Glen - > I like (kinda agree with) everything you say in that last post, except the > following: > > On 07/12/2018 09:50 AM, Steven A Smith wrote: >> I think I hear the key to your reflection here being the *expectation* >> of the band (or it's members) on you (the audience) or maybe more >> strongly but tangentially, the *need* for it. > I definitely care less about any expectation they place/have *on* me. I care > more about what that feedback *does* for them or to them. The former is probably significantly my projection, as I always find it awkward to respond to specific expectations, real or imagined. Whether it is the (real or imagined) expectations of the band, or the "rest of the audience", I can find it inhibitory. While I enjoy attending art-openings for the energy of the rest of the crowd there observing a piece or collection for the first time, I absolutely *loathe* being asked "what do you think?" (or equivalent) by anyone who is not an intimate. Especially the artist themselves!
The latter is what I think we are contemplating collaboratively here as you elaborate: > Does it help produce the music? Does it color/bias the music? Does it > simply energize them so that they can generate the music for a longer time? > Do they customize the music (consciously or not) based on that feedback? > Etc. This is what I don't understand. My attempt to parse stage bands into > those that seem to feed off the audience vs. those that don't is an attempt > to gain some understanding into what the feedback achieves for the musicians. I think your original statement was "I don't understand" which I always get trapped into thinking is code for "I don't approve", which by now I should know better with you. > But, again, I can imagine the "affectation" you refer to is a spectrum, as > well. I'm a big fan of some bands that put on a real *show* where the show > is meaningfully tied to the music. E.g. Wardruna (http://www.wardruna.com/), > which uses "historical instruments" and dresses the part. Their performances > approach a play, with strong visuals coupled with the music. So, the > question becomes one of how audience feedback affects something like a > "troupe of minstrels", including acrobatics and such, versus something like > chamber music. In my first (knee jerk?) response to this, I wanted to make some claims about Rock-Opera only to find (reading Wikipedia whose reliability is variable) that Rock Operas are not (normally?) conceived as a stage performance, but rather a themed "concept album", which is then generally rendered *as* a "rock musical" stage performance and then (yet) later perhaps as a cinematic performance. The most seminal (and sometimes considered to be the first), _Tommy_ by The Who being an obvious example. _Jesus Christ Superstar_ is another, though it appears that _Hair_ (which I always assumed followed the same arc) sprung to life directly as a stage production. While the music video/short-clip as a form predated MTV, it seems like the creation of MTV provided a consistent venue and appetite for canned visual performances to go along with canned audio. This of course, is somewhat oblique to your contemplation of *stage* performers which I take you to mean run of the mill musicians whose primary outlet for musical creation is *playing on stage*... local and regional bands or individuals who play live venues more than they sell recordings (though they may record and sell also). Naturally people who choose this venue/outlet would seem to do it because it helps them do what they do. Or perhaps they really know nothing else... they "grew up in it" and that is *how* they practice their music, whether it is obvious what aspects of the live performance is necessary to them. A complementary question to contemplate (perhaps) is not whether they *need* the interaction or if they simply are put off/lost when it is not there... it may not be that they overtly feed off of the energy or the feedback as much as they simply depend on it as a "reflection" of their energetic output? This diminishes my idea that it is collaborative... the audience becomes somewhat of a passive reflector, closer to the geometry/acoustics of an amphitheater than of electronic amplifier/speaker kitting. I'm sure we have at least a few people on the list with more live performance experience than either of us who might have their own personal insights. Other performance types to consider might include dance, magic (illusion), or acrobatics. It is my belief that while all three are very kinesthetic, that only the illusionist absolute requires an audience for full meaning to emerge. I don't mean to say that an illusionist cannot practice her craft alone, without an audience, but to some extent, wouldn't that be a lot like the proverbial "one hand clapping" more than "a tree falling in the forest, with no one to hear it"? - Steve ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove