The Reply, Part Last: Whither Harry...

To our gracious listeners,

Time to wrap up. Oh, sit down, you in the back. I realize that this is
an informal forum for public opinion, but I look back over the last
couple of days' postings and wish that I had prepared the material in a
more rigorous way (a paper or presentation or some such); I respect the
writings I have seen in the list before my joining the fray. Oh well, it
be writ. I am richer for having heard other opinions (which I don't have
to agree with ) and am glad to have stirred the waters. Hit it...

**********

What I would ask, of *all* who find value in the creative output of Mr.
Harry Partch, is to view his works in a different manner than most any
other composer, for Partch is certainly a unique case. To constrain him,
and a constraint it is, to the concert hall in a concert setting is an
undeniable disservice to a larger view of "ritual-experience", a "basic
mutilation". If Harry, save for "a few studies", viewed his music as
embodying "dramatic ideas", why would anyone choose to lessen it's impact
by presenting it in "the obsessive formality of the concert stage" or,
worse yet (by leaps and bounds), an adaptation for non-Partch
instruments? These actions would, as Harry said, "deny fulfillment". To
agree to such a request for integrity in belief and action would beget a
monumental undertaking, pointing towards a performance style that we in
the West Coast group were only part way down the road to.

The question has been raised as to the substantial, yet (at face value)
non-corporeal works such as the "Li Po" songs, the "Intrusions", and
similar. As Partch's aesthetic of integrated disciplines evolved over
his lifetime, the later pieces he created came to embrace more of the
all-involving corporealism he had sought for many years, even as the
earlier, smaller pieces did not. I have often thought that his ideal of
a corporeal performance could be 'backwards compatible'; a sensitive
staging of even the vocal and small ensemble works, with appropriate
settings, could serve to *enhance* their content, not detract from it. A
difficult task, to be sure (without it seeming to be the tail wagging the
dog), but how wonderful it would be to see the "Li Po" done with the
instrumentalist intoning the texts himself. "Barstow", while not
directly bearing a traditional story line, adapts itself well to having
players in the group be 'in character' and having different players
assume the singing/speaking roles. With appropriate stage design,
costuming, etc., it lifts the piece to another place, someplace Partch
wanted to be.

I recall a performance of "U.S. Highball" done on one of our tours that
was staged in a similar manner, with an intermingling of
singer-actors-players. After the performance, an audience member
commented that, having been a hobo himself, the evening reminded him of
not only the "sights and sounds of the road, but the smells, too!". A
good justification for getting away from the "insane specialization"
Partch abhorred, and a way to avoid standard concert-hall presentations.
Somehow, this just doesn't jive with four people in a string quartet
backing up a 'singer', even if the notes, the text -- the music -- was
correctly rendered. After all, the guy who wrote it told us: "I must
therefore decline to limit the dimensions of my rather intense beliefs by
the modernly specialized word 'music'".

In this light, it seems doubly injurious to the experience to promote his
'music' on non-Partch instruments. They were so integral to the
development of the works themselves; even as the instrumental palette
expanded Partch reworked some of the older pieces (thanks to Dr. Philip
Blackburn we can hear some of those, and trace a trajectory). It is
inconceivable to replace the "sculptural beauty" inherent to those
instruments. If they were not such a critical component, could Harry
have stated:

"And as for imaginative and sculptural forms of instruments, I have
easily given as much time to this endeavor as to intonation".

Brian McLaren, who got me rolling on this, had his own 'revelation':

"As a chronically unrepentant electronics gonzo, permit me a small
confession: Yes, I finally built myself a duplicate of Harry Partch's
Harmonic Canon I (minus Harry's bad design features). And it sounds
INCREDIBLE. Johnny Reinhard has roundly chided me for slighting
acoustic music. Of course, he's right. In the end, there's no
substitute for live acoustic music played by good performers on real
acoustic instruments. The richness and subtlety of the sound is
nonpareil. [...] A universe of subtle & gorgeous xenharmonies lie
within its bridges and pinblocks."

Not to mention the raw physicality that is transmitted (ideally) to the
audience, the musician-dancer-actor breaking the normal bindings of a
specialist-performer. Quite a goal to shoot for: "magical-sounds, visual
form and beauty, experience-ritual".

I am well aware that none of Partch's instruments emerged from the womb
of creativity fully realized; some where created using the only materials
he could get his hands on, using his own carpentry and other 'skills';
all of this is pretty well documented elsewhere. They were not meant for
the long haul; a good portion of my time was spent in repair and
replacement, and the ordeal of tuning them all was a constant ritual.
Could 'better' copies be made? I'm certain of it. Should copies be
made? Sure, why not? (Not counting the cost, time, effort...hah!).
Would I have chucked all that work and replaced them with MalletKATS,
just-tuned samples and whatever other electronic devices seemed a
panacea? Not bloody likely. To do so, folks, is to truly, truly miss
the point. And with only one set of instruments, it does indeed set up a
horrendously frustrating set of circumstances, for all of us.

I don't harbor any illusions about what will happen from here on out. I
am, in spite of the depth of my respect for Partch and my years spent
with his works and creations, as powerless as any one of you in the
future uses (and abuses) of Partch's body of literature. I can (and
will) speak out against those performances that, by their very nature,
diminish the very experiences that Partch hoped to propagate. I can (and
will) speak out in favor of those people who do their utmost to ensure
that integrity and respect, with regard to Harry's own guidelines and
visions for his work, are the reason for laying mallet to bar, pick to
string. Precious good it will do me, I imagine. It has been a few years
now since I last played any of the pieces; I wish Harry had left us in a
different state than we are in. That, however, is the real world, and we
have to deal with Harry in his own way, problematic, cantankerous, and a
pain-in-the-ass to the end. Somehow, a way will be found, and to all
that care for more than frequencies in the air, Harry said: "This thing
began with the truth, and truth does exist."

**********

As an addendum, I offer these bits o' info. For those of you that have
not visited the British Harry Partch Society Web site, it is a lot of fun
and a bit of information. I urge you to join, if only because these guys
are doing a great job of spreading the word, and are being pretty
non-judgemental about it (not like me, huh?). I especially draw your
attention to the July 1996 newsletter (which is not on the Web site yet),
because it contains writing far more eloquent and coherent than mine
regarding the Kronos "Barstow"; a must read. I will be continuing my
activity in the tuning list (with a day or so off), email me if you have
questions outside of the issues raised in the forum, and I will try to
respond to all flames and bravos in a somewhat timely manner. Last but
not least, I plan on having a very small Web site of my own up in a few
days, as kind of a clearinghouse for Partch-related info. I'll post
something when it's running (anybody taking bets on if I get content on
the pages before Allen Strange )? What a world we live in...

Yours in search of all things corporeal,
Sincerely,
Jon
--
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Jonathan M. Szanto | Once upon a time |
| Backbeats & Interrupts | There was a little boy |
| jszanto@adnc.com | And he went outside. |
|--------------------------------------------------|


Received: from eartha.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 16:42 +0100
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id HAA07474; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 07:42:54 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 07:42:54 -0700
Message-Id: <009A5DD05289290A.22C7@ezh.nl>
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu