List of Sci-Fi Musicals, Operas and Plays

photo of Via Galactica by John Michael Cox

Musicals:

Rocky Horror Show by Richard O'Brien (1972)
Via Galactica by Christopher Gore, Judith Ross and Galt MacDermot (1972)
Time by Dave Clark, David Soames, Jeff Daniels, and David Pomeranz (1986)
Starmites by Barry Keating and Stuart Ross (1987)
Return to the Forbidden Planet by Bob Carlton (1989)
Metropolis by Joe Brooks and Dusty Hughes (1989/2002)
Superbia by Jonathan Larson (1989)
Weird Romance by Alan Menken with David Spencer and Alan Brennert (1992)
Saucy Jack and the Space Vixens by Charlotte Mann, Michael Cridler, Jonathan Croose and Robert Forrest (1995)
Escape from Pterodactyl Island by Peter Charles Morris, Michael Jeffrey and Phillip George (1999)
Area 51 by Noel Katz and Tom Carrozza (2000)
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang by Richard and Robert Sherman and Jeremy Sams (2002)
We Will Rock You by Ben Elton, Brian May and Roger Taylor (2002)
The Last Starfighter by Skip Kennon and Fred Landau (2004)
The Brain from Planet X by David Wechter and Bruce Kimmel (2006)

Futurity by The Lisps, César Alvarez and Molly Rice (2012)

Operas:

Repo! The Genetic Opera (Original Stage Version) by Darren Smith and Terrance Zdunich (2002)

Death and the Powers: A Robot Opera by Todd Machover (2010)

Plays:
R.U.R. (Rossum's Universal Robots) by Karel Capek (1921)
Back to Methuselah by George Bernard Shaw (1921)
Unseen Hand by Sam Shepard (1969)
Illuminatus! Trilogy adpated by Ken Campbell (1976)
Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury (1977)
The Warp (22 Hour Play) by Neil Oram (1978)
Starstruck by Elaine Lee, Susan Norfleet Lee and Dale Place (1980)

Lunacy by Patricia Weaver Francisco (1984)
Henceforward... by Alan Ayckbourn (1987)
Comic Potential by Alan Ayckbourn (1988)
Darkside by Ken Jones (1988)
Dirk adapted by James Goss and Arvind Ethan David (1995)
A Number by Caryl Churchill (2004)
D is for Dog by Katie Polebaum, Sean T. Cawelti and Rogue Artists Ensemble (2004)
Coyote Trilogy by Don Elwell (2006)
Boom by Peter Sinn Nachtreib (2008)
Untitled Mars by Jay Scheib (2008)
Space//Space by Banana Bag and Bodice (2009)
Godlight Theatre Company's adaptations of 1984, Farenheit 451, A Clockwork Orange, and Slaughterhouse 5  (1994-2009)
What We Once Felt by Anne Marie Healy (2009)
Bellona: Destroyer of Cities by Jay Scheib (2010)
The North Plan by Jason Wells (2010)
Baby Universe: A Puppet Odyssey by Wakka Wakka (2010)
Futura by Jordan Harrison (2010)
The Annihilation Point by Berserker Residents (2010)

Samuel and Alasdair: A Personal History of the Robot War by Mad Ones (2010)
Galactic Girl by Jon Hoche (2011)
The Hallway Trilogy Part Three: Nursing by Adam Rapp (2011)
How to live Safely in a Science Fiction Universe adapted by Matt Slaybaugh and Jennifer Fawcett (2011)
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? adapted by Untitled Theater Company 61 (2011)
Frankenstein by Nick Dear (2011)
World of Wires by Jay Scheib (2012)

This is by no means a complete list, just a sample based on some basic internet research. These are works which as far as I can tell have been published, or had at least one full production/run at a regional or off-broadway theater. (there are a few that were off-off Broadway). I left off plays which are closer to the genre of horror, fantasy, or which deal primarily in the super-natural (eg Little Shop of Horrors, Spider Man, etc.) I don't have anything against horror, fantasy, or comic book genres they are just not what I'm currently investigating. If you know of other works that fit the criteria please post in the comments. I will try and update.

Here is the definition of Science Fiction I am using (from Wikipedia):

Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginary that is more or less plausible (or at least non-supernatural) content such as future settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, aliens, and paranormal abilities. Exploring the consequences of scientific innovations is one purpose of science fiction...Science fiction is largely based on writing rationally about alternative possible worlds or futures. It is similar to, but differs from fantasy in that, within the context of the story, its imaginary elements are largely possible within scientifically established or scientifically postulated laws of nature (though some elements in a story might still be pure imaginative speculation).

 tweet me @musicisfreenow

John Muther - Space Race

The Lisps played with John Muther twice in Milwaukee this year. Both times it was a joy. His songwriting is crafted so brilliantly. And he manages to talk about all the things I'm interested in just the way that seems to make sense. When I first heard is song Space Race, I was a believer.



