Philip Auslander Fluxus Art-Amusement: The Music of the Future? if In his provocative and eccentric book Noise: The Political Economy Music, originally published in 1977, French economist Jacques Attali presents a utopian vision of the music of the future. He suggests that the future produc- tion of music will take place under the rubric of "Composition," by which he means that listeners, who now are only consumers of music, will become its producers aswell. In Attali's view, although music once served important social functions as symbolic ritual, music is now completely subordinated to its status as a mass-produced, recorded commodity: "[WJhat was an element in the social whole appears as a work of art to be consumed." The future I music he envisions would completely reject commodification: it would exist purely as an end in itself rather than a means to profit. Attali does not envi- sion Composition as a nostalgic return to a time before commodification when music enjoyed a more important social position. "Make no mistake. This is not a return to ritual," he declares: "Nor to the spectacle. Both are impossible, after the formidable pulverizing effected by the political economy over the past two centuries. No. Itisthe advent of aradically new form of the insertion of music into communication."2 For this to be the case, individuals would have to create their own idio- syncratic music entirely for their own pleasure, without regard for whether or not anyone else would (or couJd) appreciate it. The division oflabor that cur- rently defines music production would be completely eliminated. There would be no distinctions between musicians and audiences or, for that mat- ter, between musicians and nonmusicians. Conventional musical training and skills wouJd no longer be required: everyone would be able to produce something they could call and enjoy as "music." Inasmuch as Attali implies that the perfect instrument for creating this kind of music is the video cam- era, which he quaintly calls an "image recorder," it is apparent that he aims to shatter conventional definitions of music completely. Even avant-garde composer John Cage's definition of music as "organization of sound") is not broad enough for Attali, who suggests that music need not even be defined as sound-the distinctive visions rendered by each person with an image recorder wouJd constitute their "music."4 It is worth observing that Attali IlO Fluxus Art-Amusement III himself describes Composition as "an abstract utopia," a theoretical social model not necessarily to be taken as a real possibility.S Musicologist Susan McClary, writing in 1985, identifies musical phe- nomena that she considers to be harbingers of Composition, including the do-it-yourself aesthetic and anticapitalist stance of early punk rock (which he calJsNew Wave), aswell asthe emphasis on live, multimedia, sometimes participatory performances that resist the definition of music as recordable ound to be found in the work of such composers as Pauline Oliveros.6 To update McClary's account a bit, I would note that Attali's discussion of the image recorder anticipates the dorninance of music video and its role in making the experience of popular music as much visual as aural. I will also uggest that such practices as rapping, scratching, and sampling can be seen in relation to Composition.? Each of these practices has enabled people with no formal musical training to make music using immediately available means: voices, turntables, old records. They have also helped to redefme what "music" is for the late twentieth century. Rapping is a way of making "music" out of words that are organized in terms of rhythm and rhyme rather than melody. Scratching and sampling have expanded the definition of music to include pieces constructed out of existing recordings by mechanical or electronic means. Neither is unprecedented, of course: rap is a fonn of oral poetry, and the concept of producing new music from previ- ously existing recordings was pioneered by practitioners of musique con- crète in the 1950S.AJthough the music produced by rapping, scratching, and ampling has proved itself only too readily commodifiable, as had punk before it, the impulses behind these practices suggest an affinity with Com- position as defmed by Attali. Although these recent and current musical practices illustrate important aspects of Composition, even better examples can be found in the work of a segment of the New York avant-garde of the early 19605, the Fluxus group. The ideas underlying Fluxus resonate in many ways with Attali's concept of Composition, and it is certainly the case that Fluxus "music" has never been commodified in the conventional economic sense (though Fluxus has entered the canon of the avant-garde through scholarly studies, museum ret- rospectives, and the other forms of symbolic commodifIcation prevalent in the art world). In the remainder of this essay, I will offer a brief history of Fluxus, review some of its phiJosophical bases, and identify some of the per- formance practices in which it engaged and the relationship of those practices to Composition. I will conclude by suggesting some specuJative connection between Fluxus and two other musical phenomena of the 1960s: a piece by the American avant-garde composer Ben Johnston on the one hand, and the destruction of musical instruments by rock musicians on the other. Fluxus has a complex relationship to the concept of textualjty this vol- 1I2 Contours ojthe 71leatrical Avant-Garde ume addresses. AJthough its avant-garde credentials are beyond dispute, Fluxus was not antitextual. Far from it-Fluxus artists embraced textuality in a way that their contemporaries who made happenings did not. Fluxu performances were conceived as music and were based on the textual model that informs classical music and musicology. Each Fluxus perfor- mance was the interpretation of a text, a score identified as the work of a particular composer. Fluxus did not privilege performance over text or consider performance an autonomous entity separate from text. Rather, Fluxus emphasized a text/perfonnance relationship considered anathema to, for instance, theatrical avant-gardes that have reacted against the domi- nance of the playwright. The relationship between score and perfomlance may be seen in two different ways, depending on whether one islooking at musicology or music itself. Classical musicology considers the scored work an urtext that gives rise to "a variety of subordinate and derivative texts."B In tlus respect, the musi- cological view isnot significantly different from aliterary perspective that see theatrical perfonnances as mere adjuncts to dramatic texts. Looking at the nature of musical works themselves, however, Stan Godlovitch argues that musical scores of ill historical eras are "intrinsicilly undetermined, skeletal and incomplete" works that do not determine performances in any strong way. Far from imposing textual authority, musical scores invite (Cacollabora- tion between the scored work and the perfonner. "9 Fluxus can be seen a addressing both of these aspects of music as a scored work. Flwms's under- cutting of the self-conscious "seriousness," pomposity, and elitism that char- acterize the culture of classical music mocks the worshipful attitude toward the score displayed in musicology. Yet by refusing to dismantle the basic tex- tual structures of classical music (i.e., composer, score, audience) and their canonical relationships to one another, Fluxus emphasized the potential for freedom and collaboration that Godlovitch considers intrinsic to the particu- lar textual conformation of the musical work and its relationship to perfor- mance. Fluxus: A Little History The origins of Fluxus are traceable to a course in music composition taught by John Cage at the New School for Social Research in New York City in 1958. The membership of this class included Dick Higgins and George Brecht, who wOlùd become two of the principal Fluxus artists. Also in atten- dance were Allan Kaprow ,who isusuilly credited with inventing the perfor- mance art genre of the happening; AJ Hansen, who authored many happen- ings in his own right; and others. As Fluxus lustorian Peter Frank has Fluxus Art-Amusement II) observed, "Arguably, the whole American school of Happenings came out of this class. Inarguably, the seeds of the Fluxus sensibility were sown in this class."Io Although Fluxus events are often discussed asperformance art or asa relative of happenings, the artists who made them called them music, and it is in that light that I shall discuss them here. II Whereas Kaprow and other artists who participated in Cage's class considered the happening to be anew art farn1, Higgins, Brecht, and other Fluxus artists presented performance work under the traditional rubric of music, though. the concept of music they received from Cage was hardly traditional. The Fluxus group was organized by George Maciunas, a Lithuanian inunigrant art dealer who undertook aseries of concerts and lectures focusing on experimental music at his gallery in 1961. Maciunas also designed the pub- lication of a collection of experimental music scores and writings entitled An if Anthology Chance Operations, which he hoped to continue asFluxus maga- zine. The magazine never appeared; late in 1961, Maciunas closed his gallery and fled to Europe to avoid his creditors, taking with him the materials that would eventually be published in the Anthology. He continued his activities in Europe. By September 1962, Maciunas had assembled an international group of artists and was ready to launch the first Fluxus event, the Fluxus Internationale Festspiele Neuester Musik (Fluxus International Festival of the Newest Music) at Wiesbaden, Germany. Other Fluxus events followed in Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Paris, and Nice.12 These European Fluxus manifestations indicated that Fluxus had meta- morphosed from apublishing project into aperformance organization oper- ating in the context of music. When Maciunas left New York, Fluxus did not exist; when he returned in 1963, .it was a fledgling international art and music movement. Within four months of his return from Europe, Maciunas put together a working Fluxus apparatus in New York. But whereas Fluxus in Europe had emphasized performance, New York Fluxus once again emphasized publication. The Anthology finally appeared; V TRE (or CC V TRE), a broadside begun independently by George Brecht, became the official Fluxus organ, carrying advertisements for perfonnances, sample per- formance scores, articles, and photographs of Fluxus events. Maciunas also began publishing editions of books and objects by Fluxus artists. In the spring of 1964, Maciunas opened the Fluxhall, a10ft on Canal Street, which served as his residence, a shop where Fluxus editions and publications were offered for sale, and a performance space. Despite Maciunas's authoritarian tendencies and desire to control the membership of Fluxus, Fluxus func- tioned successfully for a brief period as an artists' collective. Intense Fluxus activity began to drop off as early as 1965, when George Brecht went to live in Germany. The artists associated with Fluxus dispersed (some were excommunicated by Maciunas), sometimes carrying the Fluxus name with Contours ojthe Theatrical Al/arlt-Garde them, with or without Maciunas's penmsslOn. But most of the energy drajned out of Fluxus during the second half of the !960s. The Fluxus Sensibility Given the diversity of the artists who worked under the Fluxus banner, it would be wrong to characterize the Fluxus sensibility in any monolithic way. Nevertheless, it is worth taking a look at some of the founding ideas that informed Fluxus. Cage, who exposed the members of his class at the New School to concepts of art originating with avant-garde movements from ear- lier in the twentieth century, was certainly a major influence. Cage's definition of music as "organized sound" is a sympathetic echo of the Italian futurists, who argued both that noise could be music and that the sounds of nature aswell as those of urban, mechanized society should become the raw material of composition. I]Whereas the futurists were content to create noise as music and to re-create natural and industrial noises using special instru- ments, Cage sought to frame the sounds of life itself as music, thus achieving an identity of art and life to which the futurists did not aspire. "I think daily life isexcellent," he writes, "and that art introduces us to it and its excellence the more it begins to be like it."14 He talks of using art, of consumjng it: "We shouJd be able to consume it in relation to the other things in our lives which we consume. "15 In this regard, Cage's ideas are similar to those of dada, par- ticularly those of Marcel Duchamp, whose earlier concept of the "ready- made" implied that objects from daily life, consumer objects in particular, could be reframed as "art" by the artist's act of designating them as such.I6 Ultimately, in both art and life, Cage sees individual perception as the only valid ordering principle: "Weare concerned with the coexistence of dissim- iJars and the centraJ points where the fusion occurs are many: the ears of the listeners, wherever they are."17 Beginning in 1950, Cage advocated expand- ing musical practice in the direction of theater, arguing on perceptual grounds that that "art form more than music resembles nature. We have eyes aswell asears, and it isour business while we're alive to use them."IB In keep- ing with his desire to unify life and art, Cage's defl11ition of theater is as expansive ashis defmition of music: "I would simply say that theater issome- thing which engages both the eye and the ear. [T)he reason I want to make my definition of theater that simple isso one could view every-day life itself as theater." 19 In Duchampian terms, Cage saw daily life as ready-made the- ater. Cage's emphasis on perforn1ance that goes beyond the conventional bounds of music and his concepts of unifying art and life, of constructing art forms that we experience in the same ways as the rest of life, and of trans- FluÀ'USArt-Amusement Ils forming life itself into art resonate with the legacy of the historical avant- garde and proved of crucial importance to fluxus. But Fluxus was not simply derivative of Cage. An Anthology of Chance Operations, to which Cage himself contributed, contains writiDgs indicative of other avant-garde aesthetics of the early 1960s, the context in which fluxus arose. Among them is conceptual artist Walter DeMaria's brief essay "Mean- ingless Work" (dated 1960). AJthough DeMaria was not a Fluxus artist, the proposal he makes in this essay reflects exactly the kind of thinking that ani- mated Fluxus. Meaningless work is obviously the most important and significant art form today. The aesthetic feeling given by meaningless work can not be described exactly because it varies with each individual doing the work. ... Meaningless work can not be sold in art galJeries or win prizes in museums .... By meaningless work Isimply mean work which does not make you money or accomplish a conventional purpose. For instance putting wooden blocks from one box to another, then putting the blocks back to the originaJ box, back and forth, back and forth, etc., is a fine example of meaningless work.20 DeMaria clearly shares with Cage aDd the historical avant-garde the idea that everyday activity can be understood as art. But there are also crucial differ- ences in their respective fornmlations. Whereas Cage argues that art can pro- duce a fonn of attention through which everyday life can be perceived asart, DeMaria suggests that everyday activity must be divorced from its quotidian context to function as art-it must be rendered "meaningless." DeMaria's explicit stance against the commodification of the artwork differs from Cage's comment that we should consume art in the same ways as we consume everytlùng else. There isalso an element of gratuitousness in DeMaria's con- ception of "meaningless work" that is absent from Cage but present in fluxus. WhiJe Cage's notion that any sound can be music may seem gratu- itous by comparison with more traditional definitions, his fomlulation is in service to a concept of realism. The arbitrary elements in his music make it, in his view, a more faithful representation of the arbitrariness of real experi- ence. As his use of the word meaningless suggests, DeMaria does not invoke such high-nùnded principles. Finally, and most important, Cage's ideas are based on essentially conventional assumptions about the relationship between the composer (and performer) and the audience. For Cage, the audience makes the ultimate synthesis of the materials offered to it by the composer and performer, but does not participate in the production of the work itself, only in its reception. In this respect, Cage isat odds with the avant-garde ten- 116 ContollTS ojthe Theatrical Avant-Garde dency toward decentralizing authorship by creating performances based on collaboration between performers and audience members or by breaking down that distinction. By contrast, DeMaria does assault the performer/audi- ence distinction: "meaningless work" issomething you perform for yourself You perform the work and are also the sole audience for that performance; you are simultaneously the only producer and the only consumer of the per- formance. A manifesto-like statement by George Maciunas, circa 1964, gives a sense of the Fluxus synthesis of these ideas. Opposing art to Fluxus art-amuse- ment, Maciunas proclaims that To establish the artist's nonprofessional status in society, he must demonstrate the artist's dispensability and inclusiveness, he must demon- strate the selfsufficiency of the audience, he must demonstrate that any- thing can be art and anyone can do it. Therefore, art-amusement must be simple, amusing, unpretentious, concerned with insignificance, require no skill or countless rehearsals, have no commodity or institutional value. The value of art-amusement must be lowered by making it unlimited, massproduced, obtainable by all and eventually produced by all.21 The idea that "anything can be art" comes from Cage and Duchamp, of course; Maciunas also retains Cage's idea that the artist has aspecific function, which can be distinguished from that of the audience-at least untiJ everyone becomes an artist. Maciunas's opposition to commodity and institutional value in art clearly resonates with DeMaria, as does his idea that art-amuse- ment dwells on insignificance. The term art-amusement itself points to an aspect of Fluxus that isnot foregrounded by either Cage or Demaria: arobust sense of humor. AJthough Fluxus was very much a product of the kind of ruminations on the nature and limits of art in which Cage and DeMaria were both engaged, it inflected those ruminations with an antic sense of humor that was frequently manifest in the rowdiness of Fluxus performances. Plac- ing Fluxus at the juncture of high-art avant-gardism and more explicitly