Silencing the Sounded Self, Introduction notes

Today I started rereading the introduction of ‘Silencing the Sounded Self – John Cage and the American Experimental Tradition’. This book was one of the foundations of my proposal. I started rereading because I felt I was losing track. I took some notes along the way:
In my proposal I wrote that rather than a controlling artist I want to be a coexisting one. I want to have an open-ended, unintentional and unexpected approach to my project. Although I will be following certain guidelines, I have no goal as such in mind. I want to create an experience for the user, but I don’t want to tell them what they need to experience. I do however, wish, that the experience affects them in someway, whether negative or positive.

“Changed, mind includes even itself. Unchanged, nothing gets in or out.” The changed mind is an open mind, where the ego does not control the flow of experience. The unchanged mind is controlled by the ego, which stops the flow of experience. Thus, for Cage, an openly coexistent process required a “changed mind” that could allow outside and inside to coexist. (Shultis, 1998, pxvii)

In the book, Shultis describes how Cage feels about works by Thoreau, who coexistent, and Emerson, who is more controlling. Cage feels that Thoreau’s works are more interesting because when one goes through them, one is “Surprised and refreshed” and there is “Unexpectedness” throughout.
Shultis goes on to explain that for Cage, a coexistent artist is one with nature, whilst a controlling artist feels detached from it. This reminds me of spiritual individuals and religious individuals. For me, spirituality is much more significant than religion. Religion is all about semantics, and for a coexisting artists, semantics are quite unimportant. Although, Cage admits that many artists will display both characteristics (controlling & coexistent)

Let me talk about my works and my projects in relation to what I’ve been typing above. For my degree, I directed and produced (together with a friend) a short film about consumerism, spirituality, religion and humanity. Needless to say, the film was bursting with semantics and symbolism, but to be honest, these were an excuse for me to film experimental shots. Since my degree was quite scientific, I felt I needed a reason for these shots, and thus the semantics were introduced.
For my Masters, I wish to have a different approach. Every piece of film that I shoot, and every piece of art that I scan and animate, will be essentially, meaningless. Now whether or not it evokes particular emotions or feelings in the user, that is something else. However I will not try to guide the user through a particular journey, the journey will be randomised, and the user is free to experience whatever he/she wants. I do not know for sure how they will feel at the end of the journey, and it doesn’t matter.

The visuals and effects I am currently creating are produced without any actual thought – but rather, drawing something, scanning it, and playing around with the software until something interesting emerges. For my filming, I will have a basic storyboard structure, but no actual predefined angles or storyline.

My next step will be to watch “Empty Words” by John Cage.
‘“Empty words” by Cage – “In “Empty Words,” Cage removes the sentences and initiates a direction where phrases, words, syllables, or letters are dropped one by one in each succeeding lecture until the final text consists of nothing but letters and empty space. Without semantic reference, language becomes sounds in the way music is sounds. Text and music coexist as one.’ (Shultis, 1998)