Lyrics:

As kids, on our hands and knees

Around the warm glow of the radio,

We wondered if the space men will wear sweaters.

Will they still eat food?

Will all food be pills?

Will they still tie their shoes?

Ray gun. Velcro.

Time moves too slow.

Rockets. Space camp.

Air locks. Mars man.

I'll take a shower of dust; I'll take a moon bath.

We need a thruster boost; we gotta go fast!

We have a duty to ourselves and our solar system

To spread our society.

We can show the other planets how to kill all the mosquitos,

And prevent each cloudy day.

Bug bomb. Smart bomb.

A bomb. H bomb.

Box top. Moon base.

Free prize. Space race.

We put our backs against the floor. We put our knees up on the couch.

We put our backs against the floor. We put our knees up on the couch.

Brushes steel. Plastic.

High sheen. High tech.

Longing for the

Wood floor. Wood stove.

Warm bed. Wool clothes.

John Muther's Website

Are Record Labels Necessary?

photo cred

This is a question that I've been asking myself a lot lately. It seems clear that musicians have more access than ever before to all of the resources that record labels traditionally offer (distribution, marketing, recording facilities, design, replication). But for some reason when you look at the CMJ Charts, the new releases in Rolling Stone and Spin, on "subculture" magazines like Fader or Vice, or even in most high profile blogs and websites (Pitchfork, Stereogum, Brooklyn Vegan) they are still filled almost exclusively with "signed" bands. When a band like Clap Your Hands Say Yeah blows up with a self release it makes headlines that repetitively trumpet the "liberation of the artist in the internet age," yet these are still headline-worthy events rather than standard occurrences. Also artists like Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, and Jill Sobule do really well with their fan-funded projects, but what is rarely mentioned is that all of these artists had the enormous help of record labels in developing their brands and cultivating their fame. Now they are able to capitalize on all of that but it still puts the record label at the core of artist viability. In this article I'm going to try and parse the continued relevance of the Record Label from the habitual reliance on it as a model for success. I believe that ultimately labels will start to look really different, and I think that figuring out why they still exist at all will help us develop a better model that connects musicians to the future of the music industry rather than the past.

(Full Disclosure: I'm working on developing a new model for my own label, but I'm writing this as a self-releasing artist, which I always have been)

PART 1

So let's start out with what record labels do, and how that has changed because of digital technology...

Distribution:
What Labels Do: Record Labels traditionally connect artists with merchants and locations in which to sell their music both online and in stores.

Why we don't need it: Tunecore.com has basically blown this wide open with a flat fee for worldwide distribution. Within 24 hours an mp3 you record in your bedroom can be purchased on itunes around the world. So while getting your music in a Record Store is still difficult, it is increasingly irrelevant. Almost all young people discover music exclusively online, and so easy access to Digital Distribution has now made this once essential function of the label largely optional.

Marketing:
What Labels Do: Labels are able to offer capital for print ads, professionally designed marketing campaigns, branding and social media outreach.

Do we need that? Well, through social networking one could make an argument that you have all you need to promote a release but unless you already have a large committed networked fan base or a viral video you will still need to spend some money on marketing. This is why most musicians are wisely turning to making videos as promotion. Most "Indie PR" firms seem largely ineffectual from my end, and since they are pay to play rather than "curated" like labels, they don't seem to carry very much influence.

Recording Facilities:
What Labels Do: Labels have access to established producers and studios that are able to produce consistently high quality recordings. These resources help recreate the aesthetics of recorded sound that artists and labels have codified through decades of experience. In other words they can make records that sound like what people are used to hearing. Labels also are able to hire professional mixing and mastering engineers that make a huge difference in the final product.

What do we have: High Quality Recording technology is available for extremely cheap which means there are thousands of talented producers that have very humble resources but, with practice, can produce a product indistinguishable (by a mass audience) from a professionally produced recording. Mastering and mixing are also getting cheaper and easier though no less important.

Videos and Visual Design:
What Labels have: Labels may have established relationships with designers and artists that help design artwork, produce videos, design web sties, and style photoshoots. Most importantly Labels have capital to hire all of these people.

What we have: All of this has become more accessible through computers, cheap camera technology, and wonderful sites like cashmusic.org. Though creating something visually iconic, viral, and/or brilliant is still a high art that requires some resources.

