Re: more on 0'00", in 'For the Birds'

On 10/26/2011 02:47 PM, Matt Rogalsky wrote:
> I woke up this morning remembering another point of reference for this 
> piece.
>
> There is an interesting brief discussion about /0'00"/ at the 
> beginning of the 9th interview in /For the Birds/, in which Cage 
> describes the piece (and other "zero time" actions) as at least partly 
> a counter-capitalist exercise (a way of making work, without 
> deliberately producing a saleable 'object', if I understand the 
> concept). This is circa 1968, not sure of the exact date of the interview.
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Daniel Charles: You were talking about our getting rid of the profit 
> motive and employment. That, of course, would be ideal. In reality, we 
> are self-employed and active. We go on living. Through your work, you 
> yourself provide and example of the most painstaking work. Can you 
> clarify your own 'motive'—which aims towards the non-act—on a more 
> technical level? What role, for example, does time—as you conceive it 
> in your latest scores—play?
> […]
> when you performed in Gordon Mumma's /Configuration/ last July, your 
> participation was musical as well as theatrical. It was called 
> /0'00"/, in contrast, it seems to me, with /4'33"/, which is a more 
> conventional musical work in the sense that it marks its own temporal 
> limitation, a time signature. How would you define this 'zero time' 
> characterizing your latest works, which complicates the distinction 
> between music and theatre, without erasing its 'musical' aspect?
>
> Cage: 'Zero Time' exists when we don't notice the passage of time, 
> when we don't measure it. [/Cage's footnote: This expression 'zero 
> time' comes from Christian Wolff. He was the first to use zero time in 
> his compositions, concurrently with clock time./]
>
> Charles: So we should be in zero time all the time, so to speak?
>
> Cage: Sometimes we are and sometimes not. I mean that when I work on 
> the piece you mentioned, or 'in' that piece, I am indeed in 'zero time'.
>
> Charles: 'In' zero time, there's no room for measurement. If I 
> understand you correctly, measure is a variation of the 'profit 
> motive' you want to eliminate.
>
> Cage: Naturally, but that doesn't stop me from working, from doing 
> what my work requires. The difference is that I am no longer working 
> towards my envisaged end, that it, in line with the economy.
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Cage and Charles go on to talk about Cage's third 'silent' piece which 
> involves two or more people playing a game such as chess, with actions 
> again highly amplified. "A bridge or chess match, or any game at all, 
> can become a distinct—another essentially silent—musical work."
>
> Does this third 'silent' piece exist as a published score? Perhaps 
> this connects somehow with /Reunion/ (also 1968), although in that 
> collaborative performance the game players' actions were not amplified.
>
> best,
> MR
>




Hi there, I jump in a bit late on this interesting, funny (but serious) 
discussion about /0'00"/ and I was about to say that its title reminded 
me of the /time zero/ concept. However, Matt brilliantly served me the 
reason why I was connecting the title to such idea: the uncanny 
conversations between John and Daniel featured in /For the Birds/ which 
I have been leafing through an uncountable number of times:-) That says 
it all.

I might be wrong on the following but my way to see /0'00"/ is that 
whenever we are completely involved with what we're doing, the passing 
of time is irrelevant and can't be measured (time flies, right?) so 
we're in the time zero (here and now). Amplifying the whole process 
we're into brings in the musical (sound, ears) element, hence the piece 
can be regarded as a piece of music. I second David's 1962 quote from 
Conversing with Cage and Joseph's planned rendition of the piece. A 
pop(corn) remix of it, as it were:-)

Fascinating discussion... Cage's ideas always leave so much room to 
reflections of all kinds. Thanks to all contributors.

-- 

Stefano

"She's wearing nothing but a smile"