Michael Finnissy的主題演講影片：

The video of Michael Finnissy's Keynote Address:

Click here to watch on YouTube

Keynote Address 主題演講

Michael Finnissy 邁克爾·芬尼希 

1.

This is a ‘Keynote Address’, and I am advised, by that most accessible agent of information - Google - that the principal aims of such an address are to Arouse Unity and Enthusiasm, and to focus on Issues of Primary Interest to those gathered together in Conference.

這是一個「主題講座」，並且我被最容易獲得訊息的谷歌告知，這樣一場演講，

主要目的是喚起團結和熱情，參與者們聚集在一起討論彼此感興趣的議題。

The address will be in three parts, each roughly ten minutes long. The first part contains some very general reminders about our work and responsibilities: the hard graft of Composition itself. The second will carry some remarks about the reception typically given to Creative Writing: responses to what we, or people like us have ‘put out there’.  The third updates some general conceptions about contemporary critical discourse and Aesthetic categories: the weapons carried by our judges.

這次演講會分為三個部分，每部分大約十分鐘。第一部分是一些非常普遍地，攸關我們的創作和責任的提醒：作品本身艱難的工作。第二部分將展現對於創意寫作的一些評論：是大眾對於我們、或者被歸類為「我們這種人」的作品所給予的回饋。第三部分則重新檢視一些對於當代作品的批評和這些批評中所含的一般概念和審美標準：也就是我們的評審所攜帶的武器。

We happen to be in the midst of a Global Pandemic, and we are locally under the different protective restrictions of Lockdown. We are fortunate, as practising composers we are probably less impeded than many people from following our usual work-practice. We typically work alone, at a desk, with pens, pencils and paper, or a computer-screen for company. We are disadvantaged from being unable to easily rehearse our music with other people, or to bring it to live performance in a public arena - such as a concert-hall.  But these embargoes should not prevent our imagination and intellect from taking exercise. Our brain is a muscle, and it needs to be kept ‘in trim’.

我們碰巧處在全球疫情大流行之中，並受到各地不同的保護性法規與封法限制。

幸運的是，從事作曲工作的我們，在原有的工作習慣上，可能並不像其他行業一般受到那麼多阻礙。我們通常獨自工作，在辦公桌前，只有鋼筆、鉛筆和紙，或者電腦螢幕陪伴著我們，但是疫情仍使我們處於劣勢之中，因為和其他演出者排練音樂作品變得十分不容易，我們也無法把作品帶到公共舞台，比如音樂廳上表演。 但這些禁令不應該阻止我們鍛鍊自己的想像力和才智，我們的大腦是一塊肌肉，需要時時刻刻地被鍛鍊。

We function under the generic title: COMPOSER. We are UNIFIED by possessing the special gift of being able to IMAGINE  SOUNDS,  and write them down, or otherwise record them, and also to STRUCTURE them in some way, by bringing them into interesting and satisfying relationships with each other.  ‘Interesting’ and ‘Satisfying’ are contentious terms. ‘Structure’, as noun or verb, also requires further debate, but is certainly perceived as an outcome of the activity of FORMING. FORM makes a rather better verb than noun. Terminology is definitely an issue.

我們共同在「作曲家」的稱謂之下工作，我們因為擁有能夠想像聲音，並將它們寫下來或以其他方式記錄下來的特殊天賦而團聚在一起，並以某種方式建構聲音，讓它們彼此產生出有趣和令人滿意的關係。「有趣」和「令人滿意」其實是具有爭議的術語。「結構」是作為名詞還是動詞也需要進一步的討論，但能肯定的是，這個詞代表著某種形塑過程的結果。＂FORM ＂這個詞當作動詞要比名詞更為貼切。 術語的使用絕對是個議題。

The word COMPOSITION actually implies ‘bringing stuff together’. In Latin ‘Compositio’ means an ‘arrangement’, a ‘system’ and a ‘reconciliation’. In French, visual artists refer to ‘objets composées’ - objects placed together - in an aesthetically pleasing arrangement. Pleasing arrangements and reconcilliations may be disavowed in some circumstances! Systematic arranging, according to convention or mathematical rationales, is also possible.

COMPOSITION這個詞實際上意味著「把東西放在一起」。 在拉丁語中，“Compositio”的意思是「安排」、「系統」以及「調和」。 在法語中，視覺藝術家提到“objets composées”—意旨將放在一起的物體，以美觀的方式排列。在某些情況下，創作者可能會拒絕令人愉快的安排和調和！ 根據慣例或數學原理的系統化排列也是有可能的。

In bringing STUFF together in Music, we might benefit from also considering WHAT that ‘stuff’ is. Stuff we sometimes refer to, more elegantly, as ‘material’. ‘Material’ is usually assumed to simply mean Pitches and Rhythms, but it could also be understood as the INSTRUMENT, piano or violin, or that instrument’s characteristic repertoire, or a concept like emptiness, clutter, or evenly-spaced chords.  We should consider HOW and WHY this material excites our interest, and - as we are working in a time-based activity - how we might explore it IN TIME. Even ‘letting it be’ or ‘allowing it to spontaneously react without pre-conditioning’.

在將各種「東西」整合到音樂中時，去思考那些「東西」的本質對我們來說是很有益處的，有時我們優雅地稱其為「材料」。「材料」通常僅表示音高和節奏，但也可以理解為樂器、鋼琴或小提琴，或該樂器的特色曲目，或諸如「空曠」、「雜亂」或「等距和弦」之類的概念。我們應該考慮這些材料是如何以及為什麼會激發我們的興趣，以及 - 因為我們正在進行一項由時間構築而成的活動 - 我們如何探索它在時間中的安排。 甚至「順其自然」或「讓它在沒有預先干涉的情況之下自發地反應」。

If you are at all politically minded, or concerned with your rôle in wider society, the community or the culture you inhabit - and I think we all should be - then think about how your music might make itself CLEAR.  By ‘clear’ I mean DISTILLED to a point of maximal clarity, I certainly do NOT mean SIMPLE, or SIMPLIFIED FOR POPULAR CONSUMPTION.  I will return, tangentially, to this topic in Part 3, with reference to current aesthetic categories and values.

如果你有政治頭腦，或者你關心在更廣泛的社會、社區或你所居住的文化中的角色—我認為我們都應該如此—那麼想想你的音樂如何讓自己變得清晰。我所說的「清晰」是指提煉到最大程度的清晰度，我當然不是指簡單或為大眾消費而簡化。我將在第三部分的演講中，參考當代的審美類別和價值觀來探討這個主題。

As I am sure you already know, it is not possible to TEACH COMPOSITION. The impulse to imagine sound is inherent. The desire to work with this impulse is rare, and rarely understood.It is, nevertheless, possible to teach HOW to work with the imagined, but still raw, material. The most common, and simplest, way is to model Music on its own Past. A past typically institutionalised and approved by a ‘consensus of opinion’. Or Music can be modelled, by analogy, on a poem or a painting, or a traffic jam, a steel factory in action, or the dawn chorus of birds singing, or clouds moving, the sea, thunderstorms - and so on. This, at best, requires analytical skills and accurate observation. Sentiment is not enough! Impressionism and Expressionism were both revolutionary concepts - in Painting.

我相信各位都知道，教作曲是不可能的。 想像聲音的衝動是與生俱來的。

展現這種衝動的意願很少見，也很少被理解。儘管如此，教導學生如何去運用想像中的，但尚未完全成形的原始材料是可行的。 最常見、最簡單的方法是透過音樂本身和它的歷史背景來建模。 歷史通常會被制度化，或被某種「意見共識」所認可。或者音樂可以通過類比來模擬一首詩或一幅畫、或交通擁堵，運行中的鋼鐵廠、或鳥歌唱的黎明合唱、或雲朵移動、大海、雷暴雨......等等。 這些最多只要擁有分析技術和準確的觀察便能夠做到。光有情感是不夠的！無論印象派和表現主義都具有革命性的概念—至少在繪畫之中是如此。

Both concepts were ALSO drawn from complex scientific theories about light and colour, and some heavyweight philosophising.  The Past needs INVESTIGATION, and opinion should always be challenged. We should be ACTIVE as artists, and not believe any information about our discipline (including what I am now saying) in a spirit of PASSIVE ACCEPTANCE.

