Scholarly discussion of the music of John Cage.

[Rod Stasick <>]

When faced with choices, you have a number of them - 
from 2 (“yes” or “no,” for instance) on up. So, this means
that the I-Ching can be used to separate potential answers
into “chunks” of possibilities. They do not have to be equally
divisible (1-32 for “yes” and 33-64 for “no”). Having 5 choices, 
you can toss 4 hexagrams: for example: 24 / 19  / 39  / 48 
and you would have 5 divisional possibilities available:
1-18 / 19-23 / 24-38 / 39-47 / 48-64 that you would use
for the 5 different possibilities.

If you had a question that was directed at more than 64 
potential possibilities (like the 628 pages of our Western I-Ching: 
Finnegans Wake), then you could group them into chunks of possibilities
(or you could just use the 17 chapters of FW as divisions) and so on.

Yes, once you begin working in this way, you could understand how
time-consuming all of this could be and so a faster way - 
with computer print-outs - could be (and were) used.

Which brings me to the devotion that he had to this 
text-as-numerical-Oracle that so baffled me then and still does now.
As a text of interpretation, it could be wonderful, but why use such an
incredibly closed-system for numerical production?
It wasn’t an aversion to, for instance, scientifically obtainable
results coming from less-than-spiritual or philosophical areas
because, as we know, he had no problems with computer printouts
(for HPSCHD too). Even those printouts were unreliable for a time in
the early 70’s when he discovered, after using them for various pieces - 
music and texts over a period of about 4 or 5 years - that the printouts
were repeating themselves and that these resulting pieces weren't as 
random as they initially were thought to be.

Pretty much his only answer to this way of getting numerical results really 
boiled down to devotion to a text that made such an impact on his life.


Political curren(t)cy:

Finnegans Wake, Page 46:

"Small wonder He'll Cheat E'erawan our local lads nicknamed him…
… So snug he was in his hotel premises sumptuous
But soon we'll bonfire all his trash, tricks and trumpery…”

Rod



On 28 Jan 2017, at 11:43 AM, Stefano Pocci 
<>
 wrote:

Hi all,
I always wondered what chance operations were for Cage exactly, especially in 
regards of his usage of the I-Ching.
Sometimes he used it as a random number generator, which initially probably 
meant tossing the coins to obtain an hexagram, that is, a number between 1 
and 64.
Later, he used a computer generated outcome to determine such random number, 
which made his job faster.
However, this implies that his questions were supposed to receive a numerical 
answer, a number, limiting the range of possible questions. Is that so?
And finally, has Cage ever interpreted the I-Ching hexagram meaning for his 
works? Not just numerically I mean. If so, it would be really interesting to 
see what kind of questions he posed.

Thanks in advance for your help,
Stefano


*****
Now Playing:

‌Alice Coltrane‌ - Harp Solo

from: Harp Solo (In Poland)‌