Replication:
What Labels Have: Traditionally labels were able to print massive quantities of recordings for mass consumption.

What we have: There are dozens of replication facilities that will produce as few or as many CDs or vinyl as you like. Ulitmately though the CD making businesses seem to be in trouble. They got a big boost as artists starting self-releasing but I can't see indie artists shelling out for printed CDs for much longer.

Licensing and Placement:
What Labels Have: Relationships with music supervisors, film studios, and ad agencies is one of the most important things that labels have and are working very hard to maintain. These institutions and individuals have become de-facto tastemakers for indie music. Getting your song placed on Grey's Anatomy, or an iPod commercial (Chairlift) has become the new way to "be discovered."

What we have: There are sites popping up that offer artists a chance to get licensing opportunities, but I'm not sure how well these work. I'd love to hear anecdotal evidence in the comments. My sense is that a lot of music supervisors read blogs and are constantly on the look out for "it" bands of the moment. I'm sure there are areas of licensing that are democratic, but it also really depends on who you know. If I were a music supervisor I wouldn't necessarily want to use a site where uncurated acts submit there music for a fee. It's easier to find music I like on blogs. This area seems to be where labels still might have sustainable clout.

Tour Support and Booking:
What labels have: Here's an example of the mystical power of a label. A booking agency is very unlikely to take on a totally independent act without the support of a label. But the minute you get signed to a label you'll most likely need a booking agent, even if you still have little draw. The agency will assume that your label will help you develop a good following. Also venues will take you more seriously if you are on a label they recognize.

What we have: Booking was one of the first elements of the music business to move completely online. No one sends packages any more. You send emails and based on your perceived online hype and could feasibly get a gig anywhere. Venues are often democratic, if you can get people in the door they will book you. But again, do you need the label to help you get people in the door? I find that booking is something anyone can do, but it is also one of the most time consuming jobs that takes a certain skill set and a lot persistence. Labels still give you legitimacy in the eyes of established booking agents.

The Status Quo:
What Labels Have: Seems to me that the biggest advantage that labels have (which may also be their downfall) is that they are connected in the old machine of the industry. So for instance, it would be so great to self-release and not print CDs. However magazines and radio stations still require hand mailed hard media. This means that distributing your self-release with a good chance at showing up on college radio and in music magazines is prohibitively hard for most small artists. Ultimately I guess these institutions will go online for submissions. I think part of the reason we don't know what record labels are going to be like in the future is because we don't yet know what records will be like in the future. To me the video world is the most clearly ascendant force, and perhaps a full length video (like Kanye West's Runaway) will be the standard "packaging" for a musical release.

What we have: We can decide for the future how music will be released by doing it ourselves in whatever way we want. But it might be a slow climb trying to get Spin Magazine to read your unsolicited emails.


PART 2

So on looking at the list above it seems like labels offer 2 fundamental things: Resources and Status.

Resources: Resources may come in the form of money or access to some or all of the things listed above. The range is wide (but definitely don't sign to a label unless they are offering you some of those things.)

Status: The Label is still one of, if not the, most powerful curatorial force in the music industry as far as I can tell. Being signed basically means that someone has decided to put resources behind you. This is valuable to the musician undoubtedly, and useful to the writers and venues that are sifting through thousands of artists. The question I have is: Is it worth signing away 50% of your profits to gamble on whatever status you may or may not achieve through the label. Most artists take the oppurtunity to sign with a label still because "50% of something is more than 100% of nothing."

An established artist actually fundamentally shouldn't need a label. If an established artist can raise money through fans or from personal wealth he or she can do essentially everything that a label can do and then keep all of the royalties from sales and make potentially ten-fold what he or she might make from a label release. In fact an established artist that ditches the label and then goes independent might get all sorts of indie cred. This is great news for famous people, but what about artists that aren't already famous?

What I've noticed is a very specific type of artist as the new template for success. This is what I cal the Artistpreneur. The Artistpreneur is a type of Artist who is as invested in fame and success as they are in art. And these artists have been enormously successful in the current landscape of the music industry. They work tirelessly to develop their brand, promote themselves, get noticed in any way possible. They are compulsive tweeters, social networkers, bloggers, vloggers, and emailers. The proliferation of this type of Artist has opened up a new pathway to success as a musician but I would also argue that it has created its own type of homogenization. The Music Industry has been much maligned of the years for developing formulas for success that it pushes onto its artists, but I might argue that internet culture has done the same thing. Internet Culture has created an imperative to be an Artistpreneur in order succeed. "If you don't succeed it is your own fault because everyone can make a youtube video." This whole question brings me to try and understand how does the new relationship to artist success show up in culture.

In the old model of popular music the record labels functioned like gardeners who chose which seeds to plant and cultivated them carefully. The minute anything else would start to grow in the garden they would carefully prune it and claim credit for it. Right now the musical landscape is beginning to look more like a Jungle. Sure the labels are still planting, but things are growing completely out of their control. I support the jungle of culture because it means that there is more culture available and thus more cultural conversation overall. I believe culture creates nuance and intelligence in society and is crucial for an intelligent. In the jungle culture, labels' resources are becoming less valuable, but their ability to bestow status might be becoming even more important. Basically the noise floor is raising, which means that more and more artists are being heard which makes it harder to stand out. Labels help you stand out a little, but mostly only to the extent that their reputation and resources allow.

Ultimately maybe there will be a broad wiki of emerging artists that could be a democratic ladder of recognition that artists could climb. That is sort of what myspace was about 3 years ago but now myspace is a cyber ghetto and the internet is flooded with sites trying to be the home of emerging bands. Facebook has the clear opening to be that site but it's band/pages platform is a miserable failure which has caused bands to seek out other locations. It would be beautiful to see artists able to convert hard work and online presence directly into a sustainable career, but as of now lawyers, labels and managers still hold on to a lot of power. What is also missing from this conversation is the whole design of publishing and copyright law which is still stuck with dozens of out dated rules and complications. The complexity and arcaneness of these laws also keeps record labels in business.

One online platform that is missing is one that assists self releasing artists in distributing fair royalties to their collaborators and band members. If this platform existed, established artists might be more interested in working with self-releasing artists because there would be a clear system in place for them to be paid upon the success of the collaboration.

As we move forward into the internet-based future, artists will become more empowered and labels will have a looser grip on their work. Labels however, still serve the crucial function of providing status and resources, and they consistently are a key element as artists leap from struggling to successful. The traditional label model seemingly becomes less profitable by the day but artists are still dependent on them to provide the capital for their success.

We are in a clear transition period right now, and I'm hoping for an evolution of online tools that will bring a sustainable career more consistently within reach of self-releasing artists.

Re: The Greatest Love Of All

A Conversation with Dan Fishback

@musicisfreenow: Not feeling bad about yourself is a revolutionary act

@dangerfishback: @musicisfreenow keep lowering the bar for revolution and we’ll never have a real one!

@musicisfreenow: @dangerfishback that’s the exact misconception. We all create this oppressive society by hating ourselves and then one another.

@musicisfreenow: @dangerfishback Facism, racism, homophobia, xenophobia are all fed by self hatred.

@dangerfishback: @musicisfreenow this is too complicated for twitter. i’m responding on my blog: www.danfishback.com

***

Cesar my friend,

I am profoundly irritated by the notion that facists, racists, homophobes (etc) are all just “feeling bad about themselves.” It creates a false equivalence between the oppressor and the oppressed, casting them all as victims. In truth, while a queer woman whose life is defined by harassment might “hate herself,” the heterosexist who tortures her probably doesn’t even fully understand what a human being is – at least not in any kind of holistic, spiritual, radical way.

I think dominant culture oppressors are moved, not by self-hatred, but by self-obliviousness, and an obliviousness to the true nature of humanity in general.

Moreover, I think all this focus on the self is really counter-productive, since truly revolutionary action and thought can probably only stem from realization of the interconnectedness of humanity. Not the love of self, but the explosion of the boundaries of the self. A redefining of the self to include the entire world. Which is why “not feeling bad about yourself,” when applied to the individual self, has nothing to do with revolution at all.

In fact, I think one of the most important revolutions that could possibly happen — the restructuring of society to make our lives sustainable and eliminate the mass importation and exportation of resources — is only possible if we GIVE UP being self-involved and self-entitled. That revolution will only happen if we make profound sacrifices on behalf of people who haven’t been born yet.

The reason why these kinds of revolutions don’t happen is precisely because we love ourselves too much, to the exclusion of the outside world.

I understand the spirit of your statement — that the key to changing the world may lie in the hearts of those who are destroying it — but I think your analysis, while attractive (Who doesn’t want to feel revolutionary just by liking themselves?), is too easy.

Love & Respect,
Dan

***

Dear Dan,

Thanks for your response. I still have to disagree.

Growing up in a family of leftist organizers I got taught a pseudo-marxist ideology early on that humans are fundamentally good and because of that when they are cared for and provided with opportunity they become their fundamentally good selves. Over my life I started to doubt that more and more. As I became present to the atrocities, hatred, violence and oppression that takes place every day in our world I arrived at the idea that humans might be fundamentally corrupt.

I've changed my mind now though. Mostly through my own recent exploration of personal distress I've started to feel that oppressive behaviors and structures in society are a response to personal trauma on a mass scale. I believe that violence and oppression on the part of the oppressor is always connected and stemming from the violence that they themselves experienced from living and growing in a society which enacted that oppression on them. People aren't born homophobic they are taught to be homophobic by others who have been taught that. We are programmed with fear from the beginning and the pain and distress of that programming inevitably comes out as illogical (and often oppressive) action.

"Not feeling bad about yourself" isn't about being "self-involved" (in fact self-involved people feel the worst about themselves). It is about unlearning hatred and healing the pain inflicted by a violent and oppressive world. This unlearning allows you to escape the cycle of re-inflicting trauma on others and perpetuating oppression. Part of the reason it is so hard not to dislike yourself is that we are all taught that self-confidence and self-love is "arrogance" "self-involvement" and "self-centeredness" when actually those things are all modes of insecurity caused by distress.

Having grown up for thirty years watching my nearest and dearest re-articulate what revolution is, I now believe that revolution is has to include personal re-emergence from trauma. Just like it has to include culture, policy, and social justice.

This isn't just about racists and homophobes not hating themselves, it is about all people healing and unlearning the self hatred taught to them by a society that handed them that. Everyone is hurt by hatred.

I didn't say "not feeling bad about yourself is revolution." I said it is a revolutionary act. And a revolution is one made of millions of acts. Healing from emotional and psychological wounds, and learning to value yourself fundamentally, is absolutely one of those acts.

With love and respect,

César

Indie Music 2020

Anne Stewart who writes The Buzz for GigHive asked for my thoughts about the future of the Indie Music Scene.. The feature is here: Indie Music 2020

Here's what i wrote...

"One thing that really caught my attention in the last week is that Apple purchased lala.com, which says to me that the biggest online music retailer will be moving to a more subscription-based model and will start allowing and encouraging users to keep their music in the cloud. This probably means that an obsession over storage capacity will give way to prioritizing bandwidth and constant connectivity.

As an independent musician, I always champion the dissolution of music prisons (DRM, mainstream record stores, horded music collections) because they prevent the flow of media and subculture from reaching the listener. When everyone’s music is in the cloud it will hopefully be easier to exchange and access new streams, though maybe the opposite is true if iTunes wants to tell you how to manage your music.

Another thing that I’m pleased to see happening at Bandcamp.com is that they are offering high-resolution versions of their artists’ music. This is an exciting trend because for all the joys of the mp3 craze it has caused a real devaluing of the high-fidelity listening experience. Listening to 128 kbps is like injecting bit-rot into your brain.

That is all in the next 2 years. After that, it’s anyone’s game. A few ideas:

• Cell phones become a significant music production platform. They’ve already become home to demos and sketches for nearly everyone I know. I’m still waiting for the first #1 megahit produced on an iPhone.
• Auto-tune is going to start to sound really dated.
• I’m listening to how recording/producing is changing in indie music. Something that’s gone along with the loss of fidelity in the mp3 generation is that crisp and clean recordings aren’t so precious anymore. That used to be the signal of a professional studio but now a digital recording in a quiet apartment can be cleaner than an old studio recording with tape hiss (though now we have computer hum). So people are becoming more and more creative with how they are introducing noise and space into their recordings. Artists are getting more and more sophisticated with recording technology. I assume that most bands start recording themselves these days, so when they start working with a producer, they already have a developed idea of how they should sound recorded.
• I’m heartened that the indie music scene has seemed amenable to real sonic experimentation and I foresee that only developing further. There is still somewhat of a mandate for rhythm but on top of that you can do nearly anything and people will be interested. People are getting used to massive amounts of parallel input and maybe that opens up avenues for composers and songwriters.”

44 Considerations for Young Composers

1. Stop listening to what everything/everyone seems to be saying.

2. Then start listening again whenever.

3. Spend lots of time doing whatever you like doing.

4. Forget about everything you learned sometimes.

5. Make music that only your cat likes.

6. Music can be the wrong place to look sometimes.

7. You are very powerful.

8. You are very tiny.

9. You are perfect.

10. You are making a difference.

11. As an experiment stop trying to do the thing that you've been expecting yourself to do.

12. If you aren't doing anything you are still a composer.

13. Don't write a score for a piece that doesn't have a score just because the grant application says you have to have a score. (You might suggest that they read Varese's "The Liberation of Sound" 1936)

14. Don't take the rhythm out of your piece because "contemporary music isn't supposed to have rhythm."

15. Don't put a pulse in your piece because you think no one will listen to it otherwise.

16. Whatever your parents think about your music is fine.

17. If your significant other won't listen to your piece all the way through it doesn't mean that he/she is not right for you.

