Among classical musicians, there is a tendency to define our profession more by craftsmanship than artistry. In our artworld a musical performer is typically conceived of as a transparent medium for the composer’s supposed intentions (Leech-Wilkinson, 2020). The composer’s intentions “are believed to be of overriding importance, and thus there is a strong moral imperative not to perform scores non-traditionally” (Leech-Wilkinson, 2012, para 3.3). How can we reclaim agency and liberty in the process of shaping music? In this exposition, a storytelling approach is applied to the performance interpretation of a scored composition, with the aim of becoming a more daring, personal and authentic interpreter.
Musical scores, and certainly some of the modernist flute repertoire, can be very technically demanding. When studying such scores, a performer may just aim to learn the figures on the score and leave the question of interpretation for later. This was my experience when studying and performing Luciano Berio’s iconic Sequenza I for solo flute for the first time as a music student in the late 90s. While it was composed in 1958, Sequenza I (Berio, 1958) is still regarded by flautists as a “contemporary” piece. However, it might be more accurately described as a "classic modernist work". The original 1958 edition, which used a form of spatial notation, was revisited by the composer in 1992 (Berio, 1992) and re-published in a standard musical notation. I am interested in the different forms of articulation of rhythmic structures in the two scores, and how a cross-comparison may reveal new approaches, with regard to the temporal shaping. In this process, I would like to consider the composer’s intentions while simultaneously seeking to re-imagine the interpretative process.
My performance of the Sequenza I, after completing my exploratory research, is displayed on this page. Follow the modules to the left to take part in the exposition.