comic or ludic traditions, Maciunas concludes that "it is the fusion of Spikes [sic] Jones, vaudeville, gag, children's ganles and Duchamp." It isworth noting that Maciunas took very seriously the populist, demo- cratic ideology of Fluxus he alludes to when he talks about mass production and mass accessibility. That kind of mass production was what Maciunas strove for in the Fluxus program of publishing books and multiples. Like André Breton, the "pope" of surrealism, Flux pope Maciunas tried to align Fluxus Art-Amusement 117 his group with aleftist ideology. Ultimately, Maciunas was no more succes~- ful in imposing that ideology on Fluxus than Breton had been with the sur- realists. Fluxus "Music" r have already referred to Fluxus productions as "performances" and men- tioned that they often have been grouped with other forms of perfonnance art of the 1960s and 1970s, to which they certainly bear a family resemblance. Itis crucial to keep in mind, however, that unlike the makers of happenings and other fonns of performance art, Fluxus artists generally defmed and pre- sented their perfomlances as music, often at music festivals and venues such a the Camegie Recital Hall. Like classical music, Fluxus performances were generated from scores. Unlike traditional classical music notations, these scores are usualJy verbal, though some involve graphics. By preserving the basic textual structure of classical music, Fluxus was able both to mount acri- tique of the cultural pretension surrounding classical music and to avail itself of the indeterminate, collaborative aspects of the musical score as a textual form. Rather than presenting an exhaustive account of the perfonnances done under the Fluxus banner or attempting to address the work of all par- ticipants, I will focus here on two types of pieces: satirical, sometimes violent, commentaries on the conventions of musical perfomlance, including the uses of musical instruments, and gentler, more contemplative works. One of the least violent of Fluxus compositions that nevertheless involves the abuse of a musical instrument isBenjanùn Patterson's Variations Jor Double Bass,22an instrument Patterson hinlself plays. The score reads, "17 variations are pelfomled, such aslocating pin of bass over location of perfor- mance on map, attaching clothespins on strings and rattling them, agitating strings with comb, corrugated board, feather duster or chain, eating edibles from peg box, posting a letter through thefhole, etc., etc., etc."23 Through the indignities to which he subjects an instrument important to both classical music and jazz, Patterson pokes fun at the status of musical instruments a sacred objects. He even makes ligh.t of the avant-garde's own mockery of that sacred status. Placing clothespins on the bass's strings is reminiscent of the kinds of "preparations" Cage made in his pieces for "prepared piano," such as the Con.certoJar Prepared Piano and Orchestra (1951), for which the piano is altered by the insertion of various wooden and metal objects into the strings. Cage was concerned in those pieces to widen the piano's timbral range and to introduce an element of chance into piano playing, since the exact behav- ior of the elements placed on the strings cannot be predicted. Patterson's piece can be seen as satÎ1;-icalof Cage's intentions. The musician seems to be 118 Conto!1r5 ojthe Theatrical Avallt-Carde preparing the bass, but never playing it. Some of the "preparations," such as posting a letter through the hole, are comic bits with no specificaJJy musical significance. Patterson emphasizes the performative (visual) side of Cage's approach at the expense of its musical (aural) aspect. In this way, the Fluxus definition of music was even more radical than Cage's. Whereas Cage posited that any sound COlùdbe musical but defllled the realm of the gestural as the- ater, Fluxus asserted that music need not produce sounds but could consist solely of performed actions. Patterson's misuse of his bass and mockery of musical conventions are mild in comparison with the humiliations suffered by music and its instru- ments at the hands ofNamJune Paik, the well-known video artist who was a Fluxus mainstay in the 1960s. Paik's pieces are often sensationalistic and overtly aggressive. At the Dusseldorf "Neo-Dada in der Musik" concert in 1962, Paik performed his most notorious piece, alte for Solo Violin, by rais- ing a violin very slowly over his head, then bringing it crashing down on a table. Whereas Patterson's assault on his bass is essentially good-humored, Paik's performances were often perceived as expressionistic and fueled by strong, negative emotion on his part. Dance and performance art critic JiJl Joh.nston, writing in the Village Voice,noted in her review of the 