10 questions about ‘línea de vacío’
next/siguiente
1 why do you compose?
I arrived to the world of composition rather accidentally as I come from a completely non-musical environment. I soon realized
that it was a good platform from which I could generate responses to several inner creative questions. I think that as long as those
questions exist I will continue involved with composition. I suspect that composition as such is not the ultimate goal but rather a
format where I can implement or translate ideas that have been stored in my mind for a long time.
2 how do you compose?
In terms of routine I'm very Stravinskian. I usually work for a regular number of hours every day. That is a somewhat painful
process since many times you just confront a blank piece of paper without many expectations of filling it up. However, that sort of
daily 'horror vacui' triggers a certain response in the shape of a 'fleeing forward' process. I am a composer that usually works with
daily units, that is, what has been produced during a day becomes a somewhat independent and quasi self-sufficient fragment
within a larger piece. This is not a diary-like process but rather the result of a method or a habit. The ultimate result of this is the
feeling of a constant beginning, the impression of being at a particular starting point every day without completely losing a sense
of continuity.
3 why this piece, now, today?
I believe that it is quite difficult to thoroughly justify your aesthetic decisions in relation to the world as many of them just
originate and manifest themselves in deeply subjective and subterranean ways. I think, however, that my piece was developed as a
bit of a comment towards the highly performative artistic environment in which we live. In fact it is a piece that explores the
negative side of a performance: the musicians and the music are placed and aimed towards the backstage, towards an intimate
realm which is relatively disconnected from the audience both visually and sonically.
4 could you not do anything better in life?
It would be impossible to answer that question accurately unless we accept the fact that there are several living replicas of myself
and we evaluate how successfully they deal with their respective professions. I hope they are not reading this questionnaire
though.
5 how do you manage to combine everyday life eating, sleeping, relationships, family, taxes and composing? Do they
influence each other? In what way?
I try to isolate as much as possible the act of composition from the rest of things, a bit like a shelter which protects oneself from
the inclemencies of the exterior world. Unfortunately, since the expenses of life are usually not covered by composition itself one
has to confront and explore other disciplines to stay afloat. I think that most composers end by having multiple faces from a
professional point of view. However, I do not believe that those experiences necessarily manifest themselves in the music I write.
6 what attracts you in the music of whom?
There are many composers whose music I deeply admire. They belong to several periods, from Dufay till Feldman and beyond. I
try not to see the history of music in a linear way but rather as a holistic present frame in which the music of Machaut, Mozart or
Grisey have the same level of immediacy. I have never been very interested in the evolution and dialectics of materials but rather
in the different ways in which they are articulated. I could therefore mention many composers that have influenced me for
completely different reasons but that would greatly exceed the scope of this questionnaire.
7 Schönberg said: The chief requirements for the creation of a comprehensible form are logic and coherence. The
presentation, development and interconnexion of ideas must be based on relationship. Is coherence in a work of art still a
valid notion today?
Yes, but logic and coherence are ‘inner’ elements, they belong to the experience and creative universe of the composer and cannot
always be clearly extrapolated to the outer world, to the average listener. That is the point of art in general, it does not necessarily
need to display clear logic, it does not need to be understandable, justifiable and give comforting answers. Quite the opposite, the
interstice between what we may understand and what we cannot grasp is what activates our experience. Questions are raised as
part of the game, and that is crucial.
I also do not believe that elements necessarily need to be presented, interconnected and 'justified' in order to build a piece of art.
Sometimes the uniqueness of an event is sufficient in itself. When we listen to a piece we establish interconnections between the
elements we are presented with, or we don't. We link those events to our experience of the world or not. Coherence is something
that is present at the composition act but it is not necessarily experienced as such from the exterior.
next/siguiente
1 why do you compose?
I arrived to the world of composition rather accidentally as I come from a completely non-musical environment. I soon realized
that it was a good platform from which I could generate responses to several inner creative questions. I think that as long as those
questions exist I will continue involved with composition. I suspect that composition as such is not the ultimate goal but rather a
format where I can implement or translate ideas that have been stored in my mind for a long time.
2 how do you compose?
In terms of routine I'm very Stravinskian. I usually work for a regular number of hours every day. That is a somewhat painful
process since many times you just confront a blank piece of paper without many expectations of filling it up. However, that sort of
daily 'horror vacui' triggers a certain response in the shape of a 'fleeing forward' process. I am a composer that usually works with
daily units, that is, what has been produced during a day becomes a somewhat independent and quasi self-sufficient fragment
within a larger piece. This is not a diary-like process but rather the result of a method or a habit. The ultimate result of this is the
feeling of a constant beginning, the impression of being at a particular starting point every day without completely losing a sense
of continuity.
3 why this piece, now, today?
I believe that it is quite difficult to thoroughly justify your aesthetic decisions in relation to the world as many of them just
originate and manifest themselves in deeply subjective and subterranean ways. I think, however, that my piece was developed as a
bit of a comment towards the highly performative artistic environment in which we live. In fact it is a piece that explores the
negative side of a performance: the musicians and the music are placed and aimed towards the backstage, towards an intimate
realm which is relatively disconnected from the audience both visually and sonically.
4 could you not do anything better in life?
It would be impossible to answer that question accurately unless we accept the fact that there are several living replicas of myself
and we evaluate how successfully they deal with their respective professions. I hope they are not reading this questionnaire
though.
5 how do you manage to combine everyday life eating, sleeping, relationships, family, taxes and composing? Do they
influence each other? In what way?
I try to isolate as much as possible the act of composition from the rest of things, a bit like a shelter which protects oneself from
the inclemencies of the exterior world. Unfortunately, since the expenses of life are usually not covered by composition itself one
has to confront and explore other disciplines to stay afloat. I think that most composers end by having multiple faces from a
professional point of view. However, I do not believe that those experiences necessarily manifest themselves in the music I write.
6 what attracts you in the music of whom?
There are many composers whose music I deeply admire. They belong to several periods, from Dufay till Feldman and beyond. I
try not to see the history of music in a linear way but rather as a holistic present frame in which the music of Machaut, Mozart or
Grisey have the same level of immediacy. I have never been very interested in the evolution and dialectics of materials but rather
in the different ways in which they are articulated. I could therefore mention many composers that have influenced me for
completely different reasons but that would greatly exceed the scope of this questionnaire.
7 Schönberg said: The chief requirements for the creation of a comprehensible form are logic and coherence. The
presentation, development and interconnexion of ideas must be based on relationship. Is coherence in a work of art still a
valid notion today?
Yes, but logic and coherence are ‘inner’ elements, they belong to the experience and creative universe of the composer and cannot
always be clearly extrapolated to the outer world, to the average listener. That is the point of art in general, it does not necessarily
need to display clear logic, it does not need to be understandable, justifiable and give comforting answers. Quite the opposite, the
interstice between what we may understand and what we cannot grasp is what activates our experience. Questions are raised as
part of the game, and that is crucial.
I also do not believe that elements necessarily need to be presented, interconnected and 'justified' in order to build a piece of art.
Sometimes the uniqueness of an event is sufficient in itself. When we listen to a piece we establish interconnections between the
elements we are presented with, or we don't. We link those events to our experience of the world or not. Coherence is something
that is present at the composition act but it is not necessarily experienced as such from the exterior.