« | Home | »

Playing the Audience

Tags: |

In 1960 John Cage performed his piece Water Walk live on the game show I’ve Got a Secret (thanks to Jenny Diski for pointing it out). Back then it must have seemed like an elaborate joke at Cage’s expense. The presenter who introduces him is fatuous and sceptical, rolling his eyes when Cage tells him he is going to knock radios onto the floor (a union dispute over who should plug them in meant he couldn’t switch them on – a chance intervention he was no doubt delighted with). ‘I’m with you boy,’ the presenter says patronisingly.

Cage stands in front of a piano, and behind a trestle table laden with radios, a pressure cooker, a food processor, a vase – things a game show in the early 1960s might have given away as prizes. He walks round his set-up, stopwatch in hand, methodically slapping, tickling, blowing, spilling his instruments as dictated by his score, to whoops of mocking laughter from the crowd.

Now it’s clear that the crowd were unknowing performers: not just spectators laughing at the piece, but instruments laughing inside it. Water Music is a distillation of the sound of the contemporary American household: there’s the kitchen, with its bubbling pans and the hum of appliances; the bathroom – Cage puts the vase of flowers in a bath and waters it – and the living room, centred on the TV, blaring the chortles and howls of a peak-time game show audience.

Comments on “Playing the Audience”

  1. zbs says:

    This is only tangentially related, but may also be of interest: John Cale on the same program.

  2. Locus says:

    Watch it again, maybe. Is the presenter really “fatuous and sceptical”? And are those “mocking whoops”? The presenter seemed a little sceptical – what’s wrong with that? – but generally generous and game, and the audience – though this is harder to tell – were hardly hostile or “mocking”. Everyone seems to be enjoying themselves on some level, but perhaps without regarding Cage or his work with the kind of frowning reverence exhibited by some art historians, and it seems, LRB commentators.

  3. Geoff Roberts says:

    John Cage looks like a 21st century banker, although the tie is a bit thin. perhaps it was a satire on contemporary culture. The audience was well-behaved though, no jeering or whistling. Or whooping.

  4. Dear Locus and Geoff, I did not mean to imply that the audience or the presenter were hostile or aggressive. Just that they were mocking. Perhaps I should have said ‘gently mocking’ or something like that. My point was simply that the presenter and the crowd don’t seem to take Cage seriously, that they regard him as ridiculous – meanwhile Cage is using them as instruments, actively encouraging the sound of laughter from them (hence the rubber duck) in order to work the sound of TV into his piece.

    • Locus says:

      Fair enough, point taken re. the instigation/incorporation of the audience laughter.

      It just seemed like you were a bit too keen to frame the event as Boorish Mainstream vs. Isolated, Misunderstood Avantgardist (who – ha! – nonetheless has the Last Laugh on the philistines…)

  5. Oliver Rivers says:

    This reminds me of a story which I’m 95% certain is told about Stefan Wolpe in David Schiff’s book on Elliott Carter (I don’t have my copy any more, so can’t check). In composition lessons Wolpe would fling open the window of his New York apartment, filling the room with the clamour of traffic, and say to his students “Now compose that!” Wolpe wanted them to produce music reflecting that tumult and chaos.

    Wolpe’s own response to that challenge was to produce dense, intricately-wrought music of considerable notational complexity–the opposite of Cage’s approach, where vastly more latitude is offered to the performer. But the source of their inspiration was the same.

    I found this on the Wolpe Society website, a reminiscence by John Cage:

    “And I went several times to 110th Street, out where Stefan had an apartment with Irma Rademacher. And it was always filled with students who were absolutely devoted to him, so that one had the feeling being there that one was at the true center of New York. And it was almost an unknown center of New York. And that was what gave a very special strength to one’s feeling about Stefan, that it was in a sense a privilege to be aware of him, since it was like being privy to an important secret.”

    • Great anecdote; thanks Oliver. Wolpe’s windows remind me (!), in turn, of an interview I once saw with Ju Suk Reet Meate from Smegma (of the LA Free Music Society). After one of the group’s performances he was approached by a music student who couldn’t work out whether Smegma were schooled virtuosos playing highly complex compositions, or anarchic improvisors. Ju Suk says he was surprised to find out that one strand of post-modernist conservatory composition, and his own strand of DIY punk Improv, had both reached a point where their respective musical products couldn’t be distinguished from each other by a well-informed listener.

    • semitone says:

      That’s a great story. Milhaud used to compose with his window open: his second viola sonata has two beautiful, lyrical movements but the last is marked “Rude” and, while it’s more a musical representation of the bustle of the Paris streets, it also does sound a bit like traffic.

  6. jaspreetsinghboparai says:

    An extraordinary performance. How did all this come about anyway? I wonder how many audience members thought they were getting a variation on “Spike Jones And His City Slickers”…. Also: would the original broadcast have been afflicted with that continuous low buzz in the background, or is that merely a feature of this recording? Early live TV could apparently be preserved by something called a ‘kinoscope’ (no idea what that is, I’ve only seen the word somewhere before). Perhaps this doesn’t matter though.

    Many, many thanks for sharing this.

    JSB.

  7. cigar says:

    This whole thread has barely a single note of cticism for this composer, except for the post by Locus, who takes back his words after some hairsplitting from the author.

    Here we see the whole problem with this kind of self-referential music: it is not that it is meant for the ivory tower, for a small clique of composers and rather snobbish connoisseurs, but that it depends on the particular ivory tower of university music faculties and conservatories. This means that anyone who doesn’t choose to follow one or another accepted party line is ostracized and is lucky to find a way to do his or her own thing by say, composing for the movies.

    I was at a talk Philip Glass gave in Quito a month ago, and though he also had only good words to say about Cage’s influence on him, this was not the case when it came to the academy: he chose the harsher and longer path of slowly building a business out of his music just so he could do what *he* wanted, instead of obeying the dogma set down by some professor or self appointed guru.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...
    • pgillott on Wishful Thinking about Climate Change: Phrases like “monumental triumph” and (particularly) “renaissance for humankind” are overdoing it, but to suggest that there is no chance of ...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement