Research for Aural Paper: Vs Interpretation (Part 2)

Some other essays within the book that stood out included the pianist and composer, Jeffrey Goldberg’s essay on ‘Improvisation as a Practice of Trust’. I noticed his idea that the body and state of mind plays an important role in the act of improvisation (referring to how one must warm up themselves as well as their instruments and connect deeply with their breath) implied an opposition to Oliveros’ ponderings on the validity of computed improvisation. The very nature of connecting with oneself in order to take part in improvisation suggests that the human condition, mentally and physically, plays an important role in the ability to spontaneously improvise. Whilst the physical condition of technology can alter the means of improvising, there is no varied mental nature to it, and rather an unwavering state of existence, reducing any kind of meaningful and emotive colouration on the outcome.
Moreover, he states that the state of deep listening is paramount to successful improvisation, as reacting to our immediate surroundings, as well as ourselves, is intertwined with it. To what degree can technology respond in the same organic way that humans can? Highlighting the inclusion of the word ‘response’ in responsibility, it makes me think of moral obligation and intuition, both of which can inform how one improvises. While there might be a machine that has or can be designed to interact with it surroundings, it would be mechanical and not based in empathy and respect of who it shares the room with.
Considering the benefits of improvisation, Goldberg explains how improvisation encourages vulnerability and intimacy with the self. To be free of judgement, and full of humility in order to engage in the process of allowing, whether the notes that one might produce are conventionally correct or not. Essentially he states that improvising can be a gateway into self growth, trusting our own intuition and accepting the here and now (presence). ‘There are no wrong notes’