1964 FILLxus concert at the Carnegie Recital HaJJ that whereas Paik had previously per- formed One in a detached manner, on this occasion he seemed genuinely enraged.24 In his Suitefor TransistorRadio, Paik suggests disrupting asymphony con- cert by playing a portable radio between movements, adding, "I love quite much the distorted twist coming loudly from the cheap transistor radio of a teenager. "25In th.isscore, Paik takes on the role of the boor present in every symphony audience who exhibits a lack of understanding of the conventions of symphony audience behavior by applauding between movements and exaggerates it through an even less acceptable piece of behavior. By implying that the radio should be playing popular music, Paik also proposes achallenge to the distinction between the symphony as high art and the twist as popular culture. To play the twist between movements of a symphony is to create a musical work incorporating both.26 It is worth comparing Paik's radio piece with Cage's Imaginary Landscape NO.4 (1951) "for twelve radio sets playing twelve different programmes simultaneously, with their tuning, dynamics and durations (whether of sound or silence) aJJ detennined by chance."27 In Cage's piece, the random noise produced by the radios under Cage's arbitrary manipulations becomes music; for Paik's piece to have its disruptive effect, the radio must be perceived as producing noise that is unacceptable within the context of symphonic music. Mter all, if the audience is reaJJy open to hearing all random sounds indiscriminately asmusic, itwould not be upset at Paik's playing a radio during the symphony, and his gesture would not be Fluxus Art-Amusement 119 provocative. Whereas Cage uses radio noise to expand the definition of musi- cal sound, Paik reifies the existing, conventional definitions against which his piece isan aggressive provocation. Paik's Étude PlatOlÛque I, like Patterson's Variations, satirizes classical and contemporary music simultaneously. The score reads, in part: "play Beethiven's [sic] Krutzer [sic] Sonata very sincerely with violin woithput srtring [sic] and piano without harnmer." This silent Étude clearly evokes Cage's well-known 4' 33" (1952), a piano piece whose score is blank. The idea of Cage's piece isthat aJJsounds occurring in the perfonnance space dur- ing the stated duration of the performance constitute music. Cage's piece i expansive in spirit, inviting the audience to embrace the broadest possible definition of music. By contrast, Paik's Étude, like his Suite Jor Transistor Radio, is an act of aggression against the limited definition of music implicit in the classical tradition. While Suite interpolates foreign musical sounds into asymphony, thus sullying its pU1ity, Étude isan assault on one of the icons of classical music. Whereas Cage's 4' 33" implies that a new fom1 of perception can be achieved within the musical, perfom1ative, and cultural conventions of classical music, Paik. takes those conventions to be rigid ideological struc- tures, then attacks them. Cage seeks to create anew paradigm for music; Paik limits himself to criticizing the existing paradign1. Paik attacks Beethoven by reducing one of his best-known compositions to silence. Rather than using that silence to focus attention on the nonmusical sounds the audience ishear- ing and proposing they be heard as music, in Cage's fashion, Paik draw attention to the musical sounds the audience is not hearing-the silenced Kreutzer Sonata-and on Paik.'s ability to render mute the great Beethoven. Like Patterson, Paik also draws attention to the performance conventions of classical music: with Beethoven silenced, the musicians' gestures as they mime the effort of playing Beethoven "very sincerely" become the perfor- mance. Music as an audible phenomenon is replaced once again by music as a visual phenomenon. George Maciunas, too, attacked musical conventions in his work. Like Paik's One Jor Solo Violin, Maciunas's destructive pieces are acts of violence against musical instruments. Carpenter's Piano Piece consists of nailing down each key of a piano, from lowest to highest (in a photograph, Maciunas is seen performing the piece on what appears to be a derelict instrument). Hi SoloJor Violin (1962) isrelated to Paik's violin piece: "Old classic isperformed on a violin. Where pauses are caJJed for, violin is mistreated. "28 The strings are scraped and broken, pebbles placed inside and shaken, the violin issawed, drilled, and hammered upon, dropped, bitten, ripped apart, and fll1aJJy thrown to the audience in pieces. The affinity with Patterson's Variations is also apparent. But whereas Patterson's abuses of the bass are whimsical and essentially nondestructive, Maciunas's are violent and polemicaJJy anti-high