5. 'The Future of Music: Credo'

The development of a philosophy of experimentation in the early works of John Cage (born 1912)

"I found that I liked noises even more than I liked intervals." John Cage, 'Lecture on Nothing'

In the remaining works of this period - Living Room Music (1940), the Third Construction (1941) and Double Music (Apr. 1941) - Cage returned to the use of rhythmic structuring on a micro- and macrocosmic scale, and to flexibility in instrumentation and performance. The instruction in the score of the four-movement Living Room Music that 'Any household objects or architectural elements may be used as instruments' is reminiscent of the statement quoted earlier in connection with the Quartet: '...the infinite number of sound sources from a trash heap or a junk yard, a living room or a kitchen...' And in the Third Construction, we find a wide array of instruments both trashy and exotic, ranging from tin cans and cricket callers to quijadas and teponaxtle.

The 1935 Quartet is also recalled - as is Cowell's Mosaic Quartet of the same year - in Cage's instruction that the third movement of Living Room Music (titled 'Melody') may be omitted. Here, players 1-3 use their household objects to accompany player 4's tune, which - the score instructs - 'may be played on any suitable instrument: wind, string or keyboard, prepared or not'.

in the second movement - 'Story' - the household percussion is set aside and replaced by a setting for a speech quartet of a text by Gertrude Stein: 'Once upon a time the world was round and you could go on it around and around.' The manner and gestures used here are very similar to those found in the well known Geographical Fugue (1930) by Ernst Toch (1887-1964).

The rhythmic structures of Living Room Music are often difficult to detect. This is also true of the Third Construction which, at 24 2/2 bars, is by far Cage's largest work of the period. The macro-structure, based on an examination of changes of tempo and timbre, and dynamic shapes, would appear to be 5:3:2; 5:4:5 (or, alternatively, 10:14). But the distinguishing of either of these sets of proportions at a microcosmic level is more difficult to justify: while some 24-bar units divide exactly into these proportions, others ignore them completely. Elsewhere, in any given section some lines will pay greater attention to the proportions than others.

It would seem that Cage, having devised a system through which he can structure form according to purely durational (or rhythmic) considerations, and having experimented with that system in more or less strict fashion, now feels able to use his structured forms with whatever degree of freedom he wishes (rather than letting the structures dictate to him).

This is certainly the case in Double Music, for four percussionists. As seeming proof of the flexibility of his system - and perhaps in part realizing his ambition to create 'the means...for group improvisations of unwritten but culturally important music' - Cage here writes only one (horizontal) half of the piece (i.e. the parts for players 1 and 3). Parts 2 and 4 were written by his fellow percussionist and composer Lou Harrison. The diversity of instruments chosen is no greater than in many of Cage's solo efforts:

Player 1: Six graduated water buffalo bells; six graduated muted brake drums

Player 2: Two sistrums; six graduated sleigh bells; six brake drums; thundersheet

Player 3: Three graduated Japanese temple gongs; tamtam; six graduated cowbells

Player 4: Six muted Chinese gongs; tamtam; water gong.

But the sense of collaboration is extended further by the following caveat in the score: 'Substitutions of the above [instruments], if necessary, may be chosen by keeping the S-A-T-B relation of the parts clear.' This seems to invite others to take part in the creative process.

There is also a note regarding the dynamics which "are scarcely indicated. The first note of each group of 8th notes may be given a slight accent. The piece does not progress from soft to loud but is continuously festive in intention, the changes in amount and nature of activity producing changes in amplitude. This suggests that they were not decided in advance; indeed, the implication is that they came about by accident.

There must, obviously, have been some prior agreement between the composers regarding the tempo (Allegro moderatro), metre (4/4) and overall length of the piece (200 bars). But it is in the different ways chosen to subdivide this overall length that the freedom offered by Cage's system of durational structuring, and the duality suggested by the title, become clear.

Cage's two parts appear to be written within a broad framework of 14 2 + 4 4/4 bars. As with the Third Construction there is some flexibility in the way this is handled, the music for part 1 being written particularly freely. Its apparent macrocosmic proportions (defined primarily by changes in instrumentation) of 2:5:7 are unused at the microcosmic level. Rather, the rhythmic motifs seem to be freely composed, combined and varied. Part 3, written more systematically, has a macro-structure of 7:1:1:5 (again defined primarily by changes in instrumentation) which is reflected fairly consistently at the microcosmic level as 7:2:5. However, the micro-structure effectively disappears during the macro-5 section. Once again, the motivic patterns appear to be freely composed.

Harrison, as an outsider, obviously feels less responsibility towards the system than does Cage. Consequently, he treats it with a greater degree of freedom: parts 2 and 4 are both constructed as 21 x 19-minim (i.e. 9 1/2 bar) units, with one minim (1/2 bar) remaining at the end. Harrison articulates the 21 macro-units, in both parts, by filling them with either sound or silence. If the former applies, then he uses only one kind of instrument per unit. Each of these 19-minim macro-units is then normally subdivided in the micro-proportions 12 and 1/2: 4 and 1/2: 2. (Note that as Harrison's subdivision of the total of 200 bars is not based on a square-root formula - c.f. Cage's 14 2 (+4) bars - his micro-structure cannot be replicated at the macrocosmic level.) The rhythmic material Harrison invents articulates both the macro-structure (both parts having an overall A-B-C-B-A shape in terms of the groups of motifs used) and the micro-structure (example 5.29).

The combination of the two composers' ideas produces music of irresistible rhythmic vitality. p.213-215

Double Music is undoubtedly one of the more successful of Cage's works from this period, this success stemming from its combination of stricture and freedom. The lessons learnt from this piece - and from others in the period after 1938 - were to serve Cage well for almost a decade. p.216