Reading Response: Basic Concepts of Minimal Music by Wim Mertens
Matt Steckler
Audio Art
March 30, 2007
Wim Mertens' comparative synopsis of the so-called "dialectical" model of traditional music versus the so-called "repetitive" model of minimalist music certainly clarifies for me the philosophical impetus behind minimalism, and at the same time raises some questions. I agree that much of the emphasis within the music of Reich, Glass, Young and Riley (though I'm less familiar with Riley's music) is on living in the moment - as opposed to a teleological framework whereby an argument is posited, builds tension that resolves to some conclusion, and depends on the listener's memory to understand the reference of a particular repeated element. I also agree that many of these minimal concepts, including the ideas of perpetual stasis without start or finish and the Now, themselves derive from Eastern and African musical concepts. I also, however, think that neither non-Western music nor the work of Minimalist composers is completely static - changes do occur, but far more subtly over the course of a macro-time continuum, and many of these changes rely on the active participation of the listener in the process. I created a beginning-middle-end experience for myself when listening to Dream House, in my movements, my psychological mindset and my absorption of the social circumstances around me at the time of that version of the performance. In addition, Reich's comment, that one can be in complete control of one's music as long as he/she accepts whatever else happens to it, resonates also with my attitude toward music performance. Many avant-garde jazz musicians employ the term process to describe a technique whereby pre-written passages are selected at random and played in succession to create a spontaneous form in the moment, and with the added element of improvisation the passages themselves become varied with each performance. But even in the through-notated music of Reich, the changes are very calculated and serve to transmogrify the emotional effect of the Now, via a host of variables including scale, density, texture, etc.
Why is Repetitive Music so angry at Dialectical Music, and vice-versa? They are merely two ways of going about music, which everyone can agree is an important piece of therapy. The sound itself is very important, but so is the organization, and many of the non-Western music out of which Minimalism is based on very important social occasions - birthing, wedding and funereal rituals and divinations - and the music is part of the larger plan of these ceremonies. Also, the music is part of the storytelling in many of these cultures, and if stories are teleological and goal-oriented, can't Repetitive Music also work toward this end? Having an End might not be a bad thing.