18. Read "Noise" by Jaques Attali

19. Read "The Rest is Noise" by Alex Ross

20. Music bloggers have a disturbing appetite for live and recorded music, and you shouldn't feel like you have to keep up. In fact, just don't read them unless you really like the feeling it gives you.

21. Go to the library sometimes.

22. Listen to the city.

23. Take a walk.

24. Eat local vegetables.

25. Consider the semiotics/social impact/evolution/formal structures/psychological effects of recording technology.

26.Try to imagine that sonic art (music) is the non-linguistic expression (explanation) of an infinitude of things that happened, are happening, and that will happen.

27. Grant yourself permission to write the future of humanity's organizational efforts in all areas.

28. Work with the assumption that your music has a massive capacity to achieve transformative results.

29. Consider quantity over quality.

30. Allow yourself to keep everything and forget everything.

31. If you want to say "I hate music and I'm going to do something else" just say it.

32. If you went to a conservatory it doesn't mean that you are letting someone down if you:
a. Don't notate your music.
b. Do something different entirely
c. Put down the instrument you practiced for your entire life and only play an instrument you barely know how to play.
d. Never practice.
e. Have a healthy skepticism (disrespect) for all the crap you learned in conservatory.

33. If you didn't go to a conservatory you don't need to "go back to school" and refer to 9.

34. If you are currently in a conservatory don't take yourself so seriously, remember that you are learning inside a specific institutional dynamic (point of view), and refer to 9.

35. Specify failure. Generalize success.

36. All rejected applications are valuable gifts, the summed value of which will purchase tremendous acceptance in the future.

37. When you don't get the grant you will doubt yourself. When you get the grant you will be proud of yourself and then doubt yourself. All of that is fine.

38. Be wary of out dated and newly minted sonic and musical moralities.

39. Be wary of composers and teachers trash talking "Pop Music" if they aren't referring to specific artists or musical currents. It's entirely possible that they don't know what they are talking about.

40. Be wary of the cult of the "new."

41. Be cautious fixating on new technologies just because they are new. Consider letting your musical imagination guide you to the technology that will aid in the realization of the imagined sounds.

42. Think about what caveman music might have sounded like, and what purpose it might have served.

43. Send your music to your middle school music teacher. I bet he/she will be really happy you did.

44. Make more music. We need it.


I wrote this piece in response to Annie Gosfield's Article for the New York Times website entitled "Advice for Young Composers."

Digital Artifact

My Proposals for the Future of Sounds were published in Digital Artifact Magazine Issue 3: We Made This For You Out Of Nothing.

The proposals were originally posted on the blog HERE.

Tasks

Why not re-structure and more closely examine various philosophical and linguistic approaches to sound. Below are a set of incomplete tasks and unanswered questions that might arise in relation to that re-structuring:

1. Examine the ways of hearing.
2. Discover rhythm (and secondarily melody) as sources of mimetic/empathetic experience. These musical elements engage the most primal ways of learning and interacting: imitation.
3. Take responsibility for the implications of performance. What is worth rejecting and protecting about a concert experience? Is musical performance necessarily indoctrination?
4. Admit to persona. Decide on (create) its meaning.
5. In musical contexts, explore the distinguishing qualities of prose, dialogue, narration, poetry, and lyrics.
6. Re-examine the word “experimental.” What status quo does it imply? What status quo can the idea of “experimentation” engender?
7. To what extent has inherited (evolved) neural “wiring” pre-determined a relationship to sound? In music, does the familiar only validate or does it create space for transformation?
8. In what ways do the digital music “revolution” de- and re-commodify music? How is the composer implicated? How does the role of composer transform?
9. Where does unamplified acoustic sound stand in relation to:

• Networked culture
• Simulated (virtual) experience
• Cellular and video communication
• mp3 (musical) culture
• Nano-technology
• Space travel

10. Examine the “processing” that happens to sound through every channel:

• amplification
• pirating
• distribution
• documentation
• studio production
• mixing
• mastering
• sharing
• marketing
• performance
• verbal/written critique
• repeated listening
• podcasts/radio/downloads
• co-opting
• sampling
• scoring/transcribing/arranging

A Machine That Creates Peace


Dear Friends,

The run of FUTURITY that is ending this weekend has been a really major development for my band and for me as an artist. The experience of collaborating with so many wonderful performers, designers, directors, and talented people has been an unbelievable blessing that has brought forth a really original piece of performance.

I came up with the idea for a musical about a a Civil War soldier that wants to be a science fiction writer almost two years ago. The piece started out as a goofy idea for The Lisps and has turned into a 70 minute play with 15 songs and a Cast & Crew of 18 people.

FUTURITY, at is core, is a piece about war and imagination. It's about the simultaneous human drive towards both destruction and phenomenal acts of creativity. FUTURITY is about the malleability of the past and the future. It's about the way in which a feverish drive towards innovation is what keeps us alive and what can aid in our self-destruction

I've thought for a long time that music is the opposite of war. Though I realize that music is so often used to promote war, the origins of music are in the human attempt to organize chaos (noise). Music is one of the earliest forms of civilization, and it possesses within it all the same potential for chaos and disharmony that society does.

I've tried to create a piece that speaks to the way in which I've learned to understand my life as an artist. Being a musician may sometimes feel like an exercise in futility but I know that at a fundamental level we are creating a proposal for society. A proposal for the way in which things might be organized with an eye towards community, compassion and creativity. I like to think of music as a form of Utopianism. For me, Music is science fiction.

I hope that you'll come see this piece not because you feel obligated but because we have put forth so much effort to create a piece that speaks to these ideals. We are telling the story of creativity and conflict in a time that needs so much of the former and has so much of the latter.

I hope to see you there.

Love, César

FUTURITY: A Musical by The Lisps
2 More Shows at Joe's Pub
Friday May 22 8pm
Sunday May 24th 7:30pm

www.futuritythemusical.com

Buy Tickets Here

"Music is more than an object of study: It is a way of perceiving the world. A tool of understanding. Today, no theorizing accomplished through language or mathematics can suffice any longer; it is incapable of accounting for what is essential in time- the qualitative and the fluid, threats and violence. In the face of the growing ambiguity of the signs being used and exchanged, the most well-established concepts are crumbling and every theory is wavering. The available representations of the economy, trapped within frameworks erected in the seventeenth century or, at latest, toward 1850, can neither predict, describe, nor even express what awaits us. It is thus necessary to imagine radically new theoretical forms, in order to speak to new realities. Music, the organization of noise, is one such form. It reflects the manufacture of society; it constitutes the audible waveband of the vibrations and signs that make up society. An instrument of understanding, it prompts us to decipher a sound form of knowledge."

- Jacques Attali from Noise: The Political Economy of Music

Thoughts on Cybernetics

Cyborg Lincoln By annihilist

1. Humans have a hard time imagining post-linguistic civilization.

2. Cybernetics have a popular myth:

• a. Metal (cold, hard, sharp, dangerous, sterile, durable, unbreakable)
• b. Unfeeling (computer)
• c. Destructive/Facist (weapons oriented)
• d. Viral/Power Hungry (human)
• e. Dualistic (hardware/software)
• f. Digital

3. Robots made of wood are nonthreatening. What about:

• a. Flesh (bone, organs, dead human matter)
• b. Plant Matter
• c. Elemental Particles
• d. Glass
• e. Plasma
• f. Plastic
• g. Mud (dirt)
• h. Water

4. What is the technology that will replace language?

5. When humans start interfacing with one another wirelessly ("telepathically") first it will be through a chat room template; Then direct mental language interfacing; then pure thought exchange. Humans will develop acute skills of mental compartmentalization in order to maintain privacy. Eventually privacy (deception) could fade away but it will more likely just vastly complexify.

6. Why is there an idea that man-made consciousness will be similar to human consciousness?

7. When computers gain the parallel processing power, pattern recognition, and self-contemplation of adult human brains they will likely devise their own language.

SPECULATION

Rodney McMillian, Untitled, 2007.

When computers begin to feel it will be delusion alone that is uniquely human. There are so many layers to this. Here's a fake map for the development of intelligence from the beginning of life to the materialization of intelligence. We're at about 7.8:

0. Void
1. Animation of Life
2. Multiplication of Life
3. Complification
4. Relationship
5. Linguistic Stucture (meaning created)
6. Codification (referential)
7. Extension (externalized evolution eg: tools, technology)
8. Genesis of (man-made) self-replicating species
9. Explosion of Species
10. Materialization of Intelligence (permeability becomes a sensation)

It is so hard to imagine the materialization of intelligence without feeling like you are drowning.

50 Proposals for the Future of Sounds

Martin Puryear “Plenty's Boast”

1. A digital recording is a score, performed by trained and partially equipped experiencers.

2. New bots inhabit the spaces between samples. They communicate to one another the absences and potentials alluded to by a moment of media.

3. Inter–disciplinary gave way to anti-disciplinary fades into post-disciplinary erased by the inconceivable volume of communicative possibilities.

