[FRIAM] The Spectra and Dimensionality of Collaboration

[Steven A Smith]

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