The Theatrics of Performance

I'm not so ridiculous as to assume that one's perception of a musical performance can be separated into entities that rightfully coexist but are independent–sound content and gesture. But I have recently become very aware of the fact that whether people realize it or not, gesture or the theatrics of a performance (and I'm talking specifically about a musical performance) have far more of an effect on why they do or do not enjoy something. And maybe I'm a little biased and overly wishful that people would open their ears and close their eyes a little more often, but this says to me that people aren't listening.

I had a recent experience where someone accompanied me to a free improvisation performance. The performance was fantastic. My company enjoyed it as well, but what they noticed was certainly geared toward the gesture. "Sneezing" into the clarinet. Banging on the piano. And yes, these were integral parts to the performance, but describing them in such ways allows many to laugh or smirk at what in reality are truly interesting sounds made by seemingly absurd gestures.

Now before I sound too snarky about my listening habits and my expectations of the audience as a listening body even those just introduced to what they're seeing, let me point out that this encounter reminded me so much of my first reactions to music made in similar fashions. I was fascinated with the how and not really the result. It was only upon consideration after consideration of "why would people make music like this?" that I finally stopped and listened. And then I finally got it. There are far more interesting sounds in this world that don't rely upon melody or rhythm or being "in-tune". These sounds just exist, and, as composers or improvisers, there is an interest in allowing others to hear just what you're hearing and hope that they at least find some hint of what initially intrigued you–that sound that caught your ear, standing alone or following another.

Is this why people don't attach to certain works? Not just musical, but any creative body. As an audience, do we get caught up with the surface without bothering to look deeper?

So how do we show an audience these sounds without the "unmusical" gestures that accompany? If the gestures do distract first time audience members, are we really showing them what we want to? What about removing the gesture altogether? Something seems missing. The point of performance becomes downgraded. For myself, I find recordings of whatever unusual sound played through loudspeakers just don't cut it. They keep the spectral content but change the spatial. There is a clear change in the sound that was originally so interesting. Not that this destroys it, but it needs to be considered.

I realize that I sound overly idealistic. I'm not. An artform will never be just about the basic pieces that it claims to use. Sound is not all there is to music. Color and depth are not all there is to the visuals. Dialogue is not all there is to theatre. There will always be these other things that we digest without thinking about. I just hope we can all take in enough to be able to get past the surface–those features so easy to identify–and try to look for or hear what else is around the corner, beyond the accessible.