Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Iannis Xenakis - Compositional method


For my first music post, I thought I would offer a brief thought or two on a text I'm reading right now, Iannis Xenakis's Formalized Music. I could certainly talk a lot about this book, and probably will discuss it at length on a later date, but today I'll limit myself to Xenakis's description of the compositional process he undergoes when he "constructs" his pieces.

To those who don't know, Xenakis was notable for pioneering a method of composition he called stochastic, after the Greek stochas ("goal," or "guess"; Xenakis seems to prefer the former definition). It is derived from the mathematical branch of the same name, which concerns itself with fields such as probability theory, game theory, mathematical randomness, etc. and can be used to model many physical processes.  Although from this discussion it seems that his music would be quite austere and off-putting, and the evidence of his compositional approach is discernible in the sound of his music, I find much of it to be very exciting and for lack of a better term "psychedelic." Here's a recording of his early orchestral composition Metastasis, and a later electronic piece, Gendy3:





That said, one can assume that his method of composition is quite rigid and logical. This it is, but I find that at the root I follow a similar process. I suppose you could break down composing into two basic approaches. The first approach could be termed "linear," in that the writing takes place in a sequential way (improvisation in slow motion), with minimal planning on a broad formal level. The second approach could be termed "constructive," in that it places a great deal of emphasis on pre-compositional processes. This can also be seen as a top-down approach to writing, starting with the big picture and working down to the details. Most composers probably use a combination of these approaches. For me personally, a constructive approach seems the most fruitful, both on the level of inspiration and in terms of aural intelligibility. This is the perspective Xenakis appears to advocate with this scheme:

1. Initial conceptions (intuitions, provisional  or definitive data) ;

2. Definition of the sonic entities and of their symbolism communicable with the limits of possible means (sounds of musical instruments, electronic sounds, noises, sets of ordered sonic elements, granular or continuous formations, etc.) ;

3. Definition of the transformations which these sonic entities must undergo in the course of the composition (macrocomposition: general choice of logical framework, i.e., of the elementary algebraic operations and the setting up of relations between entities, sets, and their symbols as defined in 2.) ; and the arrangement of these operations in lexicographic time with the aid of succession and simultaneity) ; 

4. Microcomposition (choice and detailed fixing of the functional or stochastic relations of the elements of 2.) , i.e., algebra outside-time, and algebra in-time ;

5. Sequential programming of 3. and 4. (the schema and pattern of the work in its entirety) ;

6. Implementation of calculations, verifications, feedbacks, and definitive modifications of the sequential program ;

7. Final symbolic result of the programming (setting out the music on paper in traditional notation, numerical expressions, graphs, or other means of solfeggio) ;

8. Sonic realization of the program (direct orchestral performance, manipulations of the type of electromagnetic music, computerized construction of the sonic entities and their transformations) .  

Obviously this list is skewed toward Xenakis's peculiar style of writing (including his penchant for calculation and his acceptance of electronic means), but with some modifications, I find it a very useful guide to approaching composition in general. He simply starts from the broadest of terms and then defines in more and more detail as he goes. Reading this has helped clarify in my own mind certain shortcomings in my style, namely that I need to further refine my conception of detail within the larger structures (steps 3, and especially 4). I find that the importance of schemes like this cannot be underestimated.

For more information, check out his book:

No comments:

Post a Comment