on a four-line grid divided by broken vertical lines representing units of time. Conventional notation representing durational values appears on a single horizontal line for each voice. Throughout the piece, the smallest durational value is the eighth note. Each movement contains fixed rhythmic patterns which are manipulated in a manner similar to that employed in the third movement of Amores. The beginnings and endings of patterns are indicated by the appearance of a bold vertical line. Rehearsal numbers appear after every ten time units. An example of the notation used in Quartet appears in Figure 4-1. 111 . 1' l i . . ' ' : L 3 3 t ' E '2: "2714-23—73. "2:43? 33135 “W‘s-1' -1 1w— ‘ E E E - : : : ' : 9‘ ' : k ' --.'____._-..-- .... .... -1-..” l ...-- .-.... 1.4.. ___-._s.‘4 '4: Hz 4: 244-! 45 '46 41 4? '4‘. For :1 {IV-1 Figure 4-1. Example of notation employed in Quartet, movement I, units 21-52. Although no instruments are specified, it is apparent by the notation of longer durational values that some instruments capable of producing a sustained sound could be employed. Furthermore, any number of instruments may be utilized, as the composer explains: There are no instruments specified, so it could be any number of instruments, and it often is. I think it’s interesting to see what people do with it. The Percussion Group in Cincinnati made a very interesting performance of it, using a prepared piano to give two parts to one player because they had only three. I asked, "How can you perform a quartet with three players?" They said, "You’ll see." So, it was with right and left hand, you see, on the piano. In her dissertation, Form and Structure T_ the Music .SQT John Cage, Deborah Campana provides a detailed analysis 112 of the third movement of Qherhet and draws the following conclusions: Although tradition had been eschewed in matters of both instrumental choice and structuring means, QQQELQE still maintains traits that can be labeled "classic." The work's division into four movements recalls symphonic, or more appropriately, quartet form. The intended performing situation for Quarte; is what would be considered standard or forma1--with or without a conductor, the work is performed in a concert setting in order to receive directed attention from a central focus. The "fixed rhythmic patterns" are treated thematically, and therefore, one can recognize the application of traditional developmental techniques: theme introduction, contrast, restatement and, 09 a more formal level, statement, development and return. Trio (1936). 3 players, 16 instruments. 3 movements: I - Allegro, II - March, III - Waltz. (Third movement later used in Amores, 1943.) Duration: Approximately 2 1/2 minutes. Thio, like the Quagtet, was composed in Santa Monica, California. The title page lists the instrumentation as follows: lst. player: 3 graduated pieces of wood (not Chinese wood blocks), 3 small tom-toms (wire brush), bamboo sticks (played as claves). 2nd. player: tom-tom (wire brush), bass drum, 2 graduated pieces of wood (not Chinese wood blocks). 113 3rd. player: 3 graduated pieces of wood (not Chinese wood blocks), tom-tom, bamboo sticks (played as claves). Unlike Quartet, IEiQ is written in conventional metric notation. The first movement, only twenty-four measures in length, is written in; time with the tempo indication J‘=168. The second movement, also twenty-four measures long, is written in 2 time and includes the tempo indication 1‘ =112. The § time signature returns in movement three. The third movement has been discussed in detail in Chapter Three. Thie is notated on a staff consisting of a single line for each instrument. Conventional rhythmic notation is employed throughout the work. In the bass drum part (Player Two), 2! indicates that the rhythm be performed on the rim of the drum, and Jw“indicates a glissando to be played at the edge of the drum head (the "moose" found in movement two of Amores). All other rhythms are notated conventionally. An example of the notation used in Thie appears in Figure 4-2. (like duct) 1 Tomdom! Bus Dlum Wood mocui l ; Bambw Sucksi mu clues) l Tumotom / \ 1~ v11... 3., vd5_ N V m Figure 4-2. Example of notation found in Thie, movement II, measures 1-3. In T119, Cage employed the same method of manipulating fixed rhythmic patterns already discussed in Chapter Three. Throughout the work, rhythmic patterns are repeated and exchanged from voice to voice, at times creating more complex composite rhythms as a result of the vertical coincidence of two or more patterns. Both Thie and Quartet were experiments in the emancipation of noise brought on by Cage’s work with Schoenberg. Both works were originally conceived without particular instruments in mind, as the composer explains: The Thie and the Quartet were both written without instruments in mind. We experimented, with my help and with the players’ help, to find out what would happen when we did one thing or another. I’ve let that continue in the presentation of the Quartet, whereas the Trio I've orchestrated, so to speak. 115 The experiments in fixed rhythmic patterns found in Qpezhep and Tzie led Cage to consider the possibility of creating a musical structure based on duration, which would be equally hospitable to noise and so-called musical tone. This concept led towards the development of the "square- root" formula. The earliest work to show evidence of such a structure was Imaginapy Landscape No. 1, composed in 1939. Imaginezy Lendscape No, 1_(1939). 4 players, 4 instru- ments. Duration: 7 minutes. Thegihepy hendscapeyheT T is the first in a series of five Leheeeepee. The first three hendscapes are for percus- sion and electronic devices. Imaginapy Landscape flee A (1951) is scored for twelve radios, and Imaginary Lendscape Nee 5 (1952) is for forty-two recordings. The electronic devices employed in Imaginary Lendscape £21 1 include two turntables on which are played various frequency recordings, or "test" records. Player One is instructed to play two such recordings, Victor Frequency Record 845223 and Victor Constant Note Record No. 24 (845193), on a single turntable. Each recording is played at both 78 and 33 1/3 RPM. Since the recordings produce only a single tone, each one is capable of generating two pitches, one high and one low, as the speed of the turntable changes. On Player One’s part, the pitches are notated on a 116 four-line staff. Rhythms are executed by raising and lowering the needle. In like manner, Player Two is instructed to play Victor Frequency Record 84522A. This recording generates a steadily rising pitch which shifts in frequency as the speed of the turntable changes from 33 1/3 to 78 RPM. This part is notated on a single line, with shifts in turntable speed indicated by x appearing above each note. Player Three plays a large Chinese cymbal. The part is notated on a single line. Rolls are indicated with tradi- tional slashes above the notes ( if ). Player Four plays a "string piano" on which is played three muted pitches and a glissando produced by a sweep across the bass strings with a gong beater, indicated by r‘“«~. . An example of notation employed in Tmaginepy Landscape No. T appears in Figure 4-3. B Qf r4 Ib’ ‘ n; 16 Figure 4-3. Example of notation employed in Imaginary Landscape No. T. 117 The work consists of four fifteen-measure sections which are separated by interludes of one, two and three measures, respectively. The fourth fifteen-measure section is followed by a four-measure coda (see Figure 4-4). u‘tfl‘uAt \Mdfi M [Sufi-14ml 'L I. LSuHodl l 3.1. [Sufi-:11! I Eta-H6613 [CARI [Tg “5, [\MS. [\5 MS. [LM$.I :5 Ms. [3615.] \€ MS. |4Ms.| Figure 4-4. Outline of formal structure found in Tmaginapy Landscape hey T. A time signature of g and tempo of J =60 is used throughout the piece. Most of the rhythmic activity occurs in the string piano with the introduction of the first interlude motive, which later appears in expanded form throughout the work (see Figure 4-5). 1'. ‘7'.- mf up Figure 4-5. Imaginary Landscape No. T, interlude 1, measure 16, string piano. In Imaginapy Landegape No. T, Cage began to move toward his goal of creating music with a structure based on duration of time. The rhythmic structure employed in First 118 genepppepigh seems to be a logical outgrowth of the technique with which the composer experimented in Imaginary Lehgeeepe NQT T. The two works are similarly constructed according to a specific number of measures which are "filled” with sound (noise or pitched sounds) or silence. In the Qohetructioh series, Cage began to work with a concept of "phraseology" which further defined the durations to be filled within the framework of the macro structure and micro structure.5 This process has been discussed in detail in Chapter Two. Deborah Campana provides a complete, detailed analysis of Imagihapy Lendscape hgT T in her dissertation, [ppm ehg mummgmafi Seeghg Qonstruction (1940). 4 players, 34 instruments. Duration: approximately 7 1/2 minutes. fieeehg Qohstructigh was composed in Seattle and was first performed at Reed College in Portland, Oregon on February 14, 1940. The performers were John and Xenia Cage, Doris Dennison and Margaret Jansen.7 The work is scored for four players performing on a total of thirty-four instruments. A list of instrumentation and the notational layout appears in Figure 4-6. Figure 4-6. 119 ORCHESTRA AND NOTATION? Mflmr: Skis?! w- E Wind Gin: ¢ Indian Rattle C Lh :J: Us. uh. We blulh um: ma 2nd Hiya: Sn": Drum 1mm 74:: Temple Goa. —-—'-‘—"—— l.h. uh. Small Mama: —'-‘——— 1J1. UL Lug: Mama: v4 cum edge 3rd Plant: Tam-um ' 4 Mom: Gongs :xfi: Water Cong 6 Thundenhcu v 40: Player: Smng Pam (so: duration: for playing) Instrumentation and notation employed in Secgnd Construction. Cage provides specific directions for playing procedures in the performance note included in the score. The direc- tions appear as follows: lst. player: The sleigh bells should be large (oxen bells if possible). They should be played on a padded table or bench. Hard rubber beaters. They should be arranged so that they are graduated with respect to pitch. The maracas should be smaller than those used by the second player. The tremolo on the bells is played by sliding rapidly back and forth on top of the bells. 2nd. player: 3rd. player: 4th. player: 120 The small maracas should be larger than those used by the first player. The five tom-toms should be graduated in pitch. They are to be played with timpani sticks. The snare drum is played as indicated in the score: right hand, snare stick, left hand, wire brush. The three temple gongs are the large Japanese ones and are played with the wooden leather-covered beaters generally employed. The tam-tam should be very large, having a deep and resonant tone. The thundersheet should be light. The five gongs are muted by placing them on a padded bench, and are graduated. The water gong is an ordinary small gong which is lowered or raised into or from a tub of water as indicated in the score. Except for the tam-tam, gong beaters are useful. For the tam-tam, a larger padded stick is necesary. In the bass clef, 8va, "e" and "f" are muted by two fingers of the left hand, which fingers slide along the strings of the piano (as indicated in the score by the arrows above the staff), while the keys indicated are played by the right hand on the keyboard. "C" is muted by an ordinary screw placed between the strings. In the treble clef, the tones between "a" and "e " are muted with a piece of cardboard. The tremolo indicated in the fourth section and elsewhere produces a siren-like sound, through the use of a metal cylinder which slides along the strings (manipulated by the left hand) while the right hand trills on the keyboard. The direction of the slide is indicated by the arrows above the whole notes above the staff. The arrows below the staff indicate pitch. Because of the individuality of piano con- struction, the tones or strings used to produce this siren-sound vary: they should be chosen for their convenience and length of string available. The glissandi in the bass clef are produged by sweeping the strings with a gong beater. Like the First Construction, Second Construction comprises sixteen sections, each divided into sixteen 121 measures. Each sixteen-measure section is grouped according to the proportional division 4:3:4:5. A time signature of 1 and tempo marking of J = 128-1326 appears throughout the piece. The opening four-measure motive found in the sleigh bells appears prominently throughout the piece in each of the four voices and serves as a generating device for other similar motives (see Figures 4-7, 4-8 and 4-9). Jam-13: \ 2 3 4 :81“ A- J ‘J : L fl- 1 H ‘ IL 4 F V L 4. E i Lhfi I A. i 0 *5; '5. U.Uv 'iAW v ifi"%" t: '54'*— b P ‘f l Figure 4-7. Opening motive found in Secohg Censtructioh, measures 1-4, player one. > . -—'fi + Ty f 5m W‘ Y m 4 o . ‘ A 1 L1 I 1 PL 4 . U U ‘, U ‘ i U ‘ V .U ‘1 U .U f’ IL """°""'T—f"""""’""T! """""""""""" f1. """""" Figure 4-8. Similar motive found in measures 16-19, player four. 1:? "E! 1 x =4 —: ' L4 - 2 I L .. 5 1“ I if! .. 1 i J .H . i I . . . ' I I . ' I . I F J V ...... qq so SI 52. Figure 4-9. Similar motive found in measures 49-52, player one. The opening motive also generates a rhythmic fugue subject which makes sixteen entries after its initial statement at measure 161 (see Figure 4-10). 122 26:: Figure 4-10. Fugue subject found in Second Construcpion measures 161-164, player two. Because the fugue subject is exactly four measures long, it tends to work in opposition to the established rhythmic structure of 4:3:4:5. Whenever a voice does not play the fugue subject, it continues to adhere to the prescribed phrase lengths. After the completion of the sixteenth entry of the fugue subject, the work concludes with a single statement of the original motive from measures 1-4 in the sleigh bells, followed by the sustained ringing of a tam-tam in the final five-measure time division. Living gggm hpeTe (1940). 4 players, unspecified number of household objects, furniture or architectural elements used as instruments. 4 movements: I - To Begin, II - Story (for speech quartet), III - Melody, IV - End. Duration: Approximately 6 minutes. LTyThg Room Music for percussion and speech quartet, is scored for any number of items commonly found in a living room to be used as instruments. Cage’s performance direc- tions found in the score appear in Figure 4—11. 1 2 3 DIRECTIONS: Any household objects or architectural elements may be used as instruments, e.g.: lst player—magazines, newspaper or cardboard 2nd player—table or Other wooden furniture 3rd playerulargish books 4th player—floor, wall, door or wooden frame of window. (Some graduation from high to low pitch should be obtained from is: to 4th player.) The melody (if it is included in the suite) may be played on any suitable in5trument: wind, string, or keyboard (prepared or nm). .5 - r.h. and accented 3 - l.h. and unaccented The first three players use the three middle fingers of bOth hands, the 4th player uses fists. Do not use conventional beaters. Figure 4-11. Performance note to Living Room Music.9 The work is in four movements, each with a time signature of zand no tempo indication of any kind. In the movements for percussion ("To Begin," "Melody" and "End"), stickings are indicated by stem direction as mentioned in the performance note. Because the right hand is accented, the sticking patterns create composite rhythms among the four voices, as shown in Figure 4-12. > > > > etc. k I Player 11 . Inf— Player #2 P \ Player '3 A Player ‘4 . . ._' L; L— U r a; ‘— P M. m0 .3 POCO 1 P l 2. Figure 4-12. Composite rhythms created through variations in sticking patterns found in Living Room Music, movement I, measures 1-4. 124 Although the "square-root" formula does not seem to be applied in Living Beep hgeTe, some degree of rhythmic structuring is evident. "To Begin" is structured in two equal parts of eighteen measures each. A double bar appears after a six-measure introduction and again at the movement’s mid-point (bar 18). "Story" begins with four seven-measure sections marked by double bars before expanding its phrase structure. The movement is fifty measures long. "Melody" consists of eight sections of eight measures each, and "End" contains seven sections of seven measures each. "Story," based on a poem by Gertrude Stein, is performed by a quartet of voices "reciting" Cage’s rhythmic rendition of the text. Percussive vocal accompaniments, such as "ti ti ti ti ti," "22" as in "buzz," and a sustained sibilant "ce," are included along with rhythmic whistling, to create a "percussion ensemble" of voices. Relative pitch inflections are indicated by rising and falling arrows. An example of notation used in this movement appears in Figure 4-13. 125 1] Ah: Ate-E J - ebb}: " #4:! :h’ 254.5; :j A4.b$14h:cc4ccv ti titititititi titi titi titic't tititititiu‘ti tin tititititititi J/-\J\q J- AJ} v/‘KJX- JATD 2 J AL J A 2’ Huh :ofl-x'd wet-1; d worl- d wo~r1\’d traffic! > 3 m: r3 1 1‘3 15 1 J: rj 1 J: 1 On- fih-EE ‘ m- ce an-Ee‘ On- ce Oh- ce On-ce 4 — — _ q '0 N 2 ¢ 1 ‘1 :FJ Jfifc'fijih " A; _. ti ti ti ti ti ti 2 cite-h ‘ cash 9 4413: ch ick‘l. 35:- 34h:h J;fi Dice up-an a tin: I a time up-at a time a tire upm a time a time a > > > > > J J 1 -' 3 J g l a J i J. 4' 3 On- 7e ‘ Cii- Ee (51- ee ‘ m— ce 01- ce .4 ‘h ., P‘JJ - ‘1: J 451.4: 355:; 5355413 ‘m' w e .z_ induct}; ' ' ' ‘ ' ' I3 ' Figure 4-13. hgeTe, movement II, measures 9-13. Example of notation used in Living Room The rhythms found in "Story" are entirely periodic, presumably to aid in the articulation of the text. other movements contain periodic rhythms which are The occasionally interrupted by grupetti such as those found in hmopes and First Construction. In Movement III, "Melody," the first three players perform on the "living room" percussion instruments found in the first and last movements. Player four has a simple, folk-like melody based on a whole-tone scale which may be performed on any wind, string or keyboard instrument. The performance note (Figure 4-11) suggests that this movement is optional and may be omitted if so desired. 126 QgghTe husie (1941). Composed jointly with Lou Harrison. 