Page 34 - Composing Processes and Artistic Agency

The topography of composing work 23

196 – our translation). In some cases, composers can also resort to the technical
knowledge of developers, who will build them the software or the software-
hardware combination that they need to achieve exactly what they had imagined
musically and compositionally. This extends the composers’ own compe-
tencies at the same time as it offers software developers creative challenges,
especially when composers push the limits of what is technically possible.

1.2.3 Interacting with other composers
The data we collected focuses primarily on the composition process, which
makes composers’ relationships with their colleagues appear quite under-
exposed. However, the truth is that there is a range of exchanges between
composers. It is important for composers to have interlocutors who can stimulate
them or offer ideas while composing, who can trigger a thought process or
open up new perspectives on the composer’s creative processes. It might seem
logical that other composers in particular – i.e. genuine peers – make ideal
interlocutors because of their shared profession and knowledge, and their
similar experiences of artistic practices. In fact, our interviewees reported that
they tend to be critical of feedback from colleagues, or at times even explicitly
reject it. One interviewee said, “I don’t find it easy at all to give feedback on
compositions. That’s a really, really touchy area. And there are very, very few
people I’d ask for feedback myself.” Reasons for this vary. For Johannes
Kretz, who composes computer-generated music, getting feedback on a score
is a fundamental problem. “I can’t just say, ‘Take a look at my score, what do
you think?’, because basically the thing has to be played for you to be able to
give an opinion on it.” Scores are not an appropriate basis for feedback or
exchange of views because musical notations are only signs, not audible tones.
A composition is ultimately judged on its actual performance – its musical
realisation – which is of course tied to the musicians’ practical abilities, creative
interpretation and way of dealing with the situated performance conditions.
Interaction with other composers can of course take place during the work
process. But as Clemens Gadenstätter points out, not every idea or suggestion
or piece of advice can simply be adopted: “The logic of the composition
suddenly clicks into place, everything makes sense, but I can’tyet saywhatit’ll
look like in detail.” As Gadenstätter emphasises, this logic has no conceptual
shape. It is a musical imaginative anticipation of a work that is still being
created. “Often I can’t find the right words myself when I’m sketching it out. I
have to use metaphors, drawings, comparisons, et cetera. But the fact that it
clicks into place and suddenly becomes meaningful, that’s something […],
that’s something you sort of feel.” Based on this account, composing can be
described following Fritz Böhle as an “experience-based subjectifying action”
(Böhle, Orle & Wagner 2012: 32), where the term experience encompasses not
only past experiences, but also the actual process of experiencing. Perception
“associated with one’s subjective feeling” therefore plays a pivotal role, yet not
as “an ‘inner’ process but as a way of cognizing the circumstances”.A