Today I started to read the commentaries on my upgrade commentary, made by Steve Potter. On this page, of the daily blog, I decided to document some of the notes by Steve Potter and some of my responses to his notes.
Page 1 and 2, about ‘...from the last breath’ and ‘Redfefinition...’ Steve Potter (S.P) says: “you’re telling us stories of your experience. But for those there is no reflection on how these experiences reflect a wider cultural context.”
Page 3, about the questions I made, S.P says: “what would enable you to answer such a question? Are you simply interrogating what you like? Where is the reflection on where these likes come from? That would open this auto-ethnographic account into a truly auto-ethnographic one.”
Page 4, about what I am aiming to do as a composer, S.P says: “Truism, to obvious.”
On the same page, where I said that I can define a context, S.P says: “reductive sense of context; an individual cannot, on his own, define a cultural context; we can define the context whith some ideas, in a limited way, within a work, which it self appear within a cultural context.”
Page 8, about end of the introduction, S.P says: “The discussion of other composer’ work is fine, but it should be tied in with more specific research issues that you are working through in your own work. Right now there is sense that you have no questions, and thus nothing motivating your work.”
Page 9, Steve considered that the “ethno” part of the auto-ETHNOgraphy is missing.
Page 10, about foodnote No. 19, S.P says: “Just do it! Don’t tell how you’re to do it”
Page 12, about Takemitsu’s harmony, S.P says: “it looks derived from Messiaen’s modes; it’s not nearing as clear and tonal as your sonata.”
Page 15, about Colours (in circle), S.P says: why should the reader care about that you blogged about your piece?”
Page 22, about the most important part in the marimba piece, S.P says: “why is this the most important part?”
My general notes and responses:
It’s missing in all the document the cultural impact in the way I’m using auto-ethnography. S.P says in Page 3, “again, this is autobiography, but the meta-reflection does not contain an ethnography dimension (there’s no wider cultural awareness here).”
No Spectralism, no post-spectralism, no minimalism, no post-minimalism or any any other fucking label.
If I want to use auto-ethnography, fine! But, what’s the cultural awareness of using it:
difference between me and people from other countries or backgrounds, which could be: attitudes or values.
Why blogging about my work is important, not only to me but also for the others?
Be careful with:
Redundant stuffs as:
Basic elements of composition
Circle of 5th to transpose chords - if you want to say this, fine! But you need to explain it more: in a way of more detail and don’t be afraid to show what you found to the world.
If you cite someone, you need to be clearly aware that that sentence or citation is related with what you’re going to write next or you already wrote before (example in page 6).
If you have a mistake fine, However, you need to use more a self-critique tool. S.P says: “realising you made a mistake is not the same as self-critique - at least, it is a trivial example of self-critique.”
Good notes and responses by Steve Potter:
Social netwroks - Jazz - Jacob, on page 16
Page 22, move the last not not to the harmonic series closer to the fundamentals to create noisier result.
Page 23, Jumps between notes and kept the fundamental always present in the low register. Also, making the ascending line with the motifs using the partials (see example)
Page 32, 33 the opposite pole of the harmonic series.