4 players, 45 instruments. Duration: Approximately 6 minutes. QgghTe M2§i§ was jointly composed with Lou Harrison during the spring of 1941 while the two composers were working together at Mills College. The length of the work was predetermined, and the parts were written separately. Cage wrote parts one and three, while Harrison wrote parts two and four.10 The performance note lists the instru- mentation as follows: Player 1: 6 graduated water buffalo bells, 6 graduated muted brake drums. Player 2: 2 sistra, 6 graduated sleigh bells, 6 brake drums, thundersheet. Player 3: 3 graduated Japanese temple gongs, tam-tam, 6 graduated cowbells. Player 4: 6 muted Chinese gongs, tam-tam (slightly lower in pitch than 3rd. player’s), water gong. According to Harrison, the water buffalo bells are oval- shaped metal bells which produce a "dry" metallic sound.11 He also describes the sistrum as " . . . everything from a tin can with beans in it to an Ethiopian «12 sistrum. All other instruments are similar to those described in Chapter Two. The performance note suggests 127 that instrument substitutes may be chosen, if necessary, as long as the soprano, alto, tenor, bass relationship between the parts is maintained.13 The work is written in fi time, with a tempo indication of allegro moderato. The only dynamic markings appear in the tam-tam part. The performance note explains that the work "does not progress from soft to loud but is continuously festive in intention, the changes in amount and nature of activity producing changes in amplitude."14 The piece is notated on four five-line staves in a conventional manner, the lines and spaces representing various relative pitches where multiple instruments are used. An example of its notation appears in Figure 4-14. l - a-*. ‘. -— ‘I J.-- ‘._4— \l -....- tub-C.m-- ." .—. ...-...I I------ choc—... _.-II All“. ...-— I... III-u-I-II-l C'Y '- "I n—mwr “I. "'m-‘I "I -l III-ll - I'I - ”nu—r... ”mm” 2 ' —_AulIu-_J‘IIJ-u-ulu-IO-ullln-dl—”nu-..dl-ald- ‘JI-H—J *7 ‘ V1 _1_‘ TY l-__--‘ -_-._l‘_- fxumuuumtwmw mummmw fl } j I I J .1 j '5 r- ,. - ,- :;1 siie *i: r t 2 3 1 S' 6 1 *‘8 1 ._L j I T J T j g r T i j ' JL v' I V 7 V L i " j é'k; a ;} t i 1 his ‘—3 I, mmwuwcmns fl IO mi ‘1: {5' mm aortas («om alarms) Figure 4-14. Example of notation used in Double Music, measures 1-17. 128 Double MpeTe is exactly two-hundred measures in length. Parts one and three imply a fourteen-measure division (roughly approximating the square root of 200, thus implying some application of the square-root formula). Parts two and four are grouped into sections of nine and one-half measures. In Figure 4-14, this sectionalization is illustrated in parts one (water buffalo bells) and two (sistra). For a complete timbral analysis of DouhTe Mgeie, one may wish to refer to a series of articles by Ronald Keezer entitled "A Study of Selected Percussion Ensemble Music of the Twentieth Century."15 Third Qghehgpethh (1941). 4 players, 52 instruments. Duration: Approximately 15 minutes. Thipd Constppctioh was premiered at the California Club Auditorium in San Francisco on May 14, 1941, in a program of percussion music by Cage and Lou Harrison. The work was performed by Xenia Cage, Doris Dennison, Margaret Jansen and Lou Harrison, with John Cage conducting.16 The work is scored for a wide variety of traditional, "found," and ethnic percussion instruments. Figures 4-15 and 4-16 list instrumentation and notational layout as found in the score. 129 ORCHESTRA uw. moms RATTLE (wooom) J A 5 caaouarso rm CANS fiL .4! j :,v center rim 3 GRADUATED DRUMS (TOMTOMS) . . Aha center edge cuwes 1 LARGE CHINESE omen (SUSPENDED) U MARACAS I TEPONAXTLE J 3 saaounreo DRUMS (romroms) r A c v 3 ' center edge I . ¥ :— 5 suauareo rm ems _ - : :fi center edge LAVES - 2 COWBELLS _ _A INoc-cnmssc RATTLE (woooan, mm MANY SEPARATE CHAMBERS) LICN'S ROAR Figure 4-15. Third nstruction. Instrumentation for players one and two. 130 C3) 3 GRADUATE!) DRUMS (TOMTOHS) A 'T +¢ ' center edge a Tinacunme J - ; 5 GRADUATE!) TIN CANS T4 A 4 f :1: ¢ v center f'lm OUIJADAS I’ CLAVES ' CRICKET CALLERS (SPLIT amaoo) ' - CONCH SHELL J I Tm CAN WITH TACKS (BATTLE) l . A : s GRASUATED TIN CANS +- - : ' I : ' CCh?¢f‘ rIrn CLaVES ’ MARACAS .7 . 3 GRADUATED DRUMS (TOMTOMS) t A : center edge WOODEN RATCHET BASS DRUM ROAR Figure 4-16. Third Construction. Instrumentation for players three and four.18 131 Each of the four players is responsible for thirteen instruments. In Figure 4-17, the instruments are listed according to skin, metal, wood and wind. Skin MQLQl 3 graduated drums (pl. 1) 5 graduated tin cans (pl. 1) 3 graduated drums (pl. 2) Chinese cymbal lion's roar 5 graduated tin cans (pl. 2) tambourine 2 cowbells 3 graduated drums (pl. 3) 5 graduated tin cans (pl. 3) 3 graduated drums (pl. 4) tin can rattle bass drum roar 5 graduated tin cans (pl. 4) E929 11mg N.W. Indian rattle cricket callers conch shell claves (pl. 1) claves (pl. 2) maracas (pl. 1) maracas (pl. 4) teponaxtle (log drum) ratchet claves (pl. 2) Indo-Chinese rattle Quijadas claves (pl. 3) Figure 4-17. Thihg Construction. Instruments grouped according to type. Thizg Constpuction consists of twenty-four sections of twenty-four measures each. Unlike First Constructio , this work has a phrase structure realized differently in each 132 voice, creating a complex web of rhythmic activity. Despite the frequent employment of grupetti, a meter of §.is easily heard throughout the work due to an abundance of periodic rhythmic activity (see Figure 4-18). (QM... 72 13 14 15 VA \r Figure 4-18. Combinations of periodic and aperiodic rhythmic activity found in Third Construct' , measures 72-79. Cage has said that an attempt was made in Third Qohspzuctioh to compose "rhythmic cadences."19 The rhythmic cadences are apparently constructed through a variety of cross-rhythms which appear at the ends of the twenty-four measure sections. Such cadences occur in all but five of the twenty-four sections. (Periodic rhythms are heard at the ends of sections eight, eleven, fourteen and 133 nineteen, and a sustained roll on bamboo cricket callers is found at the end of section fifteen.) In many cases, these cross-rhythms appear in more than one voice simultaneously, creating a rhythmic tension which is resolved at the beginning of the following section with the appearance of predominantly periodic rhythms (see Figure 4-19). CD) --=== > INDO-CHI T Figure 4-19. Rhythmic "cadences" found in Third Cohstruc- t'on, measures 24-25 and 96-97. Thipg Construction is among the most complex of Cage’s works for percussion ensemble. It employs a wide variety of timbres together with a complex rhythmic structure. Cage said of the work, "In Thipg Construction, each part (voice) has its division into parts, (but) no two parts have the same structure. I like that independence."20 134 Tpegihepy Lendscape flee T (1942). 5 players, 24 instru- ments. Duration: Approximately 7 minutes. Tmegihepy Lendscape H21 T was completed in Chicago in April, 1942, and was dedicated to Lou Harrison.21 The work is given the alternate title, March No. T. The alternate title may have been applied to distinguish the work from an earlier piece, also entitled Tmaginapy Lehgeeepe flee T, which Cage had withdrawn from publica- tion.22 As in all the works in the Tmaginapy Landscape series, Thegihepy hendscape flee T combines percussion instruments with electronic devices. The instrumentation from the score appears in Figure 4-20. DWWATIG tunnrmn:vnncum §E§§§E§§.dmaisen Humane:51mioms§§§§§§§§ mmnzsrtnm E Player #4: Ratchet. Bass Dun, farmer, Water "one, Metal Wastebaslmt Player #5: 0011 of Wire (attached to phonoimnhie pick up arm and then arrplified with lmdspeaker). miner. Line's Roar Figure 4-20. Instrumentation for Imaginapy Landscape Nee T. The wire coil is stroked with the fingernail or with a handkerchief to produce sustained rumbling sounds. Conven- tional notation is used to indicate duration (see Figure 4-21). 135 . ‘ ‘5 _ ----.~-----___.- _ " _ — Ratcl’nt natal S 5 ) Jingemail lwlth handkerchiefq ‘oon " V - 13...- "- ...... ' 91 ,2 of lire .05 I 2 p 35' 34 Figure 4-21. Imaginary Landeeepe flee T. Notation for wire coil attached to phonographic cartridge, measures 1-2 and 35-36. The tin cans are to be muted at times with a cloth. Players are also instructed to play with rubber beaters and with the "stick ends" (handles). The bass drum is to be played with bamboo timpani mallets (mallet heads and handles) at the center of the membrane and on the rim of the drum. The electric buzzers are notated in the same manner employed with the wire coil. In Imaginary Landscape No. T, Cage again employed the "square-root" formula of composition. The rhythmic structure of 3:4:2:3:5 is consistently applied to both microstructure and macrostructure through the twelfth section. Until that point, each seventeen-measure section is marked by the appearance of a double bar. Where one would expect to find the beginning of the final section of macrostructure (consisting of five seventeen-measure sections), there appears instead a forty-eight measure coda. The coda is grouped 6:4:3:4; 2:3:4:5: 3:4:2:3:5. One will note that the original phrase structure (3:4:2:3:5) appears in the final seventeen measures. When asked if the departure from the square-root structure was an indication 136 that the composer was moving away from the mathematical compositional method he had established, he replied, "I began to eliminate certain portions of the structure as a kind of cadence. I was not trying to get away from the structure, but trying to do something lively with it that would change its nature."23 Tmaginary Landscape hey T was premiered under the direction of Lou Harrison on May 7, 1942, in San Francisco. The program, as well as subsequent reviews, listed the work’s title as Fourth Construction. When questioned about the discrepancy, Cage replied, "I probably said I would do that (compose a fourth Construction), but then he didn’t play that. Instead of writing a fourth Construction, which Lou may have announced, I actually wrote another Lehg- scene-"24 Tmagihapy Landscape No. T (1942). 6 players, 19 instru- ments. Duration: Approximately 3 minutes. Tmaginapy Landscape heT T was completed in February, 1942, and was premiered at the Arts Club of Chicago on March 1 of the same year.25 The instrumentation is as follows: Player 1: Audio-frequency oscillator (capable of producing pitched slides), variable-speed turntable on which is played a constant freggency record (as in Imaginary Landscape No. T). 137 Player 2: Five graduated tin cans (at least six inches in diameter). Player 3: Five graduated tin cans (as above). Player 4: Electric buzzer, turntable on which is played a record of continuously variable frequency (as in Imaginapy Landscape No. T). Player 5: 2 muted Balinese button gongs (large temple blocks may be substituted), variable-speed turntable on which is played a recording of a generator whine). Player 6: Radio aerial coil attached to phonograph cartridge, marimbula (amplified with contact microphone). The amplified wire coil of player 6 is plucked with the fingernail as in Tmaginapy Landscape No. T. The marimbula is a very large "thumb piano" on which the player sits, plucking the keys with the fingers. Conventional notation is employed throughout the work. The audio frequency oscillator is notated on a single space at the top of a five-line staff with indications for pitch slides given by the placement of arrows (see Figure 4-22). b 91 fr 100 Figure 4-22. Imaginapy Landscape The T. Notation for audio frequency oscillators, measures 95-100. The slides produced by the variable speed turntables are notated in the same manner employed with the audio frequency oscillator. The rhythmic structure for Imaginary Landscape The T is 12 x 12, with each section grouped according to the rhythmic 138 proportion 3:2:4:3. The rhythmic structure applies to both the microstructure and the macrostructure as in Tips; Construction. Complex cross-rhythms superimposed over one another appear throughout the work. Grupetti are notated in brackets as in previous works. An example of these cross- rhythms appears in Figure 4-23. CDESTA .1 1' M‘JEHCY RECO$D I3 H IS Figure 4-23. Imaginary Landscape No. T. Example of super- imposed cross-rhythms, measures 13-18. In 1965, Cage made the following statement concerning WWEQLT: When the Second World War came along, I talked to myself, "What do I think of the Second World War?" Well, I think it’s lousy. So I wrote a piece, Imaginary Lehgseepe 321 T, which is perfectly hideous. What I meant by that is that the Second World War is perfectly hideous, and I meant incidentally that Time, Life and Coca-Cola were also hideogs, that anything that is big in this world is hideous. 139 Credo ih QT (1942). 4 players, 19 instruments. Duration: Approximately 12 minutes. According to John Cage, Credo ih TS is "a suite of satirical character composed within the phraseology of the dance by Merce Cunningham and Jean Erdman for which it was written."28 The instrumentation is as follows: Player 1: 2 muted gongs, 5 tin cans Player 2: 5 tin cans, electric buzzer, tomntom Player 3: Piano, hands on wood (the player strikes the wood of the piano or piano bench), tom-tom Player 4: Radio, phonograph The radio may be tuned to any station, but the player is instructed to "avoid news programs during national or inter- national emergencies."29 On the phonograph, the player is instructed to "use some classic: e.g. Dvorak, Beethoven, Sibelius or Shostakovich."30 Both instruments, which may be used interchangeably, are notated with sustained whole notes as shown in Figure 4-24. " RADIO I PLA‘KER 4 If § 41> ‘ A . ‘fi 3 ' \ ' V \——n——/ \. _../ \_ / Figure 4-24. Credo in QT. Notation for radio/phonograph, measures 1-4. 140 After the initial entrance of Player Four, which is notated for "radio or phonograph," each subsequent entrance is marked "radio." In an interview with the author, Cage indicated that each entrance could be for either instrument: There are a lot of people who give it kind of an ABA effect by using the radio in the middle and the record at the beginning and again at the end. I think it’s nice that people make up their own versions. Credo 1 S consists of three "facades," each of which is followed by a "progression," concluding with a "coda facade." Each "facade" contains predominantly tutti percussive effects from the tin cans, muted gongs and electric buzzer over angular melodies or tone clusters in the piano, all apparently used to interrupt the "music" from the radio or phonograph. Two of the three "progressions" include piano solos which represent music of American culture. The first "progression" features a "cowboy solo,"32 and the third "progression" contains a mixture of jazz, blues and "boogie woogie" styles. It is in the second "progression" that the radio typically makes its appearance amid repetitive clusters in the piano, adding an element of indeterminacy to the composition, since it is relatively unknown what will be on the air at the time of performance. The form of the work could thus be described as a loosely-conceived rondo, as shown in Figure 4-25. 141 Facade First Facade Second Facade Third Coda Progres- Progres- Progres- One sion Two sion Threee .Tsion Facade (158MS.) "Cowboy (47MS.) "radio" (20MS.) "jazz (51MS.) Solo" (122MS.) solo" (138MS.) (lO7MS.) Figure 4-25. Credo ih QT. Outline of form. Qzegg ih QT begins with solo radio or phonograph which is interrupted by a repetitive motive in the piano, marked "very percussively" and accompanied by tin cans and muted gongs (see Figure 4-26). This initial piano motive figures promi- nantly in each of the three "facades." CREDO IN US ‘ jOHN CAGE CLRTAIV STIN CANS .m- . I5 3 ttmn s Tm CANS f A ELECTRIC a 2256 r: f PLAYER 2 fury 90:qu PLAYER 3 ‘9;- > HAND ON WOOD f.‘ RADIO 3! 'NONOGFAPH PLAYER ‘ Figure 4-26. Credo ih QT. Opening motive, measures 1-4. An excerpt from the "cowboy solo," featured in the first "progression" appears in Figure 4-27. 142 "IS? PIQZRLSSIOS .’ 0132 > ... I" Figure 4-27. Credo ih _T. "First Progression," "Cowboy Solo," measures 1-20. The piano's initial motive, accompanied by tin cans and muted gongs, returns in "Facade Two," along with the radio or phonograph (see Figure 4-28). FACA DE TKO ZQ 69.65“ ‘ !~ ~ '—5—.—_ ~ 5 5 ' 5 ' "‘ ~ I ~ 1 ' f c : c .' c 1' j " f: i : ‘ : T : ' V. r '4- ' : TA 2 H c 5 A A A e A : #g i v Kw : 3 ‘ A : A A—A ; . f l ' 5‘ . i 1 b. I . I r 3T. m .._. 3 - biz). , , ”5.5.? t.‘:“':‘ ’E' ‘ 3; 1 v J 4' . _ I ' fir' '4' W T .5 ~ - - -— - f I 7;: I 9;. i l ! l K 4v_ I ,A I ‘ I W true ’ I 2- 3 4 s Fi ure 4—28. Credo i S. "Facade Two " measures 1-5. _____. _ __ I The "Second Progression" features the rhythmic repetition of a polychord in the piano consisting of a D-flat major triad in the right hand over a D minor triad in the left hand. Each repetition concludes with an entrance from the radio/phonograph (see Figure 4-29). 143 «0'7 I08 IO‘I no u; “1 / \\ cos tab “5 “4 “g Hb in \\ \ HR Ma :10 nu :11 Figure 4-29. Credo in fig. "Second Progression," measures 98-122. An excerpt from the "Third Progression" appears in Figure 4-30. This bi-modal "jazz solo" is built on a blues scale in the right hand over triads ascending the C major scale in the left hand. 144 THIRD FROG RESSION u mu mu n? I3 I I NV h u NV “7 ' ‘q | 20 2‘ 2?, 23 24 Figure 4-30. Credo ;_ _§. "Third Progression," measures 1-24. The piano solo takes on a "boogie woogie" style later in the "Third Progression" (see Figure 4-31). 35'; 3‘ 32. 3 S ‘ 34 r-o---S?-------- 2 2 I .‘ O O O. .5 ""' 5b 3" 38 3‘1 4° > > > ‘ ‘ l t 2 2’ 3 -a--- 7n 47. «3 4v 4: 3 Figure 4-31. Credo i_ gs. "Third Progression," measures 31-45. 145 The "Coda Facade" brings back the piano’s repetitive tone clusters from the "Second Progression" along with machine-like sextuplets in the tin cans. The piano's initial motive from "Facade One" appears in the muted gongs, now in a truncated quintuplet rhythm, still attempting to interrupt the activity of the radio/phonograph (see Figure 4-32). I any number of timu ——fl 5 1 ,7 5 k ‘ a 311 1’ 35‘ -" S'O S" (i! done Without a curmn: this last part ugh: umcn Figure 4-32. Credo ;_ fig. Excerpt from "Coda Facade," measures 29-51. 146 In a 1983 interview with Charles Amirkhanian, Cage explained his intentions with regard to Credo i S following a performance of the work: Charles Amirkhanian: Did you start this piece with the idea of involving radio or recordings? John Cage: Both. It was done for a dance which was choreo- graphed by Merce Cunningham, and he made it with Jean Erdman. It’s kind of satire on America. C.A.: So the "US" is the 0.8.? J.C.: And it’s also you and me. C.A.: And what about the "Credo"? J.C.: That we believe in all that. C.A.: So the irony is also romantic, classical music bursting out of the speakers, and that was America's idea of culture. J.C.: And the cowboy solo, and the jazz solo, and so forth. C.A.: So how are you doing it here [tonight]? 147 J.C.: The phonograph is playing Tchaikovsky, and the radio, of course, is playing whatever you put on the air.33 The Wonderful Widow g: Eighteen Springg (1942). Voice and closed piano. Duration: Approximately 2 minutes. The Wonderful Widow g; Eighteen Springs was commissioned by mezzo-soprano Janet Fairbank, who first performed the work as a program of contemporary American music presented in New York City. The program mistakenly listed the title as "The Miraculous Widow g; Eighteen Springs."34 The text is from James Joyce's Finnegan’s Wake. In the introduction to his book, Writing Through Finnegan's Wake, Cage explained his employment of Joyce’s text: In 1942 Janet Fairbanks [sic] asked me for a song. I browsed in the Wake looking for a lyrical passage. The one I chose begins on page 556. I changed the paragraph so that it became two and read as follows: "Night by silent sailing night, Isobel, wildwood’s eyes and primrose hair, quietly, all the woods so wild, in mauves of moss and daphnedews, how all so still she lay, neath of the whitethorn, child of tree, like some lost happy leaf, like blowing flower stilled, as fain would she anon, for soon again 'twill be, win me, woo me, wed me, ah weary me! Deeply, now even calm lay sleeping: "Night, Isobel, sister Isobel, Saintette Isobel, Madame Isa Veuve La Belle." The title I chose was one of Joyce's descriptggns of her, The Wonderful Widow g; Eighteen Sgrings. 148 The singer is accompanied by a "pianist" who plays on various parts of a completely closed piano with fingers and knuckles as explained in the performance note of the score (see Figure 4-33). FOR. TEE HARIST cos: A 6MP IMHO W123 (mssvxzfm). B6. 1 FIG. 2 F161 saws .A. moss-Simon as THE mo so cwsap. 'A' biplanes ma mm M or THE 21550 mm, p.59 15 Home» AS 53011:: m {-16.2 01' THE 1" SM 0; “m: Pincusszon STAFF; '5' Inmates TB! mar PAM o; m: KEYBOARD-Lip ,‘c‘ , ITS max MD 51655: am (no: ABE momma 325nm: on ma 2". Tim swag-,1? mmwas me was '13: time. J . 2w! mm means; i . PLAY wm. mums 0:: cwsap amp. Figure 4-33. The Wonderful Widow g; Eighteeg SQrings. Instructions for performing on closed piano. 6 Since the closed piano is essentially a percussion instrument, the piece can rightfully be included among Cage’s works for percussion. As in other percussion works employing multiple instruments or sounds, Cage assigned each sound a space on a five-line staff with a neutral clef. Notes to be played with knuckles are indicated by J . The sounds produced are deep and non-resonant. 149 The melody is built on three pitches; a chanting tone along with the perfect fourth above and the major second below. The singer is instructed to "sing without vibrato, as in folk singing."37 The part may be transposed to allow the singer to employ "a low and comfortable range."38 The entire work is thirty-three measures long, with a time signature of a and tempo indication of J =58. The rhythms employed on the closed piano are largely aperiodic, the quintuplet grupetti figuring prominently throughout the piece. Conversely, the vocal line is almost entirely periodic. An excerpt from the work appears in Figure 4-34. 150 THE WONDERFUL WIDOVV OF EIGHTEEN SPRINGS John Cage A 'DKE 4 Figure 4-34. The Wonderful Widow g; Eighteen Sgrings, measures 1-12. Eorever gag Sunsmell (1942). Voice and percussion duo. Duration: Approximately 5 minutes. Forever gag Sunsmell was written for the dance choreo- graphed by Jean Erdman. Although the published score bears the inscription "NYC 1944," a program found in Cage’s personal collection indicates that the work was performed on October 20 and 21, 1942 at the Studio Theatre in New York City.39 151 The work is scored for voice and percussion duo. The following information is provided in the performance note: The first percussion player uses two large Chinese tom-toms (timpani sticks at first, fingers later, distinguishing center and edge). The second player uses a large suspended Chinese cymbal (yarn gong beater), distinguishing edge, center (the raised part), and "between edge and center." The cymbal should be at least 24 inches in diameter. The singer is instructed to make any transpositions that will give the highest pitch a "forced intense quality," and to "avoid vibrato, especially in the low register."41 The text is from a poem by E.E. Cummings. The following information on the text appears in the performance note: 152 7‘.J 3552.2; EEK-3%.".h‘43 .‘z' “3.25 5361: 3.?! 5E BTc'L". 7.12.335 .‘HE 33.2.3313 .‘TJ'TE .VEKRS 3.”. T‘i 2.3.») kw“ WEE. 335.“: 3:13;". $25525 3831' I: 719655.". .‘fi‘JS‘T EEK-1'1: AS .‘f 3375.555 3:! 3.3.32: 367-5 3' 7’35)?” .4 2‘,- 135-: 9! a -: ;':.-..-.::;s 2:? 3. 25:3: Lat-7:55 ...s r' 23.-‘95,: 3:.:'~'.3-:- :1 '.:w:.-. us: :.a-. .5. EV": =33 11:: r.‘ 2: TR: gum-s: 2‘33: := ‘73.: 7:23?! 5611'?! ‘35.. .-. . -. :{a ‘31:: M: :‘m at meng-a 32.-(3.5;. Mt. axon g. at; 3 re a: ;--o“ 5’ a a xxx-5:5. font. 1155 m: t-mrs 2.3:: 36:. :32".- ‘J. rams :4_.-::=. sass. 31:25:22 :5 .‘55‘ 2'. a: 2mm mes mu. 7%: 3r THE man-15'... :7-11 32.-xii: 9,1: wags; x37 29.x? was be: ARE M Z‘.‘.‘L‘-l?3'.A‘T'.3.".. TH: 2513253. 332:. '5 A5 fuzzy-'5; ‘ wnssazzics mamas firms: as tar 3:52;“ at 295%?» 50:15 as °.‘:('.3.SS an: 353$: at 32:35? 39:“ $3513— M35 ‘3‘}. DRERSIJ'. 3r 3;": 3.135% so: F30? Lats "R: an; a! 714:5 hat-2 '~’T\';$E 5071K E'f'SS L‘J‘Y‘. 7351‘) .155 3 ‘73.: 5'53 —e.~.‘:'.::'..3$ 3 :53“ 535.2. 333.. 3.3.52.1 T“) 35.323. ‘73 mars: away-3n.- .AAE 52%;. 5: was mm mm 3.2.: sue‘x 9.2.1 40:: 3: :5 171A: r.) Troika: 273.4. Argus 'r:-'.:?:a::\°n-.':.s :3. 73:: are xxx. :u'.'.‘.’:4.xx 3333-37 mam 2423.199. rp‘JnTAIfi. hut-:5 '41-'32); 73’s) 1.23.1.3: 3F 3:432 no In: 57m: 53.51357 yes wars :3 322:: BY 523::an Susan“. "fsanafzxts A warm. at 2.2".) 33553 suit-1:125) 2'27: xxx av 53 was»; Figure 4-35. Forever and Sunsmell. Note on text. The work is organized into five sections, with the voice appearing alone at the beginning, middle and end. The first and second percussionists appear together with the voice in Section II, and the first percussionist appears with the voice in Section IV (see Figure 4—36). 153 Section I Section II Section III Section IV Section V 23MS. 37MS. 13MS. 27MS. 16MS. Vocal Solo Voice + Vocal Solo Voice + Vocal Solo Per. 1811 ‘ Per. I Figure 4-36. Forever and Sunsmell. Outline of form. Section I comprises twenty-three measures of vocal solo build on the interval of a perfect fifth (see Figure 4-37). m /— /———‘ A” .h§ p a a”““: .3 15._ R I Vac: J j ‘ 1‘ J ' m- an: m. .293 1m.m a! :r em \ Z 3 I I I JAB" ' ' ' ‘2 t I l 8 2 8" ' E ‘ i 13 A 1 1 L dr- saw; at ma- ‘11-: was or a .is me (It. was or «I S' 6 ‘1 ’ /-\\ 4 p— . 3 - - B I 8 I t S 3 I *3 ' nos?) an a 510.. sum 11: y m- 5:94 at q '0 U \ ‘ 1 - ’ . U’g ; ’/’3 2‘ an” a 3' z” 4,3; ,3,“ m Four 45 7n 9}» :' "FA an my! M1 33 H .5 lb , m A f \ ‘ v? &. z, 3 / 3 m /" V -—s r g t at a 4;} n n :1 {YES ..avt m an at 1; 9»! -—uw ..ms 3! a 31' .915 an 11 ‘9' l“! 1° /—\ fl /"'\ /—-\ /'_,\ 2 :- *9! 3 5 I Q , 2 2 a a u 31- as To x In Tb : RA- 3:“ {3v 2: 22 23 Jenna" ’ I“? H "CP‘HJ.’ .372": 3:. fiect’mc frost ’TE‘AS Evil-NH €21: Scllmc “can J. F. Pen-n ram-Ha:- \.‘...~vr a” .: 294‘ w c. t. :.-1r‘xf~.:e. 3'1 ?m wen-x nst. an ‘5". “.. i '19 3 oer—13:1” 3'3 Humour Hun ~'»'m'>v|cr',. .nc. fattening-14.; \ taxman: :e:-.-e:. u. '41.“! it‘er‘vea. Figure 4-37. Forever and Sunsmell, Section I, measures 1-23. 154 In Section II, the disjunct triplet rhythms of the first percussionist combine with the syncopated dotted figures of the second percussionist to create complex cross-rhythms (see Figure 4-38). Wm! we mm 9579» 1 Figure 4-38. Cross-rhythms found in Section II of Forever and Sunsmell, measures 34-37. The cross-rhythms become more complex as the first percussionist adds various grupetti while the second percussionist executes the notated rhythms on various areas of the cymbal's surface (see Figure 4-39). 155 ”’05:! an au- -:s:c'm, "a.” f . ' . . . O ' 3 j «if "was: Waco w‘sm u uni? , 4-1 42,, 4‘? Co $1 :l I? ”1“ Lieu! , 53!.) ‘ I E§%: i L+J% *'* “ Zr 5‘ K V ‘g ' i on Figure 4-39. Forever and Sunsmell, Section II, measures 43-51. Following a brief interlude featuring a textless vocalise, Section IV establishes a strict pulse through the employment of finger slides on the tom-toms (see Figure 4-40). Figure 4-40. 0 ve and Sunsmell, Section IV, measures 60-69. 156 The work ends as it began, with a vocal solo built on the interval of a perfect fifth (see Figure 4-41). / m /—$—\ 3 \ _ A 9. 2 L e. 9. 1. R Vo‘ce E I 9 M: A new 5 ‘OCS- m, m 52'.- 5:? MI Ml m} A 7‘ ‘ $\ A 3 1 1. a ’ a. a. t 2 .73.: ans 1w: 73K a an an: 5a. :04 :o. m, 101-w: A /————\ /-;\ m A} p /“—\3 2. 2. a .D. L t A - - L - r - 2 QET’ I ’ f .s' ' ’F‘F F xx:- :3... mc'uqz: 3: at»: 7° :31- m-o A' saw us [:39 "O H! e. r. .2 .2 2 Q ’ 2 2‘2 :5: i f ' E g ' - i”; was scrum-av- - ‘ ' HL us '5 H4 M' w Tin; Figure 4-41. Forever and Sunsmell, Section V, measures 101-115. She Is Asleep (Quartet: ;; Tom-Toms, 1943). 4 players, 12 instruments. Duration: Approximately 5 minutes. She Lg Asleep is an unfinished trilogy of works which begins with Quartet: l; Iom-Ioms. The Quartet is followed by a textless duet for voice and prepared piano. In an interview with the author, Cage explained the unfinished‘ trilogy: 157 I had the notion of writing a long work which would fill out a large rhythmic structure and which began with She lg Asleep, (the quartet for drums), and then the piece for prepared piano and voice. Then the third piece was a piano piece called A Room. It was, in general, about woman, hence, She 1e A§leep. The work was never finished, and it was to be followed by another work which would have to do with maleness. Instead of finishing that work, i put those ideas in h hook p; hpeie for two pianos. 2 Qpezhepi 1; Tom-Toms systematically employs the technique of "icti control" discussed in Chapter Three. A complete analysis of the work appears in an article by Stuart Saunders Smith entitled "The Early Percussion Music of John Cage."43 Through the percussion works of 1935-1943, Cage established a firm reputation as one of the leading pro- ponents of experimental music. By structuring his music on duration, rather than on tonality, he opened the door of possibility for noise to enter the field of musical expression. According to Cage, For someone interested in noise, like myself, if you start from the beginning of my work, after I studied with Schoenberg, I began hitting things in the environ- ment. I wanted to find a way of making music that was free of the theory of harmony, of tonality; and so I had to find a way of composing with noise. And I came to the conclusion that the important aspect, or as we would say in the twelve-tone language, the important parameter of sound, is not frequency but rather duration, because duration is open to noise, as well as to what has been called musical. 4 158 In the early percussion works, one can see a gradual synthesis of Cage’s ideas on rhythmic structure. From the fixed rhythmic patterns of the Quartet and Trip to the "square-root" formula of the Qohstructioh and Landscape series, and from freely-composed works for the dance such as Qredp 1h QS and Forever eh; Sunsmell to the highly organized works employing "icti controls" such as hmpree and She 15 heleep, the composer broadened the tonal spectrum available to music. He also gradually relinquished control over the compositional process by allowing the performers to choose the instruments to be played, as in Quarter, or by introducing a radio, and therefore indeterminate sounds, into a composition, as in Qregp in QS. Through the method of "icti—control" employed in the two percussion works of 1943, Cage yielded a great deal of compositional control to the method itself, a process which would continue to develop in later works composed through chance operations. In the early Lehdscapes, Cage explored the use of electronic devices. His interest in the electronic medium would continue in earnest during the 1950’s and beyond. The prepared piano, which Cage happened upon as he searched for a substitute for percussion sounds, would dominate the composer's musical output in the decade immediately following the percussion works of 1943. The early percussion works tested the waters of change and served as a springboard for the more controversial works to come. Endnotes - Chapter Four 1Interview, 6 June, 1988. 21bid. 3Campana, 27-28. 5Cage, Fer rhe Sirge, 73. 6Campana, 32-39. 7Dunn, 38. 8John Cage, Second Consrruction, (New York: Henmar Press, 1978). 9John Cage, Living Seem hheie, (New York: Henmar Press, 1976). 10Baker, 61. 111bid., 153. 121bid., 33. 13John Cage and Lou Harrison, Qouble hheie, (New York: Henmar Press and C.F. Peters Corporation, 1961). 14Ibid. 15Ronald Keezer, "A Study of Selected Percussion Ensemble Music of the Twentieth Century," gercussionist, 8,1 (October, 1970), 11-23. 16Dunn, 39. 17John Cage, Third Construcrion, (New York: Henmar Press, 1970). laIbid. 19ounn, 39. 20Interview, 6 June, 1988. 159 160 21John Cage, Imaginary Landscape No. ;, (New York: Henmar Press, 1960). 22Interview, 6 June, 1988. When questioned about the earlier Imaginary Landscape, Cage responded, "I wrote one piece which I wanted to get rid of, so the numbering in these pieces has become questionable." 231bid. 241bid. 25Dunn, 36. 26John Cage, Imaginary Landscape her S, (New York: Henmar Press, 1961). In the performance note, the composer indicates that the records "are not necessarily the ones used but give an indication of what may be used." 27Kostelanetz, Conversing wirh Qege, 59. 28Dunn, 35. 29John Cage, Qregg ih SS, (New York: Henmar Press, 1962). 3°Ibid. 31Interview, 6 June, 1988. 32Kostelanetz, Conversing gihh Qege, 62. 33Ibid., 62. 34Program of concert in Notebook, John Cage Qomposer, v01. I, J.C.A. 35John Cage, Writing Through Finnegan'e Wake, (Tulsa: University of Tulsa Monograph Series, 1978). 36John Cage, The Wonderful Widow gr Eighteen Springs, (New York: Henmar Press, 1961). 37Ib1d. 161 331bid. 39Program of concert in notebook, Sghh Qege Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 40John Cage, Forever ehg Sunsmell, (New York: Henmar Press, 1960). 4lIbid. 42Interview, 6 June, 1988. 43Smith, "Early Percussion Music," 16-27. 44Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cage, 51. Chapter Five Cage’s Percussion Music Since 1943 Cage employed rhythmic structures in his works for more than a decade after the early compositions for percussion. The percussion works led directly to the creation of the prepared piano, for which Cage composed most of his music in the 1940's and 1950's. Cage explains how the instrument came into being: In 1938 Syvilla Fort, a magnificent black dancer/ choreographer in Bonnie Byrd's company at the Cornish School in Seattle, was giving a dance program on Friday, and I was the only composer around. She asked me to make the music for her Bacchanaie. The space was small, and there was no room for percussion, only room enough for a grand piano. So I had to do something suitable for her on that piano. And that's what happened. She asked me on a Tuesday. I got to work quickly and finished it by Thursday. At that time, because I had recently been studying with Arnold Schoenberg, I wrote either twelve-tone music or percussion music. I first tried to find a twelve-tone row that sounded African, and I failed. So I then remembered how the piano sounded when Henry Cowell strummed the strings or plucked them, ran darning needles over them, and so forth. I went to the kitchen and got a pie plate and put it and a book on the strings and saw that I was going in the right direction. The only trouble with the pie plate was that it bounced. So then I got a nail, put it in, and the trouble was it slipped. So it dawned on me to put a wood screw between the strings, and that was just right. Then weather stripping and so on. Little nuts around the screws, all sorts of things. In 1949, shortly after the completion of Sonatas ehg Inherlggee for prepared piano, Cage earned awards from the Guggenheim Foundation and the National Institute of Arts and Letters, which cited him for "having thus extended the boundaries of musical art."2 162 163 Many of Cage’s works for prepared piano, including Aheree and Sonatas ehg Ihterludee, attempted to express the "permanent emotions" of Indian tradition: the heroic, the erotic, the wondrous, the mirthful, sorrow, fear, anger, and the odious, and their common tendency towards tranquility.3 Other works, such as Imaginary Landscape her S, were attempts by Cage to express his own personal ideas about, for instance, war and devastation. In Ameres, he attempted to express the beauty of love. One such piece, The Perilous Nighr, proved a turning point for Cage. The work was an expression of "the loneliness and terror that comes to one when love becomes unhappy."4 When a critic wrote that the last movement of the work sounded like a "woodpecker in a church," Cage realized that communication was not to be the purpose of his music. I had poured a great deal of emotion into the piece, and obviously I wasn't communicating this at all. Or else, I thought, if I yere communicating, then all artists must be speaking a different language, and thus speaking only for themselves. The whole musicgl situation struck me more and more as a Tower of Babel. Cage’s denunciation of music as language or communication was nurtured by his growing interest in non-Western thought, particularly Zen Buddhism. His association with Eastern philosophers such as Daisetz Suzuki and Ananda K. Coomaraswamy led him to believe that all art should "imitate nature in her manner of operation."6 Thus, Cage became increasingly concerned with eliminating 164 his personal taste from the compositional process, and began employing chance operations as a pre-compositional process in his works. Cage had begun moving toward chance operations by the spring of 1950. In Sixteen Dances and Concerto rer Prepared Piehg ehg Chamber Orchestra, Cage used charts similar to the Magic Square on which he plotted musical parameters. The Magic Square, or matrix, is a method of representing the forms deriving from transposition and transposed inversion of a pitch set employed in serial composition. Read from top to bottom, each row in the matrix is a prime form of the tone row beginning on the various members of the original inversion form, and the columns read left to right are inversions beginning on the various members of the original prime form. Retrograde forms are found by reading in opposite directions. For his own use, Cage replaced the pitches in the matrix with single sounds, intervals, and aggregates of sounds.7 "Somehow," he said, "I reached the conclusion that I could compose according to moves on these charts instead of according to my own taste. Until that time, my music had been based on the traditional idea that you had to say something. The charts gave me my first indication of the possibility of saying nothing."8 While Cage was working with the charts on Sixteen Qeneee and Qoheerrg fer Prepared Piehg ehg Qhamher Qreheerre, Christian Wolff gave him a copy of the 1 thhg (Chinese Book 165 of Changes) that his father had just published. According to Cage: I saw immediately that that chart was better than the Magic Square, so I began writing the Music 9; Chenges and latgr the Imaginary Landscape her 3 for twelve radios. Music er Changes (1951) was Cage's first work which was completely determined by chance operations. Calvin Tomkins explains the complexity of Cage’s procedures: In his Music er Changes he began by drawing up twenty-six large charts on which to plot the various aspects of the composition - sounds, durations, dynamics, tempi, and even the silences, which received equal value with sounds. Every single notation on each of these charts was determined by chance operations based on the I thng. To plot a single note, for instance, Cage would toss three coins six times; the results, carefully noted down on paper, would direct him to a particular number corresponding to a position on the chart; this would determine only the pitch of the note, though, and the whole procedure would have to be repeated over and over to find its duration, timbre, and other characteristics. Since the piece lasts forty-three minutes, the total numbes of coin tosses that went into it was astronomical. Cage's next step was to combine chance operations with indeterminacy in Imaginary Landscape her i (1951) for twelve radios. According to Cage: The reason I wrote (Imaginary Lendscape her A) was because Henry Cowell had said that I had not freed myself from my tastes in the Musig er Changes. It was my intention to do that, so I wrote the music for radios feeling sure that no one would be able to discern my taste in that. However, they criticized that too because it was so soft. 80 I lust kept on going in spite of hell and high water.1 166 In Imaginary Landscape her 5, each radio is "played" by two performers, one manipulating the station selector and the other operating the volume and tone controls. Cage tossed coins and consulted the I thhg to determine tuning frequencies, dynamics, durations and tempos. The sounds produced on the radios are, of course, totally indeterminate since it is impossible to predict what will be on the air at the time of performance. Imaginary Landegape No. i was first performed in May, 1952. Calvin Tomkins provides the following description of the premiere performance: The concert took place in Columbia University's McMillan Theater before a large audience (admission free). Interest in the Cage piece was running high as a result of a recent article by Virgil Thomson in which he drew a parallel between Cage's chance operations and the work of some contemporary abstract painters. Over Cage's objections, the Ima inar Lendscape was placed last on the program as the piece de resistance. The earlier part of the program turned out to be exceptionally long. In plain view on the stage throughout the evening were the twelve RCA "Golden Throat" radio sets, lent by the manufacturer. By midnight, when the time came for the Cage work, nobody had left the hall and a buzz of anticipation filled the air. Unfortunately, this was very nearly all that did fill the air. The twenty-four performers took their places at the twelve radios and for four bewildering minutes the audience listened to a great deal of silence broken only by a few wisps of sound, when a station selector happened to hit a station at the same moment that the volume dial was turned on loud enough to hear it. Cage had been prepared to draw a blank much of the time, but he had not counted on the piece being performed after midnight, when most stations went off the air. . . . The disappointment of the audience was intense, and when Cage went backstage afterward, he found both Virgil Thomson and Henry Cowell looking decidedly glum. "Virgil told me later I had better not perform a piece like that before a paying public," Cage has recalled, "and so we had difficulty after that." 2 167 In his book, Silence, Cage offers the following explanation: When I wrote the Imaginary Landscape for twelve radios, it was not for the purpose of shock or as a joke but rather to increase the unpredictability already inherent in the situation through the tossing of coins. Chance, to be precise, is a leap, proviges a leap out of reach of one’s own grasp of oneself. Cage continued to employ rhythmic structures in his chance- determined works. In Silence, he explains: My recent work (Imaginary Lendscepe Nog A for twelve radios and the hheie er Qhenges for piano) is structurally similar to my earlier work: based on a number of measures having a square root, so that the large lengths have the same relation within the whole that the small lengths have within a unit of it. Formerly, however, these lengths were time-lengths, whereas in the recent work the lengths exist only in space, the speed of travel through this space being unpredictable. In 1952, Cage composed what he considers to be the "first piece of music for magnetic tape made in this country."15 Imeginary Lehdscape her S was composed as a score for a dance by Jean Erdman by "fragmenting the sounds of forty-three jazz records and re-recording the fragments on tape, following a score written according to chance methods."16 Ihegihery Lendscape her S, the last in the Lendscape series, adheres to Cage's original conception of making music with electronic devices begun in 1939 with Imaginary Lehgeeepe her 1. The work reveals an additional connection 168 with the earlier percussion pieces in the employment of a 52 rhythmic structure. The early chance-determined works began to stretch Cage’s ideas toward non-discrimination with regard to his own musical tastes. In referring to the element of timbre in those works, Cage explained: This matter of timbre, which is largely a question of taste, was first radically changed for me in Ihegih_ry Landscape Mgr i. I had, I confess, never enjoyed the sound of radios. This piece opened my ears to them, and was essentially a giving up of personal taste about timbre. I now frequently compose with the radio turned on, and my friends are no longer embarrassed when, visiting them, I interrupt their receptions. Several other kinds of sound have been distasteful to me: the works of Beethoven, Italian bel canto, jazz, and the Vibraphone. I used Beethoven in the WiIIiems Mix, jazz in the Imaginary Landscape Mgr S, bel canto in the recent part for voice in the theerr fer Piehg ehg Orehesrra. It remains for me to come to terms with the Vibraphone. Later in 1952, Cage entered a totally sound-proof room, called an anechoic chamber, at Harvard University. According to Cage: In that silent room, I heard two sounds, one high and one low. Afterward I asked the engineer in charge why, if the room was so silent, I had heard two sounds. He said, "Describe them." I did. He said, ”The high one was your nervous system in igeration. The low one was your blood in circulation." Cage's experience in the anechoic chamber led him to a startling conclusion: There is no such thing as silence. According to Calvin Tomkins: 169 If true silence did not exist in nature, then the silences in a piece of music, Cage decided, could be defined simply as "sounds not intended," and Cage made up his mind 18 write a piece composed entirely of just such sounds. 5'33" (Four Minutes, Thirty-Three Seconds) was first performed by pianist David Tudor on August 29, 1952 in Woodstock, New York. The performance consisted of three movements (30", 2'23" and 1’40") which were indicated by Tudor's action of opening and closing the cover of the piano keyboard. The work contains no intentional sounds. According to Cage: I think perhaps my own best piece, at least the one I like the most, is the silent piece. It has three movements and in all of the movements there are no sounds. I wanted my work to be free of my own likes and dislikes, because I think music should be free of the feelings and ideas of the composer. I have felt and hoped to have led other people to feel that the sounds of their environment constitute a music which is more interesting than the musig which they would hear if they went into a concert hall. 0 With 5’33", Cage had taken yet another step in the direction of non-discrimination. One could view 4’33" as a rhythmic structure which Cage "filled" with silence. As an extension of Cage's desire to eliminate his own tastes from the compositional process, the work represents a move from chance operations to indeterminacy. Cage describes the difference between chance and indeterminacy as follows: Bringing about indeterminacy is bringing about a situation in which things would happen that are not 170 under my control. Chance operations can guide me to a specific result, like the Music er Qhanges. An example of indeterminacy is any one of the pieces in a series called Variations which resemble cameras that don't tell you what picture to take but enable you to take a picture. . . . The thing I think that is consistent in my work, where otherwise inconsistency appears-~like the difference between indeterminacy and the Music er Qhanges which is not indeterminate at all--the thing that is in common between them is non-intention. William Brooks has reached the following conclusion concerning Cage's work with chance and indeterminacy: The use of chance, then, was not a revolution in Cage’s music, but simply one more way of extending his determination to accept refused elements. It enabled him to open his music not merely to all sounds, but to all continuities. As his familiarity with chance operations increased, Cage little by little discovered procedures which widened the universe of possibilities still further: the content of the score could remain partly specified, so that each performance would be different; parts could be overlapped arbitrarily, so that new continuities would always be created; the performing forces could be unspecified, so that the materials could be freshly conceived for each situation. Eventually, by the mid-1960's, Cage had extended such techniques to their limit; he was producing works which were not scores, but directions for making scores. These pieces left all aspects of performance undetermined; literally anything that coincidence might create could happen. In this musical universe only one concept was refused: intention. Cage has continued to work with chance operations and indeterminacy in his music up to the present. All of his most recent works for percussion (to 1987) combine these two compositional processes. The remainder of this chapter discusses specific works fer percussion which Cage composed from 1956 to the present. 171 27’10.554" Per h Percussionist (1956) 27’10.554" Per 5 Percueeionier is part of a series of works with time-length titles which may be performed separately or together in any combination. The other works in the series include 26'1.I499" Per A Srring Piayer (1953 and 1955), 34’46.776" Per A Pianist (1954) and SI’S7,SS6§" Per A Pianist (1954). Each of these works employs graphic notation, with each page of score representing one minute. According to Calvin Tomkins: The longest piece set the performance time, and the others could enter in at will, with no sense of beginning, middle, or end. Cage’s idea was that the parts could go together like the parts of a Calder mobile, moving independently but related by their presence in the same time length. In the performance note included in the score, Cage provides the following information about g7'iQ.SS4" Per 5 Pereussionist: Percussion instruments are here divided into 4 groups: M = metal; W = wood; S = skin; and A = all others, e.g. electronic devices, mechanical arrangements, radios, whistles, etc. A correspondence between time and space is made so that each page = one minute; the numbers above the systems are the seconds of the minute. A performance with string player and/or pianists may be made providing the latter use an equal number of structural units of their parts. A virtuoso performance will include a wide variety of instruments, beaters, sliding tones, and an exhaustive rather than conventional use of the instruments employed. For example: a gong may be suspended or placed on a mat, struck with metal, felt, yarn, wood, rubber, etc., beaters at points on the edge or center or anywhere between. It may be lowered into and/or raised Out of a tub of water. A tremolo between 172 suspended gongs facing one another is another use. And directional changes following the attack are also effective. 0 '5 above a line and lines are louder than those below (the staff line is to be taken in all cases as "mf"). Thus‘;" will be a crescendo. Stems are attached when it is not otherwise clear which type of instrument is to be used. A hook for metal instruments (c orJ) = "laissez vibrer." This piece may be performed 3? a recording or with the aid of a recording. Unlike the graphic scores of Morton Feldman, in which the vertical dimension of the score represents relative pitch, Cage’s notation uses the vertical dimension to represent relative volume. Thus, points appearing above the horizontal lines are louder than those appearing below. The parameter of pitch is left to the discretion of the performer, according to the instruments chosen. An example of notation used in 27’10.554" appears below. 3 M H q '1; M 9 {13¢ ‘11,” :2: 15 f. ‘1. W P'J‘ \ W Jo—I‘;L' ‘1 '.: S g. if S 1' v i- :7 , II A [.4 1 A _.‘.L._.LLA:' l n t? 13 :1 .1... 25 24 25 26 23 M a w 2 - . S . i 01 o {lo r M )3 >4 )5 )6 38 40 4‘2 44 ‘w ' w r S i _‘—‘_"'_ Figure 5.1. Notation employed in 27'IQ.§§4 For A W. page 5- 173 In his article, "John Cage's z7’10.554" Per 5 Percussionist," Michael Ranta states, "One might speculate that the distribution of the dots was derived from a star chart, one of Cage's interests at the time the piece was written."2.5 Actually, Cage employed a method of chance operations that involved marking the imperfections in a sheet of paper, tossing coins to determine which would be silences and which would be sounds, placing over the marked paper a transparent sheet on which the horizontal staves had been drawn, and noting where the marks fell within the staves.26 Cage had first used this method in a series of compositions entitled Mheig rgr Piehg (1952-1956).27 Cage did not employ astronomical charts in his compositions until 1961, when he began work on his Ahiee Seiiprieeiie for orchestra.28 Cage has stated that any of the works in the series of which 21110.554" is a part may be performed in combination with a work entitled 45' Por A Speaker, which is published in Silence.29 Cartridge Music (1960) In the liner note to his 1962 recording made with David Tudor, John Cage gave the following description of gerrrigge Music: The title Cartridge Music derives from the use in its performance of cartridges, that is, phonograph pick-ups into which needles are inserted for playing recordings. Contact microphones are also used. These 174 latter are applied to chairs, tables, wastebaskets, etc.; various suitable objects (toothpicks, matches, slinkies, piano wires, feathers, etc.) are inserted in the cartridges. Both the microphones and cartridges are connected to amplifiers that go to loud-speakers, the majority of the sounds being small and requiring amplification in order to be heard. The dials of the amplifiers affecting volume and tone are controlled by the performers. Each performer makes his own part from materials supplied. These materials (made Stony Point, N.Y., July, 1960), all but one sheet of which are on transparent plastic, may be superimposed in any position. One then sees a complex of points, circles, biomorphic shapes, a circle representing clock time and a dotted curving line. Readings are taken which are useful in performance, enabling one to go about his business of making sounds, generally by percussive or fricative means, on the object in a cartridge, changing dial positions on the amplifiers, making "auxiliary sounds" by use of the objects to which the contact microphones are attached, removing an object from a cartridge and inserting another, and, finally, performing "loops:" these are repeated actions, periodic in rhythm. . . . The sounds which result are noises, some complex, others extremely simple, such as amplifier feed-back, loud-speaker hum, etc. (All sounds, even those ordinarily thought to be undesirable, are accepted in this music.) 0 An example of the superimposed notation used in Cartridge nusic appears in Figure 5-2. 175 Figure 5-2. Example of notation emplgyed in Qgrrriggg unsig. Superimposition using page 6. Cage has described garrriggg nggig as "a composition indeterminate of its performance."32 He explains: The objectives were uppermost in my mind when I supplied the material for Cartridge uggig. First, to bring about a situation in which any determination made by a performer would not necessarily be realizable. When, for instance, one of the performers changes a volume control, lowering it to nearly zero, the other performer's action, if it is affected by that particular amplification system, is inaudible. I had been concerned with composition which was indeterminate of its performance; but in this instance performance is made, so to say, indeterminaSe of itself. Second, to make electronic music live. Cage had been concerned about the accessibility of tape music to the concert audience, and found in garrriggg ugsig a means of producing electronic music in a live performance setting. According to Calvin Tomkins: 176 The trouble with electronic music produced in the laboratory, (Cage) had concluded, was that by the time it came to be performed it was stone dead: the audiences at electronic concerts, having nothing to watch on stage, often went to sleep. Cage’s solution was to have the electronic sounds made by live performers in a concert situation that involved many elements of theater - and anyone who has been to a Cage concert, and seen Cage and Tudor threading their way about a stage cluttered with cables, amplifiers, speakers, and electrically wired instruments, can testify at least that the spectacle does not induce drowsiness.3 In Cartridge Mggig, Cage moved further into the field of indeterminacy, although not completely into that of improvisation. He had long been concerned with "letting sounds be themselves," unassociated with any preconceived function such as tonality. He had also worked to rid his music of his own personal taste. In Cartridge Mugig, both goals were realized. In his article, "Aesthetic Value in Indeterminate Music," Terence O’Grady offers the following appraisal of the work: Cage's Cartridge Music, although clearly indeterminate, provides for the possibility of a sensitive, although improvised, structured continuity partly because of its lack of specific instructions but also because of its potential variety of textures and sound effects. The sort of structured continuity which results from Cartridge Music, although differing from performance to performance, might well approach that associated with electronic music compositions in which contrasts between blocks of sound rather than pitch content are emphasized. The work provides enough timbral variety to avoid monotony, while tacitly encoggaging the performers to establish their own continuity. 