Read on Twitter
I’ve written elsewhere that I think what I do isn’t ‘free improvisation’ even as my practice is entirely improvised, and doesn’t enroll notation. [1/5] https://twitter.com/hanearlpark/status/1231005282211442695
I think more than a little of that has to do with my interest in idiom and idiomatic gravity; of harmony, say, or melody or rhythm or groove or orchestration. [2/5]
I don’t mean using the idiomatic in a collage (a kind of Modernist Post-Modern affect that I really don’t relate to), but taking those voices (of idiom, of tradition, of the vernacular) seriously; to engage, to refute, to refuse, to embrace, to orbit, to surrender to. [3/5]
It occurs to me that the persistent dogma that post-Darmstadt scratchy-bloopy-bleepy-klangies are a kind of ‘democratic neutral-ground’ reflects a kind of liberal wishful thinking (and it’s _some_ fantasy). [4/5] https://twitter.com/hanearlpark/status/1225797870747516931
Isn’t asking improvisers to ‘behave’ this way—to actively purge idiomatic impurities—in order to ‘ease’ socio-musical interactions something akin to, say, asking people to be ‘less queer’ at gathering to make straight people feel more comfortable. [5/5]
