Week 15b - The Trial Run

No messing around this session - we had to write the second movement no matter how long it was going to take. This sort of pressure was what the majority of us in the group usually fed off when it comes to summative assessments. And it's not entirely a bad thing for people to have this trait - individuals who actively procrastinate display a certain level of self-reliance, autonomy and self-confidence because they are aware of the risk of subjecting themselves to last-minute pressures and still consciously decide to do so (Choi & Moran, 2009)

It's by no means a claim to postively encourage procrastination in all situations, however creative procrastination can lead to inspiration and innovation within a time-constraint that simply isn't as accessible over a longer period of time. In essence, we were aiming to break away from 'productive mediocrity' (Pannapacker, 2009) - a risky strategy that we hope would pay off.

28th May Face to Face Meeting 6:30pm-11:30pm 

To begin the session, Peer A raised the idea of creating our 'setup' in preparation for the recording session this Sunday. At first I was aprehensive with that suggestion, given that we had in my eyes, higher priorities to deal with today. But then as we progressed setting up and came across multiple challenges (such as where to place performers, what position should the marble run go and where the cameras would be set up) it was apparent that it was a good call - it meant that our next session on Sunday would be less stressful and hopefully give us more time to rehearse.

This session was entirely 2nd movement as we had a lot of confidence with the first movement from our last session (perhaps over-practicing it!).

Given the success of the electric violin in the 1st movement there was still the decision as to which instruments I would use in this movement. Before the session, I was hoping to use both to show diversity in the performance however within 30 minutes of the session I figured it would be best to restrain my choices down to just the Push. The Push itself can provide thousands of different possibilities so it was enough to play around with. As mentioned earlier on in the module, it should only be necessary to constrain as you get closer towards a summative deadline and this was exactly the right point to do it.

The first 90 minutes of the session comprised of 'playing around' and experimenting with the motor of the marble run- reminiscent of our first face to face session back in Week 10. With the added pressures of time on our hands, I felt that this was more efficently done than previously and as a group we were able to reduce numerous melodic ideas down to a select few much faster. 

A major moment in this session was when Peer A was playing around with the lights and we all noticed that when the lights went off - our efficency sky rocketed (2:07:00). The American Arts-Journalist Grace Glueck states that:

The studio, a room to which the artist consigns himself for life, is naturally important, not only as workplace, but as a source of inspiration.

Having the lights off was a source of inspiration - almost tricking our brain into thinking that we were performing or recording. Peer A's suggestion of the setup at the start married with the lights off was an excellent method of inspiring us to interact with each other better than we ever have before in a session. A real turning point that is clear by the cohesion of the music as our meeting recording progresses.

The way in which we approached forming this movement was very similar to the methods described here. There was a sense of an emerging structure as time passed and as we looped the movement over and over again, we were able to identify loose sections and either 'fix' or 'ditch' them. This no-nonsense approach was exactly what we needed and eventually lead to the completion of the 2nd movement. It was shorter than the 1st movement, but that was OK - if anything it was ideal to contrast the indulgence with a sharp, snappy finish. 

It was interesting to note at this point that myself and Peer A were leading the musical decisions at this point which was reassuring for us both, given that we were worried at the start of the project that Peer B's technological approach would dominate the collaboration. Instead, due to our decision to change our installation apporach to a recorded performance, it felt much more balanced (every part/member was required to create the desired outcome).

5 hours 30 minutes later since starting the session, we managed to do one full run through of this 6 minute movement and then we started packing up.

Then came a dreaded realisation for myself - what we just did then was an improvisation (not a strong competency of mine). Although it was video recorded, it was going to be difficult to try and replicate this for the performance. In my eyes, it wasn't the best decision to pack-up straight away (no matter how late it was) and running it a few more times would have been peace of mind for me. Hopefully recording day will give us enough time to build up my confidence before hitting the record button. 

I should note that the reasons for my feelings above is probably due to my musical upbringing and background. I tend not to use my musical instinct in a live improvised setting but instead use musical instinct in the preparation of a performance so that I have less to worry about when performing. It is a new feeling that is not entirely comfortable at the moment but I do welcome this change as it could lead to some exciting music in the final recording that I thought I wouldn't be capable of if I over-prepared my improvisation.

References

Pannapacker, W.A. (2009). How to procrastinate like Leonardo da Vinci. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55, p.B4