177 snug 9.: Tree (1975) rail; 9: Ire; for percussion solo using amplified plant materials, is a composed improvisation involving chance operations. The performer is instructed to find ten "instruments," one of which is a pod rattle from a poinciana tree. Several pod rattles may be counted as one "instrument," or according to their actual number (e.g., five pod rattles may count as one instrument or as five instruments). Another of the ten instruments is a cactus. The score specifies that the cactus be "of a genus having a solid body and spines which are relatively free of other spines, so that when one spine is plucked, a single pitched sound issues."36 The cactus requires amplification by means of a contact microphone or a phonograph cartridge. According to Cage: If I have a piece of cactus, either by means of an alligator clip attachment or by means of a cartridge with a needle in it, I can connect the cactus and the spines with the sound system, and then by plucking one of the spines or touching it with paper or cloth or something, I can get a very beautiful pitched sound, and the pitch relations between the spines of a single piece of cactus ogsen will be very interesting - microtonal. The score suggests that other plant materials requiring amplification may be used together with those not requiring amplification, such as "claves or clave-like instruments, teponaxtli, sticks to be broken or slapped against one 178 another, etc."38 Conventionally pitched instruments and those made of animal or metal materials are not to be used. Cage establishes a time-length of eight minutes for the performance and provides instructions for dividing the eight minutes into parts by means of the coin oracle of the 1 thrg. Prior to the performance, the player tosses three coins six times to determine a number between 1 and 64 (this process is explained in any available edition of the 1 thrg), and consults the following chart to determine the length (in minutes) of each part. 1-16 = 1 33-48 ll u 17-32 = 2 49-64 ll .5 Depending on the numbers derived by the L Qgigg, the performance may be divided into as few as two and as many as four parts. After the player has divided the performance into parts, he then tosses coins to determine how many and which of the ten instruments are to appear in each part, consulting other charts similar to the one provided above. A given instrument is to be used only in a particular part of the composition. According to Cage: Using a stop-watch, the soloist improvises, clarifying the time structure by means of the instruments. This improvisation is the pggformance. The rest of the work is done ahead of time. 179 Similar procedures are followed in Eranches (1976) for "percussion solo, duet, trio or orchestra (of any number of players)."40 According to Cage: If Branches is performed as a solo, it begins with a performance of Chiig gr Ire . Follow that with an I Ching determined period of silence of one to eight minutes. The silence is then followed by an eight- minute variation of Cniig 91 Tree, specifically a performance using an I Ching determined number of the ten instruments. The variation is followed by a period of silence one to eight minutes long (I Ching determined). The performance continues for any number of variatipns (always eight minutes long) and silences. The composer gives further instructions for performing Eranghes as an accompaniment, duet or larger ensemble. In Child 9f Tree and Branches, it seems that Cage relinquished his control over the compositional process even further than he had in Cartridge Music. Although in the past he had specifically avoided improvisation because it relies upon habit and personal taste, he discovered in these percussion works a way to free the art of improvisation from the personal tastes of the performers. He explains: In the case of the plant materials, you don't know them; you're discovering them. So the instrument is unfamiliar. If you become very familiar with a piece of cactus, it very shortly disintegrates, and you have to replace it with another one that you don't know. So the whole thing remains faiginating, and free of your memory as a matter of course. 'Cage calls this type of improvisation "music of contingency; improvisation using instruments in which there 180 is a discontinuity between cause and effect."43 In his Inlgrs (1977), conch shells are filled with water and tipped to create a gurgling sound which is amplified. According to Cage: In the case of Inigrg, you have no control whatsoever over the conch shell when it’s filled with water. You tip it and you get a gurgle, sometimes: not always. So the rhythm belongs to the instruments, and not to you. Following a performance of granches by the Canadian percussion ensemble Nexus, Cage made the following observations: I had thought of it, if it were to be played by a number of people, as it was the other evening, as being determined by each person independently of the other. But what the Nexus group did was to determine it for the whole group, and to play it in what you might call vertical harmony, rather than, as I had imagined it, contrapuntally, with each person independent of the other. I explained to them that their understanding of the piece was different from mine, but my directions are actually always ambiguous, and I do that in order to leave the door open for a musician to make an original use of the material. If you would ask me - because they probably would if we had a chance to talk - of what I thought of the performance and so forth, I would lead them away from continual activity to a sense of silence as activity. So that within, say, four minutes, it's not necessary to be continually making sound. You can fill that four minutes by simply putting one sound halfway through the third minute. Instead of being a lawmaker I would like to have my work take on the character of stimulus or suggestion. 5 Cage has continued to produce "music of contingency" in one of his most recent works entitled Composed Imprgvisatiog for Snare Qrum (1987). This work, part of a collection of solos for snare drum compiled by Stuart Smith entitled The 181 Mobie Spere (Vol. 2), is an eight-minute improvisation which is divided into three parts by means of chance operations in a manner similar to that employed in Chile 21 Tree. Chance operations are also used to determine the number of events in each part and the number of icti in each event. In order to free the player further from his personal taste, Cage supplies a chart from which sixty-four pairs of striking implements are determined by means of chance operations. In addition, instructions concerning playing surfaces are provided as follows: For each of the three parts, use chance operations to determine whether the snare is on or off. The drum can be given another "preparation," e.g. cloth, paper, rubber, plastic, etc., over the entire surface or over only a part of it. Or the side of the drum can be used as the surface to be struck, with or without prepara- tions. Which surface and which if any preparation is to be used durigg a single event is determined by chance operations. Although the snare drum is a familiar instrument to any percussionist, through chance operations Cage transforms the instrument into a vehicle for music of contingency. Variations in striking implements, use of "preparations" and chance-determined icti controls insure an improvisation free of the personal tastes of the performer. Cage had employed chance operations in a similar manner in his earlier work as a means for freeing his music from his own personal tastes. With music of contingency, Cage’s chance operations are extended to include the performer as well as the composer. 182 Cage’s employment of chance operations stems from his earlier work in percussion combined with his interest in non-Western philosophy. 'He explains: Variations in gongs, tom-toms, etc. and particularly, variation in the effects on pianos of the use of preparations, prepared me for the renunciation of intention and the use of chance operations. Study of the philosophy of Zen Buddhism with Daisetz Suzuki was substantial to these steps. Suzuki gave a lecture on the structure of the mind. He drew an oval on the blackboard. Halfway up the left-hand side he placed two parallel lines. "They are the ego which has the capacity of flowing with its experience — out through the sense perceptions to the world of relativity: in through the dreams through the collective unconscious of Jung to the Ground of Meister Eckhart - or closing itself off from that experience by means of its likes and dislikes, its memory. What Zen wants is that ego flow full circle." Needing a musical discipline as strict as sitting cross-legged, I chose chance opera- tions.4 Cage's later work in percussion reflects the evolution of the composer’s ideas on music and art in general. While his philosophy can be extremely complex, it has at its root the desire to free sounds from any structural hierarchy which denies their individuality. "Sounds don’t worry about whether they make sense or whether they're heading in the right direction," Cage has said. "They don’t need that direction or mis-direction to be themselves. They ere, and that's enough for them. And for me, too."48 Endnotes, Chapter Five 1Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cage, 58. 2Charles Hamm, "John Cage" in The New Grove Dictiohery pf Americah Music, edited by H. Wiley Hitchcock and Stanley Sadie (London: McMillan Press Ltd., 1986) Vol. 1, 335. 31bid, 336. 4Calvin Tomkins, The pride ehg rhe Bachelore; The Hereticai Courtship ih Moderh Arr (New York: The Viking Press, 1965), 97. 51bid. 61bid, 100. 7Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cage, 63. 8Tomkins, 105. 9Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cage, 64. loTomkins, 111. 11Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cage, 64. 12Tomkins, 113-114. 13Cage, "45' For A Speaker" in Silence, 162. 14Cage, "To Describe the Process of Composition Used in Mpeie pr Changes and Imaginary Landscape Mgr A" in Silence, 57. 15Kostelanetz, JQDB Cege, 130. 16Tomkins, 115. 17Cage, "Composition as Process" in Silence, 30-31. 18John Cage, A reer grep Monday (Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1967), 134. 183 184 19Tomkins, 118. 2°Kostelanetz, Cehyereing yirh Cege, 65. 21Campana, 97. 22William Brooks, "Choice and Change in Cage's Recent Music” in A gphh Cege Beeder, edited by Peter Gena and Jonathan Brent (New York: C.F. Peters, 1982), 96-97. 23Tomkins, 124. 24John Cage, 27'lg,§§5" Epr A Eerepeeiepier (New York: Henmar Press, 1960). 25Michael W. Ranta, "John Cage’s 27’10,§§§” Epr A Eerehe; elepier," Perchesiopier, 7, 1 (October, 1969), 8. 26Tomkins, 124. 27Ibid, 123. 28Ibid, 139. 29Cage, "45' For A Speaker" in Silehee, 147. 30John Cage, Cartridge Mheie, performed by John Cage and David Tudor (Time Beeprde s/8009, 1962), liner notes by John Cage, c1962. 31John Cage, Cartridge Mpeie (New York: Henmar Press, 1960). 3zDunn, 34. 33Cage, Certridge Mpeie, liner notes. 34Tomkins, 136. 35Terrence J. O’Grady, "Aesthetic Value in Indeterminate Music," Musieel Quarterly, 67, 3 (July, 1981), 380. 36John Cage, Child pf Tree (New York: Henmar Press, 1975), 1. 185 37Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 88. 38cage. smug 2: 1m. 3. 39Ibid, 7. 40John Cage, Branches (New York: Henmar Press, 1976). 41Ibid. 42Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 91. 43Stuart Smith, "Interview with John Cage," Percussive Meree, 21, 3 (March, 1983), 3. 44Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 91. 451bid, 89. 46John Cage, Composed Improvisation for Snare Drum (New York: Henmar Press, 1987). 47Smith, "Interview," 4. 48Cage, For The Birds, 150. Chapter Six Summary and Conclusion This document presents historical information on John Cage's professional career through 1943 with emphasis on the composer’s work in percussion. The specific analysis of two of Cage's most significant percussion works and the more generalized presentation of his thirteen other compositions for percussion from the same time period reveal certain compositional procedures or styles common to these early pieces. Some of Cage’s most recent work has been presented in order to facilitate comparisons of these works with the early compositions for percussion. This chapter attempts to draw conclusions based on such comparisons, as well as to summarize the significant events of John Cage’s early career, with particular regard to the influences which helped shape Cage's ideas on music. In addition, the chapter addresses Cage’s early work in percussion as it fits into the context of the art form in general. Suggestions for further research are made where deemed necessary. Significant Influences on John Cage's Career Through l943 Among Cage’s most direct early influences were his teachers. Richard Buhlig, by virtue of having been acquainted with Schoenberg's work, was the first to instruct Cage in composition. Buhlig’s most noteworthy 186 187 contribution to Cage's career was his suggestion that the young composer show his work to Henry Cowell. Cowell, in turn, suggested that Cage study composition with Schoenberg, and that he could best prepare himself by working with Adolph Weiss, Schoenberg's first American pupil. In the spring of 1933, Cage moved from California to New York and began studying harmony and composition with Weiss. He also attended some of Cowell's classes at the New School for Social Research. Although it was Cage's interest in serial technique that prompted Cowell to suggest he study with Weiss, it seems that Cowell himself had a greater influence on the young composer. Cage has acknowledged that Cowell introduced him to music of various cultures. He had taken Cowell’s course on music of the world’s peoples at the New School for Social Research and so was undoubtedly acquainted with various non-Western musics, even before he began writing percussion music. Cage has said that Cowell’s book, Mew Mpeigel 3W, gave him "permission to enter the field of music."1 "That was very important to me," Cage said, "to hear through him music from all the various cultures; and they sounded different. Sound became important to me — and m3ise is so rich in terms of sound."2 Cage has said that his employment of grupetti in the eaJi‘ly percussion works came from his studies with Henry CC“Well . He explains: 188 It was characteristic of Indian music, not of the South, but influenced by Mohammedan music. Mohammedan rhythms were to me more interesting than the South Indian rhythms. They were interesting because of these grupettos. Henry, himself, was very interested in grupettos, and devised notation for them which I didn't use. I copied out of his book on rhythm, which was not published, and this book had all She information that led to my use of these grupettos. Cage used Cowell’s "string piano" in several of the early percussion works and has acknowledged that Cowell’s instrument was a definite precursor to his own prepared piano. "I remembered how the piano sounded when Henry Cowell strummed the strings or plucked them, ran darning needles over them, and so forth," he said. "I went to the kitchen and got a pie plate and put it and a book on the strings and saw that I was going in the right direction."4 Cage and Cowell continued to collaborate throughout Cage's early career. Cowell wrote several works for Cage’s percussion ensemble and contributed the program notes for one of the group's concerts. Although examples of_Cowell's direct influence on Cage are numerous, perhaps the most important was his openness toward sound materials and compositional innovation, an attitude which Cage most certainly embraced. "At that time, though (1933)," Cage said, "the essential thing for me was that Cowell led me to Schoenberg."5 Whatever influence Schoenberg may have had on John Cage or his music has been rather abstractedly manifested. Some of Cage's earliest works are experiments in serialism, but 189 Cage used no such methods in his later work, for percussion or otherwise. What attracted Cage to Schoenberg’s twelve- tone method was the autonomy it granted to individual tones. According to Cage: What was so thrilling about the notion of twelve-tone music was that these twelve tones were all equally important, that one of them was not more important than another. It gave a principle that one could relate over into one’s life and accept . . . " Cage very obviously venerated the Austrian master. "I worshipped Schoenberg," he said. "I saw in him an extraordinary musical mind, one that was greater and more perceptive than the others."7 Yet, even Cage's deep admiration for his teacher could not deter him from following his own musical instincts. Schoenberg had emphasized the importance of harmony and tonality to the structure of music and Cage could not agree. "Though we had gotten along beautifully for two years, it became more and more clear to me, and to him, that he took harmony fundamentally seriously, and I didn't," Cage said. "The reason I couldn’t be interested in harmony was that harmony didn’t have anything to say about noise. Nothing."8 Schoenberg had impressed upon Cage that music required a tonal structure to differentiate parts of a whole. Cage determined that his own musical structure, in order to accommodate noises, must be based on duration, rather than on tonality. Nevertheless, he acknowledged Schoenberg's oblique influence on his early work: 190 In all of my pieces coming between 1935 and 1940, I had Schoenberg's lessons in mind: since he had taught me that a variation was in fact a repetition, I hardly saw the usefulness of variation, and I accumulated repetitions. All of my early works for percussion, and also my compositions for piano, contain systematically repeated groups of sounds or durations. Cage's friends and colleagues were perhaps as influential to the development of his ideas on the employment of percussion in music as were his teachers. Oscar Fischinger, the abstract filmmaker with whom Cage collaborated in 1936, made a lasting impression on the young composer: Fischinger told me that everything in the world has a spirit that can be released through its sound. I was not inclined toward spiritualism, but I began to tap everything I saw. I explored everything through its sound. This led to my first percussion orchestra. Cage began to explore not only traditional percussion instruments, but also "found" objects such as automobile brake drums, lengths of metal pipe, strips of sheet metal and a number of common household objects or materials acquired from junk yards. Lou Harrison, whom Cage had met through Henry Cowell, worked with Cage in these early experiments with percussive sounds. The two composers worked together with a community of modern dancers in Santa Monica in 1938, and continued to collaborate both in the composition and in the performance of percussion music, particularly in conjunction with dance, throughout their early careers. It was Harrison who introduced Cage to 191 Bonnie Bird, a modern dancer who, in 1938, hired Cage as a dance accompanist at the Cornish School in Seattle.11 Cage and Harrison shared ideas not only about percussion instruments, but also on compositional procedures such as the "square-root" formula and "icti-controls." They jointly composed Double Mpeie for percussion quartet in 1941. The environments in which Cage worked throughout his early career provided, for the most part, positive reinforcement for his work in percussion and experimental music in general. The community of bookbinders with which Cage worked in Santa Monica in 1938 certainly encouraged his experiments with percussion. Since many of them were modern dancers, they helped Cage discover new sounds which could be utilized as dance accompaniments. At the Cornish School, Cage’s work in percussion flourished, largely due to the widespread support he received from the dance community there. Cage formed his first percussion ensemble at the Cornish School in 1938. The players, many of whom were modern dancers, presented a number of performances and premiered several new works for percussion. It was at the Cornish School that Cage invented the prepared piano and composed his first work for the instrument, Bacchanale, for dancer Syvilla Fort. There also, Cage met Merce Cunningham, who played in the percussion group and with whom Cage would establish a life-long collaboration. 192 The dance community-at-large embraced Cage's work in percussion and in experimental music in general, while music critics invariably took it lightly. Cage continued to work with modern dancers at Mills College in the early 1940's, where he engaged in successful collaborations with Lou Harrison and choreographer Marian Van Tuyl. In Chicago, Cage’s fame and notoriety increased. His two major percussion performances in that city, both given during March, 1942, received widespread attention from the press. While in Chicago, Cage became more actively involved in experiments with electronically-produced sounds, composing the second and third of his Imeginary Lepdeeepee there in 1942. Cage’s move to New York City in December, 1942, was a major turning point in his career. His highly successful concert of percussion music presented at the Museum of Modern Art in February, 1943, established his reputation as a leading figure in experimental music. Curiously, his most successful percussion concert was his last, and his compositional activities for percussion came to a halt as he sought to concentrate on works for prepared piano. The events of Cage's early career exerted considerable influence on his work in percussion. Perhaps the single most important event of Cage’s career between 1935 and 1943 was his establishment of the percussion ensemble at the Cornish School in 1938. The three concerts presented at the Cornish School and the numerous appearances by the group at 193 colleges and universities provided recognition and growth not only for Cage's works, but for percussion music in general. Cage solicited composers to submit new percussion works for his ensemble. The results of his efforts were quite impressive. Within a period of approximately four years (December, 1938 to February, 1943), Cage’s ensembles (at the Cornish School and elsewhere) presented in public thirty-two different compositions for percussion. Considering the limited accessibility to music for percussion at that time, such prolificacy is indicative of the interest the group generated. The following is a list of works performed by John Cage and his percussion group from 1936 to 1943. Jose Ardevol Erelhdie a ll SuLts Johanna Beyer Three Mevements John Cage Amoree Construction ih Merel Becond Construction Third Construction Imaginary Landscape £21.; Imaginary Landscape Mpr_d Quartet Trio Figure 6-1. Repertory of John Cage Percussion Group. 194 Mildred Couper Birge Elma; Henry Cowell Ostinate Pianissimo Bfllég Returh Ray Green Three Inventeries of Casey Jones Lou Harrison Canticle Counterdanee in the Bprihg Fifth Simfony Song pr Quezecoatl 13th Symphony Harrison/Cage Double Music Amadeo Roldan Ritmice No, V Ritmica No,V1 William Russell Chicago Sketches E2929 March Buite Studies ih Cuban Bhythms Three Dance Movements Waltz and Boxtrot Gerald Strang Percussioh Music for Three Elayers Figure 6-1 (Cont.) In his dissertation, The Percussioh Bhsemble Music p; Lou Harrison, Don Baker lists fifty-three "known pieces for percussion ensemble and percussion solo from 1926 through 1943."12 Of the works listed in that document, twenty-six were performed in public 195 by Cage's percussion ensemble. Many of the works were premiered by the group. Cage composed ten of the fifty-three works, more than any other composer represented. Cage’s contribution to the early milieu of percussion in America, through his organization of percussion ensembles in Seattle, Chicago and New York and the performances presented by these groups, was indeed significant. The events of his early career, particularly the performances by his ensembles of new works for percussion, had a lasting impact on experimental music and helped establish a direction for the future of percussion. om osi o a Procedure Cage utilized four different compositional procedures in the fifteen works for percussion composed between 1935 and 1943. The earliest percussion pieces consist of fixed rhythmic patterns which are continually recycled, appearing in various locations within a given measure (or unit of time) throughout the work. The patterns, or motives, remain static and do not undergo any developmental manipulation other than their placement within a given unit of time. The "square-root" formula provided a structural framework, based on duration, within which motives or silences could occur. Each work employing this procedure is based on a given number of measures having a square root, so that the large structural divisions (the macrostructure) have the same relationship within the whole that the small 196 structural divisions (the microstructure) have within a unit of it. The majority of Cage’s percussion works employ this procedure in some form. In two works composed in 1943, Cage utilized a compositional procedure known as "icti-controls", in which he predetermined the number of attacks (or "icti") per player within a given phrase-length. This procedure was applied within a structure of phrase-lengths similar to that employed in the "square-root" formula. The three works involving either dance or voice (Credp Th MB, Borever and Sunsmell and The Wonderful Widow pr Bighreeh Springs, all composed in 1942) employ a more freely- structured compositional style based on the framework of the dance or vocal line. These works utilize the contraposition of periodic and aperiodic rhythms. The following chart illustrates the compositional procedures employed in the fifteen works for percussion: Fixed Rhythmic Patterns: Quartet, 1935 Trio, 1936 Amores (Movement III), 1936 "Square:Root" Eormula (partial application): Imaginary Landecape No. 1, 1939 Figure 6-2. Compositional procedures utilized in percussion works, 1935 — 1943. 197 Living Room Mueic, 1940 Bopble Musie, 1941 Imagipery Lendseape Me. 2, 1942 Amores (Movement I), 1943 EggperegRoot" Formula 1complete application): First Construction (In Metal), 1939 Seeond Constructioh, 1940 Third Construct'o , 1941 Imaginary Landscape No. 3, 1942 Amores (Movement IV), 1943 DanceéVocel Erameworh: Credo Th BB, 1942 Egrever and Bunsmell, 1942 The Wonderful Widow pr Eighteen Springs, 1942 "Icti-Conrrels": She Te Asleep, 1943 Amores (Movement II), 1943 (Figure 6-2 Cont.) The chart above reveals a chronological sequence of evolution in the compositional procedures applied to the early percussion works. Cage’s tendency in this evolution seems to be toward increasingly systematic pre-compositional procedures. Although Cage’s desire to eliminate his own 198 taste from the compositional process came as a result of his study of Zen philosophy, which did not take place until the mid-1940’s, it is apparent that in these early works he was already moving toward that goal. The pre-compositional procedures themselves governed Cage’s compositional activity, as is most clearly demonstrated in the works employing "icti- controls." Of course, Cage would not completely eliminate his personal taste until the 1950’s, when he began to work with chance operations. Cage has said that his goal in composition is to allow sounds to be themselves, unhampered by the stringent laws of harmony and tonality. Although his early percussion music is often highly structured and organized (as in those composi- tions using "icti—controls"), it is open to any sound which might be placed within such a structure. Hence, Cage was able to explore a myriad of percussive sounds in his music. Often, a work explores a particular type of sound such as that produced by metal instruments (Ei£§§ Constructiep and Bephle Mpeie, for example), or electronics (in Credp Th MB and the Imaginary Landscapes). In Living Room Musi , he allowed the performer to choose the instruments to be played from among items found in an ordinary living room. In Quarrer, he made no specification at all as to the sound sources (the title reads "For percussion: no instruments specified"), leaving the performers absolute freedom of choice. Figure 6-3 shows all the different types of instru- ments employed in the fifteen early percussion works. A chronological list of these works with instrumentation appears in Appendix B. Metal orchestra bells sleigh bells oxen bells cowbells water buffalo bells Chinese cymbal Turkish cymbal Japanese temple gongs muted gongs water gong suspended gong Balinese button gong tam-tam brake drums anvils sistrum tin cans tin can with tacks metal wastebasket marimbula Wood wood blocks (not Chinese) wooden table hands on wood teponaxtle door window frame bamboo sticks claves cricket callers (split bamboo) ratchet Indian rattle pod rattle Indo-Chinese rattle maracas quijadas Figure 6-3. Instrument types employed in Cage's fifteen early percussion works. 200 Blectropic Bhih turntable tom-toms buzzer bass drum amplifier snare drum coil of wire lion's roar audio frequency oscillators tambourine radio bass drum roar 21213.: wind glass conch shell magazines newspaper cardboard books floor wall piano string piano prepared piano closed piano Figure 6-3. (Cont.) As noted earlier in this chapter, Cage collaborated with Lou Harrison, Henry Cowell and others in his search for new percussive sounds. Many of his instruments are of 201 non-Western origin, reflecting the influence of both Harrison and Cowell, who also experimented with such instruments. In addition to sharing ideas on sound materials, the composers also influenced one another in their compositional procedures. Cowell's Qstiharo Eiehissipo (1934) uses fixed rhythmic patterns in a manner similar to that employed by Cage in his Quarter (1935) and Trip (1936). In Epiee (1939), Cowell employed a structure consisting of twenty-five segments of five measures each, a procedure similar to Cage’s "square-root" formula. The piece is dedicated to "John Cage and his percussion group."13 Cage has said that he derived his use of "icti-controls" from Lou Harrison, who employed the procedure in several works prior to 1943. Further research would be necessary in order to verify the presence of similar compositional procedures in the works of other composers. Outside Influences on Cage’s Early Percussion Works Cage’s work in percussion certainly has precedents in the music of earlier composers, such as Varese, and in artistic movements such as Dadaism and Futurism, but direct influences are difficult to discern. In an article he wrote in 1959 entitled "The History of Experimental Music in the United States," Cage addressed the notion of influences by quoting painter Willem de Kooning: "The past does not influence me; .14 \ I influence it.‘ Cage once asked a question of Varese concerning the latter composer’s views on the future of 202 music. "His answer," Cage said, "was that neither the past nor the future interested him; that his concern was with the ~ present."15 Cage is equally enigmatic concerning influences on his own music. Cage heard VarEse's Ionizatioh for the first time at the Hollywood Bowl around 1935.16 He has said that VarESe "Fathered forth noise into twentieth-century music."17 Both Cage and Var3se have defined music as "organized sound," yet Cage did not look upon Varése as a model for his own methods of organizing music. According to Cage: What I appreciate about Varese is obviously his freedom in choosing timbre. He, along with Henry Cowell, has very greatly contributed to getting us used to the idea of a limitless tonal universe. . . . Nevertheless, there is still in Varese a prejudice towards controlling sounds or noises. He tries to bend sounds to his will, to his imagination. And that is what very quickly bothered us. We knew that he wouldn't let sound be entirely free. What we were looking for gas in a way more humble: sounds, pure and simple.1 The Italian Futurists were among the earliest proponents of the emancipation of noise. A movement centered primarily in the visual arts, Futurism has been described as "a subversively dynamic art inspired by the machine age."19 Its most significant representative in music was Luigi Russolo, who, in 1913, wrote a manifesto entitled The Art _£ Noises. Russolo classified noises into six families and invented machines called "noise intoners" to produce them. One source hailed him as "the forgotten precursor to John Cage and Edgard VarEse."20 203 In a letter presumably addressed to music critic Peter Yates around 1941, Cage said, "Russolo('s work) was a definitive result of the machine. He desired to carry his work forward with the aid of electrical means. . . . My Imaginary Landscape written for percussion and records of constant and variable frequency lies in this class of music dependent on the machine for performance."21 Although Cage acknowledged Russolo’s contribution to electronic music, in the same letter he indicated that his knowledge of Russolo's work was retrospective: I did not have the background . . . for my work in this field. I did not know about any of\the above accomplishments except those of Varese in his Ionization. I had studied harmony with Weiss without liking it or feeling any natural inclination to use it. I had written a lot of dissonant linear music. I then studied counterpoint, form and analysis with Schoenberg. I saw the New Music publication of Percussion Music, heard Schoenberg call it nonsense, doubted whether it was nonsense. I saw some abstract films made by Oscar Fischinger, talked with him, and began writing my first Quartet for Percussion.2 Although Cage had implied that Russolo’s work did not venture beyond mechanically-produced sound, there is evidence that the Futurists were, like Cage, concerned with the entire field of sound. According to art critic Caroline Tisdall: Russolo's manifesto was refreshingly lyrical and constructive, partly because he was arguing for the acceptance of a new awareness of beauty in which the perception of the primary sounds ofzgature was balanced with the excitement of city noises. 204 Filippo Marinetti, a poet and dramatist considered to be the founder of Futurism, conducted sound experiments strikingly similar to Cage’s around 1933. Tisdall explains: His use of "found sound" - the sounds of nature (fire crackling, water lapping, blackbirds calling) - added a new dimension to the Art of Noises. Marinetti's exploration of silence, as a positive compositional element to be "heard" like sound, prefiggred the concerns of John Cage's generation of composers. Parallels have also been drawn between Cage's work and Dadaism, another early twentieth century artistic movement which, like Futurism, helped to usher in the avant-garde of which Cage is most certainly a part. Unlike Futurism, however, Dadaism had no direct musical expression. Its primary expressive vehicles were the literary and visual arts. Proponents of Dadaism used elements of shock and irrationality to break down the distinctions between art and everyday life. Although many in attendance at Cage’s early percussion concerts (especially music critics) were shocked or annoyed by the proceedings, any attempt to connect his early work to Dadaism would be an exaggeration. Later in his career, Cage frequently associated with Max Ernst and Marcel Duchamp, both of whom were associated with Dadaism. Cage’s work with chance operations and indeterminacy has been criticized for its irrationality and thus related by critics to Dadaism, but Cage himself has refuted such presumptions. "Critics frequently cry 'Dada’ after attending one of my concerts or hearing one of my lectures," Cage said. "Others 205 bemoan any interest in Zen, . . . but neither Dada nor Zen is a fixed tangible. They change: and in quite different ways in different places and times, they invigorate action. What was Dada in the 1920's is now, with the exception of the work of Marcel Duchamp, just art."25 Insofar as they broke down distinctions concerning the nature of artistic expression, movements such as Dadaism and Futurism could indeed be viewed as precursors to Cage's broadest experimental ideas. There is, however, little evidence of their direct influence on his work in percussion. It is a prevalent assumption that Cage’s early percussion music was greatly influenced by non-Western music. The sounds of his prepared piano have been compared to those of the Balinese gamelan, and indeed, they are strikingly similar. The lists of instruments found in Appendix A and Figure 6-3 show that Cage had accumulated, and employed in his music, instruments from many different world cultures. It has been suggested that his rhythmic structures are akin to the tala found in Indian music.26 It has already been established that Cage had been exposed to non-Western music through his association with Henry Cowell, yet Cage himself denies any direct influences on his work. "As I mentioned, I attended some of Henry Cowell’s classes in New York where I heard some music of that type," he said. "If there were any influences, I was not conscious of them; anyway, at that time I had not seriously studied the theories of Indian or Indonesian music."27 206 What Cage was interested in were sounds, themselves. Through his association with colleagues such as Cowell and Lou Harrison, who were quite familiar with music of non-Western cultures, Cage became acquainted with the sounds associated with such cultures, and he freely employed those sounds in his own music. In Eire; Construction (In Metal), for example, he used muted gongs, oxen bells and Japanese temple gongs, but he also employed such "found" instruments as automobile brake drums and thundersheets, in addition to ordinary orchestra bells and Cowell's "string piano"--"sounds themselves," Cage has said, "pure and simple." Perhaps the most important outside influence on Cage’s work in percussion came from the modern dance community. His earliest work was rejected by musicians who refused to perform it, but he found an outlet for his ideas within the dance community. According to Cage: . . . about that time I was called up by some modern dancers at UCLA, who actually wanted me to do some- thing . . . and so I did it, and in that way I soon learned that if you were writing music that orchestras just weren't interested in . . . that you couldzget things done very ea511y by modern dance groups. The extent to which Cage was involved with modern dance has been discussed in Chapter One. Much of his early percussion music was written as accompaniment to the modern dance, and some of his works intended for concert performances were adapted as dance accompaniments. Cage found that his rhythmic structure was ideally suited to the dance: 207 At the time I was interested in structure because I was fresh from working with Schoenberg. I thought that dealing with noises as I was I'd need another structure, so I found this time structure and immediately was able to give it to the dancers to work with. Time was a common denominator between dance and music, rather than being specific to music as harmony and tonality were. I freed the dancers from the necessity to interpret music on the level of feeling; they could make a dance in the same structure that a musician was using. They could do it independently of one another, bringing their results together as pure hypothetical meaning. And we were always gslighted to see that what we brought together worked. The dance community did more than provide Cage with an outlet for his musical expression. It embraced his work, while the musical community rejected it. Many of the players in Cage’s percussion ensembles were modern dancers. They helped him experiment with sound materials and provided the impetus for the creation of new media of sound production, such as the prepared piano and the water gong. The dance community provided Cage with an environment within which he could freely express his ideas and through which he received encouragement and positive interaction. Perhaps no other element so pervasively influenced Cage's direction in his early career. Relationships Between Cage’s Early Percussion Music and Mis Later Works Immediately following the early works for percussion, Cage concentrated on compositions for the prepared piano and 208 later experimented with chance operations, indeterminacy and both live and recorded electronic music. The early compositions for percussion, while seemingly far-removed from Cage’s later musical directions, contain the seeds of development for many of his most controversial processes of composition. The prepared piano was invented as an extension of Cage's work with percussion instruments. Not only did the instrument itself reproduce the sounds of a percussion ensemble, but the compositions for prepared piano contained the same types of rhythmic structures found in the works for percussion. Cage's work with chance operations seems a natural outgrowth of the pre-compositional procedures utilized in the early works for percussion. William Brooks has suggested that, for Cage, the use of chance was simply another way of extending his determination to accept refused elements, much in the same way that the rhythmic structures in his early works provided a means of acceptance for noise.30 Cage, himself, has said that variations in the sounds of percussion instruments and the effects of preparations on pianos prepared him for the renunciation of intention.31 Cage's work with indeterminacy can likewise be traced, in part, to his early work in percussion. The use of unspecified percussion instruments in Quartet, his first effort in that medium, is among the earliest examples of indeterminacy in Cage’s work. The employment of a radio in 209 Crede Tn B5 opened the composition to indeterminate sounds. Cage's rhythmic structures were as equally open to silence, and thereby indeterminate sounds, as they were to intended sounds. 5;;11, a totally indeterminate composition, could be viewed quite simply as an ”empty” rhythmic structure. Cage's later work in electronic music had its origins in the Tneginery Lendscapee for percussion and electronic devices. The frequency recordings used in these works were precursors to Cage's work with magnetic tape in the 1950’s and 1960's. The amplified coil of wire and the electric buzzer employed in the Lendscapee prefigured the amplified sounds used in Cartridge Mneie and Child pf Tr_e. It is not the intent of this document to oversimplify Cage’s later work by attempting to draw straight lines between the early percussion works and the new directions he eventually undertook. Cage’s lines of development have rarely been straight. He has, in fact, occasionally fallen under criticism for what has been perceived as his tendency to move too abruptly from one compositional method, style or activity to another.32 However angular his lines of development may have been, and however abrupt his tendency to move in new directions, there may be found in the early compositions for percussion the seeds of that development and potential for those new directions. Although Cage's later musical developments have taken him away from the percussion medium per se, he has recently stated that he still considers himself essentially a percussion composer.33 210 dohn Cage's Influence on the Percussive Arrs John Cage was a vital part of the initial growth of activity in percussion during the late 1930’s and early 1940’s. As this document has shown, Cage contributed to that growth through his own compositions as well as his efforts to solicit the creation of new works from other composers. The activity of Cage’s percussion ensembles reveals the performance of a large portion of the known repertory for the medium at that time. The performances by these groups of works by such composers as Amadeo Roldan, Lou Harrison, Henry Cowell, William Russell and Gerald Strang brought the new music to the attention of the public. Cage's mutually influential relationships with Lou Harrison and Henry Cowell yielded a vast spectrum of new percussive sounds and inventive compositional techniques with which to employ them. Through the efforts of these composers, ethnic instruments, "found" sounds and electronics became common timbral resources in percussion compositions. Along with the new sounds came new ways of composing which often bore little relationship to conventional tonal music. Cowell's use of ostinati, Cage's "square-root" formula, and Harrison’s "icti-controls" were compositional methods specifically designed for percussion. The fact that these composers borrowed ideas freely from one another in their compositions is evidence of the expansion of activity in percussion during the 1930's and 1940’s. John Cage certainly 211 played a vital role in that expansion, as both a composer and a facilitator of ideas for other composers. One should bear in mind that at no time during his early career was Cage considered in the mainstream of percussion. His works make little use of traditional percussion techniques such as rolls or rudiments. The players in his ensembles were, for the most part, untrained percussionists. When Carlos Chavez wrote his Toccere {pr Percussion for Cage’s ensemble in 1942, the group was unable to perform it due to the specific techniques it required. "(Rolling) was the big impediment," Cage said. "Rolling requires training."34 In spite of the fact that Cage was considered an outsider not only to the mainstream of music in general but even to the rather limited sphere of percussion, he influenced both through his work in expanding the resources of percussive sound. Cage's contribution to the percussive arts was not of a technical nature related to performance. Rather, it was one of expansion of the sounds available to the percussionist and to music in general. At the time that Cage organized his percussion ensembles, there had been very few, if any, precedents set in the area of percussion ensemble performance practice. Cage and his percussion players set their own precedents and created their own performance practices within a somewhat restricted technical proficiency. Not until the 1950’s, when percussion ensembles began to be established in colleges and 212 universities around the country, would compositions for that medium be performed by trained percussionists. Many of Cage’s early percussion works are frequently performed today by professional and collegiate ensembles. All of the fifteen works presented in this document are published by C.F. Peters corporation and are thus readily available to the public. In order to assess Cage's influence on the art form accurately, further research into the performance history of these works is warranted. Conclusion The initial idea that prompted John Cage to write music for percussion instruments was, quite simply, to make available to music any sound that could be heard, whether or not that sound was considered "musical." It was this idea that eventually led Cage beyond percussion and into the realm of new musical resources: the prepared piano, chance operations, indeterminacy, electronic music and "music of contingency." In the process of his own musical evolution, Cage influenced the worlds of percussion, music and art. Indeed, he revolutionized twentieth century aesthetics, opening new doors of artistic thought to those who followed him. For John Cage, the revolution began with the acceptance of noise as material for music, as articulated in his 1937 statement, "The Future of Music: Credo," which reads as follows: 213 I believe that the use of noise to make music will continue and increase until we reach a music produced through the aid of electrical instruments which will make available for musical purposes any and all sounds that can be heard. Photoelectric, film, and mechanical mediums for the synthetic production of music will be explored. Whereas, in the past, the point of disagreement has been between dissonance and consonance, it will be in the immediate future, between noise and so-called musical sounds. The present methods of writing music, principally those which employ harmony and its reference to particular steps in the field of sound, will be inadequate for the composer, who will be faced with the entire field of sound. New methods will be discovered, bearing a definite relation to Schoenberg's twelve-tone system and present methods of writing percussion music and any other methods which are free form the concept of fundamental tone. The principle of form will be our only constant connection with the past. Although the great form of the future will not be as it was in the past, at one time the fugue and at another the sonata, it will be related to these as they are to each other: through the pringgple of organization or man's common ability to think. Cage's early prophecy (an expanded version appears in Appendix D) set the course which he followed throughout his career to the present day. In a recent interview, he acknowledged his continuing connection with percussion: I still believe what I wrote in 1939. "Percussion music is revolution." New music: new society. I don't think, as some seem to be thinking, that the percussion should become like the other sections of the orchestra, more expressive in their terms (overtone structure, frequency). I believe that the rest of the orchestra should become as noisy, poverty-stricken, and unemployed as the percussion section (or at least grant its accepta- bility in musical society). I do not mean anything hierarchical. I just mean accepting the fact that noises are sounds and Sgat music is made with sounds, not just musical sounds. It was through his efforts to create music which would be open to noises that Cage became interested in percussion, 214 organized his percussion ensemble, composed music for the group and encouraged other composers to do the same. The result was much more than the fifteen compositions presented in this document. The early percussion music was merely a starting point in the ongoing evolution of one of the most imaginative minds of the twentieth century. Endnotes, Chapter Six 1Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 39. 2Ibid. 3Interview, 6 June, 1988. 4Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 58. 5Cage, 29; the Birds. 71. 6Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 38. 71bid, 5. 3151a, 6. 9Cage, £2; the Birds, 75. 10Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 41. 11Baker, Percussion Ensemble Mneie pr Len Harrison, 11. lzIbid, 203. 13Ibid, 57. 14Cage, Silence, 67. 15Ibid. 16Cage, :2; the Birds. 73. 17Cage, Silence, 69. 18Cage, Ber rhe Birde, 74. 19John C.G. Waterhouse, "Futurism" in The New Grove Dictionary 9; Music, edited by Stanley Sadie (London: McMillan Press Ltd., 1980), vol. 7, 41. 20Carolina Tisdall and Angelo Bozzolla, Futurism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978), 55. 21Untitled document in Notebook, John Cage Profeeepr Maestro Percussionist Composer, vol. I, J.C.A. 215 216 ZZIbid. 23Tisdall and Bozzolla, 114. 24Ibid, 108. 25Cage, Bilence, Foreword/xi. 26Kostelanetz, Conversing yirh Cege, 191. 27Cage, £21 the Birds, 75. 28Kostelanetz, Conversing with Cege, 191. 291bid. 30Brooks, 96. 31$mith, "Interview," 6 June, 1988. 32Cage, Fer the Birds. 86. 33Interview, 6 June, 1988. 34Ibid. 35Cage, S’lence, 3-6. 36Smith, "Interview," 4. APPENDICES Appendix A List of Percussion Instruments Owned By John Cage Dated July Source: John Cage Archive, Library. 3 - 175's! can: . ' . 1.. - JUL: 2.1940— f i , . 1.151- o£~ PERCUSSIOH msmmaz'rs .. —l snare dnns‘ ,, -2 bass drums' -- -5 Chinese tom toms black) Chinese tom toms Japanese Nah drum: wood blocks drasons' mouths tortoise shell ’3', , . ..- 'I " small painted)‘ pr. bones —. - :vti pr. houses/i - ‘3 .rwc~xd& G/L ' -2_pr. tymp. sticks 2, 1940 Northwestern University, Music -2 pr. snare sticks , -5 misc. snare sticks - ‘.- .> -1 bass drum beater .“ta ' - " .. good) r - bamboo)- -2 pr. hard felt beaters ‘ .'.' , -3 wire brushes . . '1 pr. cymbal beaters ‘ ' ' «‘5 pr. metal beaters " -1 pr. tymp. sticks ' 45 odd tymp. sticks . ..3 Sons beaters .. . .5 Edi; (iC‘Cd/ *1 quiJadasa -3 Chinese cloth beaters I ' . P'l suiro~/ -—1 odd hard felt beater (bamboo) ' ' ) -l marimbula] -1 reg. triangle beater ,_ f f. -4 pr. claves~ -3 metal sticks ; .\-.- -1 leather beater ; 'a .-"3-4 pr. maracas ..‘- -1 pr. hard rubber beaters (black 1 -l Indo-Chinese rattle -l " ' " Esra -sreen ? --1 Indian rattle‘ ); M1 ‘< “(3,.- " ' .: . ' red 3~ -1 sistrum -2 odd - . - _ _ -‘ -.I -1 tambourine —-l tam tam beater ' : '- ‘-. - ‘7 misc. wooden beaters : - 'Bpr. finger cymbals IAIN-1 3 —2 leather beaters (temple gangs).. ! i -1 pr. crash cymbals ' -\3 small beaters (cup songs 2 ----r- 3‘ .1 Zildjian cymbal (TurLish) (3 -9 chopsticks (not marked 1 L? Chinese cymbals . -1 saw blade / '24 1 pr. Jazz cymbals 31»- . u --1 hand saw _' . . . \ .. 7 -6 metal cylinders ._-_--_\_ g ‘5 songs -2 forks ' , (item r-l slap stick ~ ;- t -—1 Chinese painted sons kw: ~-Gl.)basa dram foot pedal 3 " ‘-.-‘ . lmetronome ( -3 Temple songs with stands -1 snare stand (2 pieces) '5 Japanese cup songs with stands ~l Jazz bynbal holder .\ -. ~4:rice bowls :' '3 standards . . ; ~ '1 wind bell -.-l keyboard-length board (felt) . 3 ' -6 curtains . u _ {'1 .tms Of oxen ben, (13 bells) ooooeeoeoeeeeooooeoeoesoe _ set orchestral bells . -4 triangles - ‘7 gcowbells Sargent) ‘ . .: ii — I '13 brake arms .. :I cowbells old) , -" -8 strap irons - -1 dinner bell . "'1 metal pipe A , 3.. _ ,' -5 Mexican clay bells 3 -\3 metal discs ; g.--T._: (- " . .-1 trolling bell ‘ -lO thunder sheets - ‘W-.P ' ,--1 small turkey bell ‘- 4 wash tub .._.~ ' ‘i~.‘-1 small Chinese bell Sbronze) —l lion's roar +7.2. ., c5 sleigh bells (loose ‘ .., . ) _ . i -4 slide whistles -"/ X K" 96"}; . —~3 pang whistles .1 - ' 4 pee epipes ..,_ ~ ‘ " 1a ' E (l conch shell H-i ' U'v‘fl C ‘YE’U V“ *- c .—I j Q¢&.u+ku : a _ ... r... .b . «Li-lb WV); . “4’5.- . . 3" ."; P.‘ ‘ J' r; (it: .\ {a 7' \ ‘13!“ & ..A _ JIL‘A. .4 r Appendix B Chronological List of Percussion Works by John Cage (1935-1943) with Instrumentation Quartet (1935) Unspecified instruments. Trip (1936) Player : 3 graduated pieces of wood, 3 small tom-toms (wire brush), bamboo sticks. Player 2: tom- tom (wire brush), bass drum, 2 graduated pieces of wood. Player 3: 3 graduated pieces of wood, tom-tom, bamboo sticks. Imaginary Landecape No. 1 (1939) Player : turntable (Victor Frequency Record 845228 at 78 and 33 1/3 RPM, Victor Constant Note Record No. 24 (84519B) at 78 and 33 1/3 RPM). Player 2: turntable (Victor Frequency Record 84522A at 78 and 33 1/3 RPM). Player 3: large Chinese cymbal. Player 4: string piano. First Construction (In Metal) (1939) Player : orchestra bells, thundersheet. Player 2: string piano. Player 3: thundersheet, sleigh bells, 12 graduated oxen bells. Player 4: thundersheet, 4 graduated muted brake 218 219 drums, 8 graduated cowbells, 3 graduated Japanese temple gongs. Player 5: thundersheet, 4 graduated suspended Turkish cymbals, 4 graduated muted anvils, 4 graduated suspended Chinese cymbals. Elayer 6: thundersheet, 4 graduated muted gongs, water gong, tam-tam, suspended gong. Second Cpnetruction (1940) Player 1: 5 graduated sleigh bells, wind glass, Indian rattle, 2 small maracas. Player 2: snare drum (wire brush, snare stick), 5 graduated tom-toms, 3 graduated Japanese temple gongs, 2 small maracas, 2 large maracas. Elayer 3: tam-tam, 5 graduated muted gongs, water gong, thundersheet. Player 4: string piano. Living Room Music (1940) Elayer l: magazines, newspaper or cardboard. Player 2: table or other wooden furniture. Eleyer 3: largish books. Player 4: floor, wall, door or wooden frame of window, melody instrument. Double Music (1941) (Composed jointly with Lou Harrison) Player 1: 6 graduated water buffalo bells, 6 graduated muted brake drums. Player 2: 2 sistra, 6 graduated sleigh bells, 6 brake drums, thundersheet. Player 3: 3 graduated Japanese temple gongs, tam-tam, 6 graduated cowbells. Player 4: 6 muted Chinese gongs, tam-tam 220 (slightly lower in pitch than 3rd. player's), water gong. Third mm (1941) Elam: N.W. Indian rattle (wooden), 5 graduated tin cans, 3 graduated tom-toms, claves, large suspended Chinese cymbal, maracas, teponaxtle. Eleyer z: 3 graduated tom-toms, 5 graduated tin cans, claves, 2 cowbells, Indo-Chinese rattle (wooden, with many separate chambers), lion’s roar. Elayer 3: 3 graduated tom-toms, tambourine, 5 graduated tin cans, quijada, claves, cricket callers (split bamboo), conch shell. Elayer 4: tin can with tacks (rattle), 5 graduated tin cans, claves, maracas, 3 graduated tom-toms, wooden ratchet, bass drum roar. lmaginary Lendscape No, 2 (1942) Player l: 5 graduated tin cans, conch shell. Player 2: 5 graduated tin cans. Blayer 3: 5 graduated tin cans. Player 4: ratchet, bass drum, buzzer, water gong, metal wastebasket. Blayer B: coil of wire (attached to phonographic pick-up arm and then amplified with loudspeaker), buzzer, lion’s roar. Imaginary Landscape No. 3 (1942) Player : audio frequency oscillator, variable speed turntable (constant frequency record). Player 2: 5 graduated tin cans. Player 3: 5 graduated tin cans. Player 4: buzzer, turntable 221 (continuously variable frequency record). Pleyer B: 2 Balinese button gongs, variable speed turntable (recording of generator whine). Player 6: radio aerial coil attached to phonograph pick-up arm, marimbula. Credo in MB (1942) Player : 2 muted gongs, 5 tin cans, Player 2: 5 tin cans, electric buzzer, tom-tom. Elayer 3: piano, hands on wood, tom-tom. Player 5: radio (avoid news programs during national or inter- national emergencies), phonograph (use some classic: e.g. Dvorak, Beethoven, Sibelius or Shostakovich). The Wonderful Widow pr Eighteen Sprinqe (1942) Voice and closed piano. Forever and Sunemell (1942) Voice and percussion duo. Player l: 2 large tom-toms. Player 2: large suspended Chinese cymbal. Amores (1943) Prepared piano and percussion trio. Player 1: 3 graduated tom-toms, 3 graduated pieces of wood. Blayer 2: 3 graduated tom-toms, pod rattle, 2 graduated pieces of wood. Player 3: 3 graduated tom-toms, 2 graduated pieces of wood. 222 .3811 Is Asleep (Quartets. 12M) 4 playem: 3 tom-toms each graduated in pitch played with fingers on edge and center. 1912 1928 1930 Fall, Appendix C Biographical Chronology of John Cage's Career 1931 Spring, 1933 Fall, 1934 Through 1943 Born September 5, Los Angeles, California. Graduated from Los Angeles High School, class valedictorian. Entered Pomona College, Claremont, California, remained for 2 years. Left for Europe. Studied architecture, wrote poetry, painted, first composed music. Returned to California. Settled in Santa Monica, worked as gardener in auto court, gave lectures on modern painting and music to local housewives. Studied composition with Richard Buhlig. Went to New York at suggestion of Henry Cowell to study harmony and composition with Adolf Weiss. Also studied modern harmony, contemporary music, and music of the world’s peoples under Henry Cowell at the New School for Social Research. Returned to California. Began studying counterpoint, form and analysis with 223 1936 Summer, 1937 Fall, 1937 Spring, 1938 Fall, 1938 9 Dec. 1938 19 May 1939 27 July 1939 5 Aug. 1939 224 Schoenberg at University of Southern California and UCLA. Became acquainted with abstract film-maker Oscar Fischinger. Began concentrating on music for percussion instruments. Accompanist at the Demonstration School of the University of California at Los Angeles. Instructor in percussion at Virginia Hall Johnson School of Dance in Beverly Hills. Accompanist in Santa Monica public schools. Taught extension course at UCLA entitled, "Musical Accompaniments for Rhythmic Expression." Studied bookbinding with Hazel Dries. Formed quartet of bookbinders for playing percussion music. Moved to Seattle. Joined faculty of the Cornish School. Organized percussion orchestra. Composed first work for prepared piano, Bacchanale. Presented first percussion concert at Cornish School. Presented second percussion concert at Cornish School. Presented percussion concert at Bennington School of Dance, Mills College. Presented percussion concert at Lial Studio, Monterey, California. 9 Dec. 1939 Jan.-Feb., 1940 1940 Summer, 18 July 1940 Fall, 1940 14 May 1941 26 July 1941 Summer, 1941 Fall, 1941 1 March 1942 18 March 1942 Dec. 1942 225 Presented third percussion concert at Cornish School. Presented percussion concerts in Idaho, Montana, Washington and Oregon. Taught percussion and dance accompaniment at Mills College. Presented percussion concert with Lou Harrison and William Russell at Mills College. Remained at Mills College in order to establish a research laboratory of percussion and electrical instruments. Presented percussion concert with Lou Harrison at California Club Auditorium, San Francisco. Presented concert for percussion and dance with Marion Van Tuyl and Lou Harrison at Mills College. Worked as recreational leader for WPA. Moved to Chicago to join faculty of the School of Design. Taught classes in improvisation and "sound experiments." Presented percussion concert at Arts Club of Chicago. Presented percussion concert with University of Chicago Symphony Orchestra at Mandel Hall, University of Chicago. Moved to New York. 226 7 Feb. 1943 Presented percussion concert at Museum of Modern Art, New York City. Appendix D "The Future of Music: Credo" 1940 revision in Cage’s handwriting Source: John Cage Archive, Northwestern University Music Library. J. 2? (KI/(WW 710.7, m (414, J‘L W0 {36, L0 Imam. Music. (ml/L 0,th 0.443“ WCMaesel WHL . _ I , . We Nod/W OJ 54441.9 '0 (4)/1.0514414 lb’wevaLi/L/ Tate... MI , LLLL‘VI £4113, WSWfS LLJALML/ M5 . , vtému... '8'!le - v {2 Ima/KL avow'edfl (o tow fwms Oww mo 8 . \W/Z ,xJ’Lx’la/Sj {/vv : - _ 0 ‘WL £7an 1va (bow/f 57. 3 [swg/wvx/«J “was i l , . (b We [)‘f/fim’d 5‘65me 0/1? CJ‘rLSU‘VLQ/MLL.’ \+' vaLQ/ VW/ 7%Lfl Mauwmfla\' attzcjgpr ube, W/ mm. M? fro-cw? W-LSL.M ngmlihs ‘fliaf- CADM/ LHL aAQLhU bet” Saw/0“ j’éwfle: 7m! WT} 075 (7 {min/{:4 Wis {3, , JPN/wblbaflu mm [Mew/(v 26mm»; {/fo 0mb {TS /W‘WMJ/ B 9 {OM/TIC! (L‘- d”? ‘3 031/781): M (M, W. 050 Me, (if. {r , "ZVHL W‘DJV 48". 3 . - WGC’WJDU‘} *UV {NJ/VD W MK {919 —.- \OLCJ‘ 3’, ; flip/LC, ,Q/M {fl .2, . (I. K I . . I 4 My: fr] 3 Cad/.4. C. . {\Il” v,’ _ 'J FM. ({‘f m 8 Lit-L} 'JL'E/ J 7 2 2 7 \‘T’ 228 5:960 Y-U‘Lwfi) (flu/Mom? 0v EOEW Mafia/o 1?) ch em {V‘ML‘ 5 ’21 +0712. 5 Li 5% 0M? WIDAL SWEL- MSW 0’65 {720 UNTVA/{j (£7in 5 Si OM MM. 5 I. 0 041.? TM. @WLi’D-j— 0% wfumFWUa/Q TM. 33., WW” 00 {WW M Le W 01% Cam/"v 1.0M CW‘UM WW. “fie. MST- 1 . A #mul’xv 7‘34; 0/4415?" W cpl/L 93% (01M. M1" be, M .L 1' Mb dim 'wa 350.5") 53' m ”Law/Le, 5» Damn, (LAT CUT" Ma’TM 7%. emoi—Qx) H, WM 1x, MJJ‘ to W92, 0.5 1.4% GMT; Zea/w Wm: Thaw/fix 'W, bwml’os’b a; . W51 0W6 01 i ”V W \V‘I’L CWLI S C C'W/mm Oyéhltg 1:7 VMK - 229 SW4, Cmeoivms 7:23 am WT' music, (30 0., amW/w'fioma/e NEW/u. auj. Cl 7%, than! who“, 0’] MIDI/wt] + [71.77% flaw—ta. W 63' 5); $0chti/r leS Jaw-v SOC/ML 016W 15 CLFJWW: 7 {W 5014,75 W & 0W6 M m ML (my, Wm, 7%. (m ’IrxL ( 77W 9pm W @wawuv‘ jaw: +0501 W W Hm {Hm/04);, may new W'HM. [MA/J mule 0 [MW/w MAX/C Exam L940» WWH‘M { amgoasws Ma DOM MU: 3:75", (pm/T ijx a We, 0mm W/ a, OLWM L8, WWW (6 ~, QM? Sa/LSIWVLTLO a ijxb Cm/jL—LOW/LCLZ, SUM/5 3:10 Mar 2N *wjg. Cw. lfi'fo. 201%.! Col/€20 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources A. Music: Compositions by John Cage Amores for prepared piano and percussion trio. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Branches for percussion solo, duet, trio or orchestra. New York: Henmar Press, 1976. Cartridge Music for amplified sounds. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Child _§ Tree for percussion solo. New York: Henmar Press, 1975. Composed Improvisation for Snarg Drum. New York: Henmar Press, 1987. Credo In US for percussion quartet. New York: Henmar Press, 1962. Double Music for percussion quartet (composed jointly with Lou Harrison). New York: Henmar Press, 1961. First Construction jln Metall for percussion sextet. New York: Henmar Press, 1962. Forever and Sunsmell for voice with percussion duo. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Imaginary Landscape No. 1 for percussion quartet. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Imaginary Landscape No. 2 for percussion quintet. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Imaginary Landscape No. ; for percussion sextet. New York: Henmar Press, 1961. Living Room Music for percussion and speech quartet. New York: Henmar Press, 1976. 230 231 Quarte; for percussion. New York: Henmar Press, 1977. Second Construction for percussion quartet. New York: Henmar Press, 1978. She Is Asleep (Quartet: Twelve Ion-Toms). New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Thipd Construction for percussion quartet. New York: Henmar Press, 1970. Trio for percussion. New York: Henmar Press, 1977. The Wonderful Widgy p: Eighteen szings for voice and closed piano. New York: Henmar Press, 1961. 4’33" for any instrument or combination of instruments. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. 27’10.554" For A Percussionist. New York: Henmar Press, 1960. Manuscript Cage, John. "Credo. 1940," File 1940, John Cage Archive. . List of Percussion Instruments, "July 2, 1940," File 1940, J.C.A. "Personal History," File 1942, J.C.A. Press Release, "John Cage Percussion Group," File 1942, J.C.A. Published Materials Cage, John. Silence; Lectures gnd Writings. Middle- town, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1961. . Writing Through Finneganig Wake. Tulsa, Oklahoma: University of Tulsa, 1978. . A Yea; From Monday: New Lectures gng Writings. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1967. John Cage, Compiled by Robert Dunn. New York: Henmar Press, 1962. Kostelanetz, Richard, ed. John Cage: Documentary Monographs in Modern Art. New York: Praeger, 1970. 232 Interviews Cage, John. For the Birds: In Conversation with Daniel Charles. London: Marion Boyers, 1981. . Interview with author, 6 June 1988, New York, New York. Kostelanetz, Richard, ed. Conversing With Caqe. New York: Limelight Editions, 1988. Smith, Stuart, "Interview With John Cage," Percuseive Notes, 21, 3 (March, 1983), 3-7. Miscellaneous Brochure, "Percussion Course by John Cage," 27 June - 30 July, 1937, at Virginia Hall Studio of Dance, Beverly Hills, California, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Com ose , Vol. I, J.C.A. Brochure, "Mills College Summer Session," summer, 1939, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percus- sionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Brochure, "Mills College Summer Session," summer, 1940, in Notebook, Jonn Cage Professor Maestro Percus- sionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Brochure, "Mills College Summer Session," spring semester, 1941, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. Brochure, "University of California Extension Division," 7 April, 1941, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. Brochure of upcoming events, Mills College, 23 July, 1941, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Composer, Vol. II, J.C.A. Brochure from School of Design, Chicago, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Composeg, Vol. II, J.C.A. Program, "Percussion Concert," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 9 December, 1938, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percueeioniep Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 233 Program, "Second Percussion Concert," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 19 May, 1939, in Notebook, John Cege Professor Maestpg Percussieniep Qomposep, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Concert of Modern American Percussion Music," Bennington School of the Dance at Mills College, 27 July, 1939, in Notebook, John Cage Epofessop Maeetro Percussionist Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Percussion Concert," Monterey, California, 25 August, 1939, in Notebook, Jonn gage Epofies- sor Maestno Percussionist Composep, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Third Percussion Concert," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 9 December, 1939, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussionisp Composep, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "American Dance Theatre," Cornish School Theatre, Seattle, 7—11 May, 1940, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussioniep Qom- poser, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Cage Percussion Players," Reed College, Portland, Oregon, 14 February, 1940, in Note- book, John Cage Professor Maestro Percussioniep Composep, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Percussion Concert," Mills College, 18 July, 1940, in Notebook, John Cage Professop Maesppg Eereussionisp Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Percussion Concert," California Club Audi- torium, San Francisco, 14 May, 1941, in Notebook, John Cage Professor Maestrg Pepcus- sionist Com oser, Vol. II, J.C.A. Program, "John Cage, Lou Harrison and Players, Marion Van Tuyl and Group," at Mills College, 26 July, 1941, in Notebook, John Cage Professon Maestro Percussionisp Composep, Vol. II, J.C.A. Program, "Music for Percussion Orchestra," at the Arts Club of Chicago, 1 March, 1942, in Notebook, John Cage Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "The University of Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Percussion Group conducted by John Cage," Leon Mandel Assembly Hall, 18 March, 1942, in Note- book, John Caqe Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. 234 Program, "Percussion Concert," Holloway Playhouse, Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco, 7 May, 1942, in I, J.C.A. Notebook, John Cage gomposep, Vol. Program, "The Dance Observer Presents Jean Erdman, Nina Fonaroff, Merce Cunningham," Studio Theatre, New York, 20-21 October, 1942, in Notebook, John Cage Composer, Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Percussion Music directed by John Cage,” presented by League of Composers in association with The Museum of Modern Art, 7 February, 1943, in Notebook, John Cage Com ose , Vol. I, J.C.A. Program, "Janet Fairbank in a program of songs by Con- temporary Americans," Carnegie Hall, New York, 19 February, 1943, in Notebook, John Cage Qom— poser, Vol. I, J.C.A. Performed Sound Recording, John Cage, Cartridge Musie. Time Records by John Cage and David Tudor. s/8009, 1962. Liner notes by John Cage, C. 1962. II. Secondary Sources "The Percussion Ensemble Music of 1939-1942." D.M.A. dissertation, 1985. Don Russell. Lou Harrison: University of Illinois, Cane, Herb, "Music Department," The San Francisce Chronicle, undated clipping in Notebook, Jenn Cage Professor Maestro Percussionist Compgsep, VOl. II, J.C.A. Baker, Deborah Ann. "Form and Structure in the Music of John Cage." Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University, 1985. Campana, ed. A John Cage Reader. Peter and Jonathan Brent, 1982. Gena, New York: C.F. Peters, Oxford University Griffiths, Paul. Cag . London: Press, 1981. "Fingersnaps and Footstomps," Time Magazine, 29 July, 1940, 40. Frankenstein, Alfred, "A Program of Percussion," The San Francisco Chronicle, 28 July, 1939. 235 Hamm, Charles. "John Cage" in The Neg gpeye Diepipnepy pf Anepieen uneie, Vol. I. Edited by H. Wiley Hitchcock and Stanley Sadie. London: McMillan Press Ltd., 1986, 334-341. Keezer, Ronald, "A Study of Selected Percussion Ensemble Music of the 20th Century," Eeneneeieniet, 8, 1 (October, 1970), 11-23. Moore, Thomas Darian. "Rhythmic Structures in John Cage's Amopee." Master's thesis, University of Maryland, 1987. O’Grady, Terence J., "Aesthetic Value in Indeterminate Music," Musieal Quarterly, 67, 3 (July 1981), 367-381. Ranta, Michael W., "John Cage’s 27'10.554 For a Percus— sionist," Eereuseioniet, 7, 1 (October 1969), 8-12 0 Smith, Cecil, untitled newspaper article, Chicagg peily Tribune, 2 March, 1942, in Notebook, Jepn Qege Professor Maestpo Percussionist Com ose , Vol. II, J.C.A. Smith, Stuart, "The Early Percussion Music of John Cage," Eereussienisp, 16, 1 (Fall 1978), 16-27. "They Break Beer Bottles Now to Make Music in Chicago," New York Neplg Ielegrem, 2 March, 1942. Tisdall, Caroline and Angelo Bozzolla. Fupurism. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978. Tomkins, Calvin. The Npide end phe Bachelogs: INe Heretieel Qourtship in Nodepn Art. New York: The Viking Press, 1965. Waterhouse, John C.G., "Futurism," in TNe Neg onve Dictionany g; Music, Vol. VII. Edited by Stanley Sadie. London: McMillan Press Ltd., 1980, 41. Yates, Peter, "Organized Sound (Notes in the History of a New Disagreement: Between Sound and Tone)," California Arts and Architecture, 65, 11 (March, 1941), 18. III. General References Andrews, Bob, "His Beer Bottle Music Becomes a High Art," Chicago Daily Times, 4 March, 1942. 236 Avshalomoff, Jack, "Cage Percussion Players: A Review," Reed gelleee Queer. 16 February. 1940. Brown, Gilbert, "Not Flat-Wheel Tram But Percussion Music," Tne §eat§le Sper, 11 December, 1939. Cage, John. Empty Wopd . Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1979. . Notatigns. New York: Something Else Press, 1969. Cage, John and William Russell, "Percussion Music and Its Relation to the Modern Dance," Qence Observer, October, 1939, in Notebook, John gage Professor Naestng Eepcnssieniet Qomposer, v01. I, J.C.A. Cowell, Henry, New Nusicel Bespnpces. New York: Some- thing Else Press, 1930. Delio, Thomas. Cireumscribing tNe Qpen Nniveree. New York: University Press of America, 1984. Fisher, Marjory M., "Interest Shown in Percussion Music Program," The San Erancisee Newe, 8 May, 1942. Frankenstein, Alfred, "A Recital on Percussion Instru- ments," Tne §an financiseo Ch onicle, 8 May, 1942. "In Retrospect - the Music of John Cage," Nigh Fidelit , 10, 4 (April, 1960), 63-64. Hassan, Ihab, ed. Liberapions: New Essays en phe Humanities in Revelupio . Middletown, Connecti- cut: Wesleyan University Press, 1971. Horst, Louis, "Modern American Percussion Music," The Dance Observer, 27 July, 1939. Kostelanetz, Richard, "The American Avant-Garde Part II: John Cage," Stereo Review, 22, 5 (May 1969), 61-69. Nyman, Michael. Experimental Music. New York: Schirmer Books, 1974. Pence, James, "People Call It Noise - But He Calls It Music," Chicago Daily News, 19 March, 1942. "Percussionist," Time Magazine, 12 February, 1943. 237 Reynolds, Roger, "Indeterminacy: Some Considerations,” Perspectivee 9; New Nusie, 4 (1966), 136-140. N.S., "Percussion ’Music' Heard at Concert," New Xork Times, 8 February, 1943. Salzman, Eric, "Milton Babbitt and John Cage," §tereo Review, 22, 4 (April, 1969), 60. Smith, Stuart, "Lou Harrison’s Fugue for Percussion," Percussionist, 16, 2 (Winter, 1979), 47-56. Watkins, Glen. Soundings: Nusic in the Twentieth Century. New York: Schirmer Books, 1988. Whittal, Arnold. Music Since the first World War. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1977. Wing, R.L. The J Ching Workbook. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1979. Wolff, Christian. "John Cage," in Dictionary gr Con- temporary Music. Edited by John Vinton. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1974, 115-119. "Taking Chances," Music and Nusi- cians, 17, 9 (May, 1969), 38-40. Yates, Peter. Twentieth Century Music. New York: Pantheon Books, 1967.