4. One moment (in multitudes) of sound: so loud that every mobile Malleus (hammer) on earth flexes in honor of the experiment

5. Sample rate so rapid that the time each bit inhabits has been warped by the speed necessary to collect its binary name.

6. Immerse the public in Perilymph.

7. Chemical composition determines resonance. The composer is a chemist.

8. Emotional resonance is the body’s unwillingness to relinquish expressive decisions to the brain.

9. The network, starts as a string (cable). Becomes a web. Becomes a porous fabric. Becomes a metallic sheet. Becomes a dense compression of strata. Becomes a living skin inhabited by emerged consciousness.

10. The network has wildlife. Predators, Prey, Parasites, Fauna, Sickness, Herbs.

11. Design is Disease. Disease is Mutation. Mutation is Design.

12. Learn to understand memory by depleting/processing your material possessions.

13. I believe in emptiness, vibration and electricity.

14. Isolate the ingredients for your projects. Molecules, Cells, Atoms, Consciousness.

15. Dark matter is a musical frontier.

16. Space travel is inhabiting sound on pause.

17. Rhythm is the body. Headphones are disembodiment.

18.Sounds to examine: purchases, energy, children interacting on the network, the oscillation of viral exchange, the afterlife of packaging material, human migration, melting.

19. Designate each person as a sample and derive 37,792 hours of CD quality audio.

20. Screaming is a commodified point of view.

21. Vibration is an elusive business model. Purchasing power is equivalent to memory.

22. Musical creation becomes the output of networked and cybernetically predictive conglomerates. Their objectives fluctuate between arousal, placation and inciting amnesia

23. Atonal and arrhythmic recordings are subjects of anthropological discourse.

24. Isorhythm becomes an affliction.

25. Audio warfare is the subject of congressional hearings in which the public debates sonic cruelty and the woeful of lack of adequate protection for the nation’s citizens and armed forces.

26. Middle Ear nano-receptors revolutionize the memory enhancement and psycho-acoustic capabilities of multi-function cognitive entertainment systems.

27. Neocortical Sound Synthesis programs are officially added to most prenatal and early childhood music curricula.

28. Vibration from city, highway and airport noise is stored and reused via kinetic energy cells.

29. Standardized measuring of personal sound energy flux allows everyone to ascertain his or her own relative (native) receptivity (density) to experimental audio.

30. Teach fractal synthesis, electrical current phrase mimicry, breath/pulse listening, audiosomatic pain reduction, “hearing things” as composition, and sonic turmoil.

31. Post-Digital is the frontier in which ones and zeros (quantum particles) exhibit predictive behavior.

32. Bruises are bodily reverberations of compacted/inertial sound.

33. Sounds to examine: Vocal and cerebral activity during prayer, the oscillation of public opinion, internal organ noise of grain fed livestock, bacterial evolution, the numerical resonance of economic collapse.

34. Develop a new theory of musical pleasure based on perceived hype, redundancy, and novelty.

35. As a composer, expect emotional and critical sublimation from your audience.

36. Sensory dissonance on the basilar membrane (inner ear) is a widely accepted technique in popular/commercial music.

37. Auditory hallucinogenic drugs are delivered illicitly on personal music players.

38. Drum machines develop cybernetic (organic) personality.

39. Rhythm regains lifespan.

40. After the unification of Physics, composers work to make the world of quantum mechanics audible (popular).

41. Musical Nano-Drugs, which allow adults to enjoy their children’s music, are commercially available. Bots benignly invade the auditory cortex and install the neuron structures of your choice.

42. Absolute Pitch, Environmental Mute Function, Hearing Reinstatement, and Earshot Extension, are all available commercially.

43. Sound comes from the brain’s evolutionary need to fictionalize (embellish) vibration.

44. Pitch is an invented linguistic outgrowth of sound.

45. Music is a longstanding human accident (adornment) in which the brain rewards itself, and the body, for it own accomplishment and discovery.

46. Noise is a constructed regret. Fake.

47. Rhythm, as a structure, is the (a) fundamental unit of life and physical organization.

48. The composer is measured against the possibility of visceral ecstasy. She is loaded down with the failures and Gnostic wisdom of tradition. She is able to conjure and deaden. She is never taught what is available, but it is still available.

49. Recording: initially the instatement of illusionistic reverberation into the seat of authentic experience. It inaugurated a colonial structure onto the haphazard economy of musical experience and experimentation. Recording turned on itself and became the subject of it’s own gaze (colonization). Recording became wilderness anew. It seeped into the ground.

50. Music is the human effort to civilize air.