Clarinetist Carol Robinson and cellist Frances-Marie Uitti are esoteric and virtuosic performers, equally at ease in the classical and experimental realms. Having worked in parallel for years, ISSUE brings the them together for a two-night residency on April 5th & 6th, 2013. Both composers themselves, the pair have worked extensively on original works and techniques that have expanded the fields of their respective instruments through electronics. Here they speak with composer Annie Gosfield (whose work they premiere on 4/5) about their many parallel years of collaborations.
Annie Gosfield: How did you two decide to do this project together, and what exactly is it?
Carol Robinson: It’s become clear as we’ve gotten to know each other over the years—as performers of Giacinto Scelsi’s music, and simply as musicians —that we share essential musical motivations and a focus on the expressive properties of pure sound, in addition to an interest in extending our instruments with electronics. This project makes sense to me, and I’m very pleased to continue our work together.
Frances-Marie Uitti: Yes, and I think adding to that, we are both classically trained and I think that’s evident in our command of our instruments. We both have a certain classicism and on the other hand, total abandon in the improvisational sense that comes very much from the body. That’s a combination that we both share.
CR: I agree.
AG: You’ve both developed extensive vocabularies that draw from your experiences with both classical music and improvisation. That used to be quite unusual - improvisers tended to have a more idiosyncratic approach to their instruments, and often didn’t come from a classical background. In recent years it’s become so much more common for classically trained musicians to improvise.
FU: Improvising was something I’ve always done even when just starting to play, but in private.. Then, I dared to present it, but in groups, and later, I started doing it on my own. Carol, you must remember that…
CR: Yes, and I also think, that as a cellist, you perhaps had a different freedom. Playing an instrument like the clarinet, people immediately think jazz when you say improvisation. Well, there are many ways of improvising, and I remember inventing music and sounds as a young girl, though like you said, not showing it to anybody. Too many people seemed to think that improvising meant reading chord changes and playing choruses.
FU: Yes, of course Scelsi had a huge influence on improvisation and encouraged it, whereas all the other composers in that period of 12-tone and serial writing couldn’t think of anything more blasphemous than to improvise.
CR: Exactly, and how dare you do something so complicated that it can’t be notated and repeated.
AG: You both come from a background where there usually wasn’t the freedom to improvise, and then you built so much based on your unusual approaches. When do you think improvisation started to affect what you were composing?
FU: Well, for me, composing came much later. I improvised for years before I composed or put things really on the paper that were to be repeated.
CR: Real composition did come much later for me too, but I also think that improvising influenced my interest in compositions that evolve internally— random-based systems that are completely determined compositions, identifiable but never the same—and in using electronics to give the performer more flexibility, a sort of living composition.
AG: I started improvising, performing, and composing at basically the same time, which gave me a much more physical approach to my composition. I had a piano teacher named Bernard Peiffer who was an improviser, composer, jazz pianist, and classical pianist. He didn’t separate the different approaches much - it was all music. When I’m composing I often sit down and play first. It’s a physical process as well as a mental process, influenced by what my body does (at least what my fingers do) as much as by what my brain does in more conscious thought.
CR: Yes, I think we’re all modified by those experiences, though it’s hard to catalogue exactly how and when it happens, but it’s definitely a different way of doing things.
FU: And which came first, actually- the body or the sound (of course the paper came last).
AG: I’m curious to know, both of you, about your process—how much do you put on paper, and how much starts as something physical that you have to recreate and translate into some repeatable form?
FU: When writing for myself, I sketch structures. For me, the structures (for example, a tree) can be quite detailed and completely written out, but often I leave room for the leaves to blow… there is always room for the breath, a spontaneous detail, but not usually a complete new thread of thought as would happen in an improvisation with others.
CR: I always start by writing down words. I need to get an impression of something and feel what it’s about. I can spend days just writing words. Once I know what a piece is about, sound becomes inevitable .
AG: Are you writing a description, are you writing prose, or are you just writing impressions or single words?
CR: I go through a thought process and could be thinking about spatialization or about an emotion. It’s similar to flow of consciousness, but I write down ideas until the piece is clear. I understand what it’s about, I have an idea of a structure, and the sounds appear.
FU: That’s interesting. I visualize everything internally. I literally see a structure in detail, like a painting. I can almost taste it. Then, it’s also very much a sonic thing for me. So, there are no words at all, ever. Zero words. (laughing) It’s very funny.
CR: My words don’t describe what I’m doing; it’s just that they somehow help me liberate the sounds in my mind.
AG: That’s really interesting, especially the contrast between the two of you: one starts verbally and the other starts visually. You two have so much in common, but the process is so different from the beginning.
