Food for Thought (#7)
“To me, the greatest thing in jazz music is for all of us to be kind of spontaneously composing together, to take something somewhere and take the audience with us. That’s like the pinnacle.” — Fred Hersch
Right said, Fred.
(from “In Conversation with Fred Hersch” by Ted Panken)
I wonder if there’s a way to do the same thing in creating visual art.
Creating improv art as a group could be really fun to do and maybe even fun to watch.
I think the difference might be in what you have left over at the end.
In jazz, you would have a recording. Listeners may not get the whole experience of being in the club or the studio, but what they hear could make them say, “Man, I would have loved to be there to hear and see this unfold.”
So I wonder if a sort of abstract, spontaneously created piece of visual art would do the same thing. Would someone walk by and say, “Oh wow, I wish I could have seen that happen.” Or would they be so confused by it that they wouldn’t even relate?
What I mean is, a jazz recording makes sense. It’s not as cool as being there, but what you hear later still entertains.
Could a piece of visual “jazz” do the same?
I wonder.
29 Jun 2009 at 2:06 pm
Hi David,
That’s actually something I’m really interested in.
I’m really interested in documenting the improv process as it happens. I’ve got a project idea percolating about spontaneously creating with artists who work in other mediums. I wonder how we could influence and impact each other’s work. And I think you would learn more/see more by watching the process than viewing/listening to the finished project.
That’s why I like to watch live music, you get to hear the product AND watch the work being created at the same time.
Thanks for dropping by!
singingly,
sg
30 Jun 2009 at 11:53 am