這兩個概念也都來自關於光和顏色的複雜科學理論，以及一些重量級的哲學思想。歷史需要重新驗證，過去的觀點應該永遠被挑戰。作為藝術家，我們應當要積極主動，不要本著被動、接受的精神來相信任何關於我們學科的訊息（包括我現在所說的一切）。

(Musical Extract: Ukarakteristisk Marsj (1999))

http://georgehollowaycomposer.com/?p=1529

2.

I am writing this in the UK, where the best-known and most enduring ‘cultural export’ is William Shakespeare. Not a composer, but still someone who worked with pen and paper, sound, rhythm and structuring information: a playwright and poet. Shakespeare was so revered in the 19th century that it was widely thought that he wrote as if by magic, without any need of correction or revision. As much as anything else, this imagined  ability raised him above other writers and rendered him a genius. Film biographies of famous composers, like Beethoven or Chopin, have kept this falsified view of creativity alive in more recent times.

我在英國寫這篇文章，那裡最著名和最持久的「文化輸出」是威廉·莎士比亞。並非作曲家，但仍然是用筆和紙、聲音、節奏和結構訊息創作的人：劇作家和詩人。莎士比亞在 19 世紀如此受人尊敬，以至於人們普遍認為他的寫作就像魔術一樣，不需要任何更正或修改。與其他因素一樣重要，這種大眾想像中的能力讓他超越其他作家，使他在他們眼中成為天才。 著名作曲家（如貝多芬或蕭邦）的電影傳記，讓這種扭曲的創造力觀點更加延續到當代之中。

Strangely enough, it was already known, and accepted, that Shakespeare had drawn his topics from historical sources, or the works of older Italian and French writers; and indeed after the practice of ancient Greek playwrights, whose audiences already knew the plot of the play, as it was drawn from commonplace historical incident or Mythology. What was admired here was the TREATMENT, the particular VIEWPOINT or dramatic ANGLE taken by the author. What mattered was the WAY things were told, rather than the simple WHAT that was so apparent in the telling.

奇怪的是，人們早已知道並接受了莎士比亞是從歷史資料或義大利和法國老作家的作品中提取創作主題的事實。事實上，這種提取現有主題來創作的作法，早已被古希臘劇作家實踐過，觀眾們已經預先知道話劇的情節，因為這些創作取材自司空見慣的歷史事件或神話。 而令人欽佩的地方，是在於作者處理作品時，所運用的特定觀點或戲劇性的視角。 重要的是用什麼樣的方式來描述事物，而不是在講述中事物本身顯而易見的的內容。

More recent scholarship has revealed that, from first to last, Shakespeare drafted earlier versions of several of his most famous plays. This does not now cancel his reputation, but it shifts the emphasis away from the invention of stories, onto the writing PROCESS. The way the stories are transcribed and adapted.  This shift in emphasis is significant - and, as composers, we should try to reduce the amount of time spent on inventing material, onto inventing striking and original ways of working with material, exploring and transforming it.

最近的學術研究表明，莎士比亞自始至終都起草了他幾部最著名戲劇的早期版本。 這項發現並沒有使他的聲譽受損，反而讓人們將關注的重點從故事的發明轉移到寫作過程上—即故事的轉錄和改編方式。這種重點的轉變意義重大—作為作曲家，我們應該盡量減少花在發明材料上的時間，轉而發明引人注目的原創方法來處理材料、探索和改造材料。

Composers need not be afraid of making mistakes, or having to re-assess and rewrite. Making mistakes is a good way to learn, one should not be ashamed of getting things wrong.

作曲家不必害怕犯錯，也不必害怕重新評估和重寫作品。 犯錯是一種很好的學習方式，任何作曲家都不應該因為犯錯感到羞恥。

Here is a simple exercise devised by Morton Feldman:

Make a Composition with only the notes A and B.

以下是莫頓·費爾德曼（Morton Feldman，1926-1987） 設計的一個簡單練習：

僅使用音符 A 和 B 來進行作曲。

After listening to the mostly loud and extravagant displays of ingenuity for several minutes, Feldman would walk over to the piano and play, as an extremely quiet dyad, the lowest B and the highest A on the keyboard. “Sound”, he would say after a long long pause, “is not something you should be able to walk past”.  This last statement was borrowed from a painter-friend, who told him that a good painting was not something you could walk past.  Bear this in mind when you next visit an Art Gallery, and watch (perhaps with despair) as people pause in front of a painting, identify its subject in five seconds or less, and walk on to the next one.  Our needs, and concerns, might be substantially different to those of our audience. But is our work complete before it is listened to?

在聽了幾分鐘最響亮和奢侈的獨創性展示後，費爾德曼會走到鋼琴前面，並演奏，作為一個極其安靜的雙音，鍵盤上最低的 B 和最高的 A。他會在長時間的停頓後接著說道:「聲音，不應該是你能夠錯過的東西」。這句話是從一位畫家朋友那裡借來的，那位朋友告訴他，一幅好畫是你不可以錯過的。當您下次訪問美術館時請記住這一點，並且（也許是絕望地）觀察人們在一幅畫前停下來，他們用五秒鐘或更短的時間內就斷定其主題，然後走向下一幅畫。我們的需求和關注點可能與觀眾有著很大程度上的差異。 但是我們的工作在作品被聆聽之前就結束嗎？

When I was still teaching, at Southampton University, it was a regular occurrence to find at least one student in every year’s intake, anxious about their own ‘originality’, and concerned that this was being suppressed, by the apparent jumble of musical facts and techniques that needed to be assimilated.  I wonder whether Shakespeare experienced the same crises in confidence, or did he have sufficient nerve, that the NEED to write pushed aside everything else before it?

當我還在南安普敦大學任教時，經常會發現每年至少有一名學生在為自己的「原創性」感到焦慮，並且擔心被顯得雜亂而需要時間吸收的音樂事實和技巧所壓制。我想知道莎士比亞是否經歷了同樣的信心危機，或者他是否有足夠的勇氣，讓對寫作的渴望將一切其他的事物都推到一邊去？

As you might already have guessed from the references to Shakespeare, and to painting, I do not believe it is healthy for Music to exist IN ISOLATION. My next reference is to a Film Director. His work follows in the tradition of what is now called, often disparagingly, Art-House Movies. His name is Julián Hernández, and his titles, like ‘Raging Sun, raging sky’ indicate something of the atmosphere and passion of his work.

正如您可能已經從我在上述對莎士比亞和繪畫的論述中猜到了，我認為將音樂當作一種孤立的存在是不健康的。 我的下一個論述對象是電影導演。 他的作品遵循了現在被稱為（通常是帶有貶義的）「藝術之家電影」的傳統。 他的名字是朱利安·赫南德兹（Julián Hernández，1972），他的許多電影標題，比如“Raging Sun, raging sky”（《狂暴的太陽，狂暴的天空》），表明了他的創作具有氛圍和激情。

He has this to say about their structure: “My narratives are INTENDED to be disruptive, fragmented… I try to free myself from the CLARITY of plot, and invent a different structure in which I abandon the established grammar […] for a […] state of mind”. I tell you this as it is a statement I could still make about my own work. We all need to know how to make clear-headed statements about what we are doing, or have done. Otherwise our work is likely to be mis-read and misunderstood.

關於它們的結構，他是這樣說的：「我的敘述旨在具有破壞性、支離破碎......我試圖將自己從劇情的清晰度中解放出來，並發明一種不同的結構，在其中我放棄了既定的語法......為了能夠獲得一種思想狀態」。 我告訴你們這些，是因為我仍然可以對自己的創作做出這樣的聲明。 我們都應該要知道如何對自己正在做的，或已經做過的事情做出清楚的陳述。 否則我們的創作很可能被誤讀和誤解。

Here is a statement from another film-artist, writing in 1929, and this is quoted at the head of Steffen Schleiermacher’s first CD of Soviet Avant-Garde piano-music: “In the realm of art [the] dialectic principle of dynamics is embodied in Conflict - as the fundamental principle […] For art is always conflict, according to its social mission, according to its nature, according to its methodology.”  It is signed: Sergei Eisenstein.

以下是另一位電影藝術家於 1929 年發表的聲明，且這段聲明被引用到史蒂芬·施萊爾馬赫 (Steffen Schleiermacher) 的第一張蘇聯前衛鋼琴音樂 CD 小冊子的開頭引言之中：「在藝術領域，動態體現在衝突中——作為基本原則… 因為藝術總會有衝突，這些衝突根據其社會使命，根據其性質，根據其方法論而來」。這段話的署名為：謝爾蓋·愛森斯坦。

He was attempting to animate the INTELLIGENCE of everyday people through unfamiliar images, thoughts, and sounds. The challenge of this viewpoint was as vulnerable then, in an emergent Soviet Union, as it is now - in the deceitful and inhospitable marketplace-mentality of commodification, where the rhetoric is almost identical.  Our dumbed-down culture has gone soft-in-the-head, become complicit and fearful. It seems to be lying down with its legs in the air, waiting for its tummy to be rubbed.

他試圖通過不熟悉的圖像、思想和聲音來激發人們的智慧。對於上述觀點的質疑，無論在當時新興的蘇聯中，或是放到現代中來看都同樣脆弱 — 這些質疑和處於欺騙性和冷漠的商品化市場心態中的言辭幾乎相同。我們愚蠢的文化已經變得頭腦柔軟，成為共犯且變得膽怯。 它似乎是平躺著，雙腿懸空，等著人們來撫摸它的肚子。

The questions to ask are: Do I want to be a part of a wider community? Do I dare risk sharing my work with other people? What and how much should I share?

應該要面對的問題是：我想成為更廣泛社會的一部分嗎？ 我敢冒險與他人分享我的作品嗎？ 我應該分享什麼以及分享多少？

If you want to be part of a community which contains other composers, how do you relate to them? Take courage, and learn to listen to others.

如果您想參與一個包含其他作曲家的社會，您該如何與他們建立聯繫？ 鼓起勇氣，學會傾聽別人的聲音。

What can you share of your work? Have confidence in it, but perhaps best not to give too much away, hold something in reserve.

你可以分享你的創作嗎？ 對它有信心，但也許最好不要透露太多，保留一些東西。

How do we share what we know and feel? Remember that in the 21st Century great emphasis is placed on advertising. The world does not owe you a living. Unfortunately, even people in positions of authority cheat and tell lies, so try to have a clear sense of ethical and moral responsibility and behaviour. We might be special as composers, but will anybody care?

我們如何分享我們所知道和感受到的事物？請記住，21 世紀非常重視廣告。

這個世界不欠你一條生計。不幸的是，即使是處於權威地位的人也會欺騙和說謊，所以盡可能有明確的倫理道德責任感和行為意識。 我們作為作曲家可能很特別，但有人會在乎嗎？

(Musical Extract: Seven Sacred Motets, (1991) Et cum factus esset)

http://georgehollowaycomposer.com/?p=1529

3. 

I think it was Stravinsky who replied to the question “For whom do you write?” by saying “I write for myself and a hypothetical other”.  For those of us still working with non-hypothetical others who are performing musicians, we must use tact, imagination and, above all, respect.  In Busoni’s account of Music’s Social Continuum: the composer transcribes VISION & THOUGHT into notation; the performer transcribes the notation into LIVING SOUND; and the audience transcribes that living sound into some kind of EXPERIENCE.

我想，當史特拉汶斯基被問及「你為誰創作？」時，會這麼回答：「我為自己和一個假想的他人創作」。對於那些仍在與非假想對象的音樂演奏家合作的人，我們必須運用機智、想像力，最重要的是尊重。在費魯喬·布索尼（Ferruccio Busoni，1866-1924）對音樂社會連續體的描述中：作曲家將想像與思想轉錄成符號； 表演者將樂譜轉錄成生動的聲音； 觀眾將這種生動的聲音轉錄成某種體驗。

Professional musical commentary on our work, if any, is likely to come from Academics and Musicologists or - less likely to use their imagination, tact and respect - Music Critics.  We must hope that critics have some kind of musical knowledge, and that this might be assisted by what composers feed them. They might also have fed from the rich table of Aesthetics.  Here is a short list of the aesthetic categories to which our critics can refer.  Please remember: Aesthetics is very unstable territory.

對於我們作品的專業音樂評論（如果有的話）很可能來自學者和音樂學家，或者—比較不可能運用自己的想像力、機智和尊重的—某些音樂評論家。我們務必期望評論家有某種音樂知識，而這些知識的建立可能會仰賴於作曲家所提供的養分。他們也可能從美學的豐富餐桌中汲取營養。以下是一些我們的評論家會參考的美學類別的簡短列表。請謹記：美學是非常不穩定的領域。

Firstly there are Classical categories - Sublime and Beautiful, either moral, religious, political, or epistemological.  These categories are hardly ever applied to Modern Composition.

首先是古典範疇——崇高和美麗，無論是道德的、宗教的、政治的還是知識論的。這些類別幾乎從未被應用於現代作曲之中。

About 100 years further on in history Nietzsche tells us: “We have been able to create forms, long before knowing how to create concepts”.  ‘FORM’ is a much-abused word. ‘Formalistic’ came under serious fire from the Soviet Politburo in 1948, when it was considered that formal abstraction was becoming of greater interest to the composer than humanistic content. It is an idea which regularly surfaces in attacks on modernism. The date is not incidental. In 1948 it might have been apparent to Soviet Intelligence that the CIA were giving financial support to Avant-garde composers in Europe, to promote the concept of Freedom.

大約 100 年後的歷史上，尼采（Friedrich Nietzsche，1844-1900）告訴我們：「早在知道如何創造概念之前，我們就已經能夠創造形式了。」形式（form）是一個經常被濫用的詞。 「形式主義」在 1948 年遭到蘇聯政治當局的嚴厲抨擊，當時人們認為形式抽像比起人文主義內容更加受作曲家的關注。 這種想法經常出現在對現代主義的抨擊中。 時間上並非巧合，在1948 年，蘇聯情報部門可能已經意識到中央情報局（CIA）為了推廣自由概念而向當時的歐洲前衛作曲家提供財政支持。

By that time we had been told that Form was the antithesis of Matter (what ‘seems’ rather than what ‘is’).  The Free West also promoted Culture as “a realm in its own right, and the source of art’s incorrigible ambiguity” (according to Adorno and Marcuse).

在那個時候，我們已經被告知形式是物質的對立面（意即更關注於一個事物「看起來如何」而不是它「是什麼」）。自由西方也將文化宣傳為「本身就是擁有獨立的領域，是藝術無可救藥之模糊性的源頭」（這是根據阿多諾（Theodor Adorno，1903-1969）和馬爾庫塞（Herbert Marcuse，1898-1979）的說法而來）。

In the UK “Culture” refers mainly to Sport and vacuous Celebrity.  When our government finally acknowledged Covid-19, and recommended lockdown conditions for survival, someone high up suggested a campaign for those in the Arts, to re-train for a career in Information Technology. One of the posters showed a ballerina, with the slogan: “Rethink. Reskill. Reboot. Fatima’s next job could be in cyber (she just doesn’t know it yet）”.

在英國，「文化」主要是指體育運動和空洞的名人。當我們的政府最終承認 Covid-19 並建議封鎖條件以維持生存時，高層提議藝術界人士發起一項運動，這是為了讓他們能夠在資訊科技之中任職而進行重新培訓。 其中一張海報展示了一位芭蕾舞演員，且海報上的標語是：「重新思考。重學技能。 重新啟動。 Fatima 的下一份工作可能是在網絡領域中（她只是還尚未知曉）」。

From Little Britain we jump across the Atlantic to Daniel Harris and ‘styles of commercial culture’— these are Cute, Quaint, Romantic and, even in the Land of the Free, Hungry.  A small sideways jump takes us into post-modernist, consumer-aware,  aesthetics: where ‘Cute’ has held its place, according to Sianne Ngai, along with Zany - and Interesting.

從小不列顛橫跨大西洋，我們來到丹尼爾·哈里斯（Daniel Harris）和位處「商業文化風格」的地區—這些分別是可愛、典雅、浪漫，甚至是充斥自由與渴望的地方。一個小小地橫向跳躍，將我們帶入具有消費者意識的後現代主義之美學：在該範疇中，根據錫安·乃 （Sianne Ngai，1971-）的說法， 「可愛」已經在「滑稽」和「有趣」之旁佔據一席之地。

Thank you for your attention.

I hope you have had a terrific, stimulating and energising Conference.

[MF  June-July  2021]

感謝各位聆聽這場演說。

我希望各位都能度過一個精彩的、有啟發性和充滿活力的研討會。

[MF 2021 年 6 月至 7 月]

中文翻譯/Chinese Translation：George  Holloway、鄭元瑜、邱杏慈