I often think about extended techniques as a kind of oral tradition. In spite of the fact that we’re working with written forms, I see techniques getting passed on and adapted in a way that is more typical of an oral tradition. How do you feel about sharing the techniques that you developed? For example, if I write a piece for Frances and we work together to notate some of her techniques, we pass on some of her secrets to the next cellist who plays the piece. Of course your secrets may have come from somebody else… I love the idea of a collaboration between a musician and composer leaving a “mark” on a piece. I will take something that is unique to the performer I’m writing for, and put it in a piece (with their permission, of course). The next person who plays the piece learns the technique and adapts it for themself. Together you create a lineage of extended techniques that gets passed on, and maybe the next cellist uses the idea in an improvisation or a composition. I’m curious to know about where your sounds came from and where they might go and how protective you are, since, you know, composers are just parasites sometimes. (laughing)
FU: Well, I think in my case, certainly, I’ve given a lot to composers right from the beginning. After all, it has been a tradition since Brahms, so there’s nothing new in that—to work with a performer and use some of their personal idiosyncrasies or techniques or whatever you want to call them. Yes.
AG: Is there a place where you draw the line?
FU: Yes there is, and that place, for me, is when I’m still doing research and have not yet fully explored my thoughts. Because basically, I love to work in the dark. If somebody else has an idea that they like to work on that’s “ in the air” (a kind of Jungian idea) then that’s fine. But personally, I wouldn’t be happy to show my own work prematurely only to hear it back in various iterations before I feel like I’ve fully explored it fully for myself.
CR: I would agree, but I find that some things shared with a composer are incredibly personal. It’s more subtle than a mere technique. For example, I worked with Eliane Radigue this afternoon—on what will become a trio for bass clarinet, harp and viola—and the particular multiphonics she needs. I can write down the fingerings and describe the quality of each multiphonic, but another person would almost have to get inside my skin or inside my sensitivity to be able to make a similar sound. So it goes further than just following instructions. Frances may very well tell people exactly how to play something but her personal pressure or intensity may be lacking. It’s not so easy.
AG: In addition to talking about what you’ve shared with composers, I’m curious to know what composers have shared with you. What are the difficulties of inheriting a part from someone else? For example, you talked about multiphonics, which can be so personal to the player, instrument, and maybe the barometric pressure. Some musicians would rather work out the details themselves. Are there other performers that have influenced you, and composers who you’ve worked with that you’ve gotten a lot from technically?
CR: Well, I can speak of Bill Smith, a clarinet player who was one of the first to really develop clarinet multiphonics. He was and is—Frances knows him too—interested in all sorts of new things, whether he was playing jazz or working with electronics. He nurtured that spirit in me. Every composer gives you something (also things you may want to avoid). I’ve made a decision over the years, to work with people I feel a real connection to, so I’m less available to simply bring someone else’s ideas to life. Maybe that sounds a little selfish, but there is only so much time in a life.
FU: You’ve done it already; we both have. Hundreds and hundreds of pieces—that’s for the next generation to do. Now, it’s our time to take the time for ourselves.
CR: Yes, and now we’re giving actually more by going further with our personal pursuits.
AG: Do you think there is the same excitement in combining improvisation, extended techniques and notated contemporary classical music that there was when you were starting out? Now that it’s more common, do you think it’s gone further or do you think it has just become more standardized?
FU: Well, the fact that they’re teaching it standardizes it to some extent. That’s not a value judgment, but it’s just the way things are.
CR: This whole idea of standardization could be seen as saturation instead. There are so many kinds of music available now. Some people desire or even require that musicians be more polyvalent, be great at everything. Well, we know there are limits to how great you can be at everything, but when people do improvise, you sometimes wonder what their motivation is. Is it to become freer as a performer, to explore other types of musical energy and expression, or is it result based—if I improvise will I play better, will I get a better job? Who knows what people are really thinking sometimes. I’m still excited. Improvising still surprises me, and I like being surprised.
AG: One thing that I’m interested in seeing is your concert at ISSUE. You’re going to be working with Satoshi Takeshi, percussionist and also with Nate Wooley, who is a young trumpet player (I think he’s great; I love the way he uses electronics)—so this may be a very positive answer to the question I just asked.
FU: I think improvisation is awareness-oriented and big ears-oriented.
CR: It’s sensitivity-oriented. I think that’s why we like to play together. We hook into each other’s sound and rhythm. We hope that will be the case when we play with Nate and Satoshi for the first time.
AG: When Evan Parker was coming up there were far fewer models, but when Nate Wooley was coming up, there were so many more improvisers. I think Nate’s found something unique, but I wonder if it’s more challenging for a younger generation of improvisers to develop something new.
CR: Right. What is new anyway?
FU: I don’t know. I really don’t know. Does it matter?
AG: Is there anything more you want to say about the concerts and what made you choose the program?
FU: I think this residency characterizes both Carol and me as contrasting artists with similar backgrounds and profiles us as two artists who weave yet a different music together in real time.
CR: Yes, and I like fact that there are three concerts showing three different aspects of what we do, and not just the repertoire concert or the this or that concert. I think it’s fantastic that ISSUE gives the audience that overview.
AG: Are you improvising together or are you playing composed pieces together?
FU: Improvising.
AG: So, this program is a combination of you playing composed work individually, as well as improvising together?
FU: Yes.
AG: It’s exciting to be able to hear both approaches, and see you work together. So in essence you will be interacting with the composers as well as interacting with each other?
FU: Yes.
