Hi chris,
I don't think any of J6 have (yet) consciously started to write with the
idea of performance in multiple voices in mind. Though we have
definitely thought about it, which is a shift of a kind, I guess. At the
last gig we did, the sound system was set up badly, which made us vow to
check it ourselves in future. And we've been mulling over a multi-voice
sound check piece, which would be partly functional, and partly
performance in its own right. The idea of blurring the edges of the
performance, so it's not clear where it begins, is something that is
rather attractive.
Sometimes it matters which voice and sometimes it's just that it's a
*different* voice. J6 comprises two women and four men, one of the
latter being American (the rest of us are English). That gives us a
range of tones to play with.
Dave puts an unusual point, when he suggests that poetry is principally
literary, and that performance is a diversion from this. (I'm
paraphrasing, but I hope not misrepresenting.) I've often heard the
opposite view, that because poetry was originally oral (rhyme etc being
there to assist with memorising it) that poetry *is* (pace Bunting) a
sound. I don't agree with either of these generalisations. What poetry
was, influences, but doesn't determine what it now is. Some poetry works
better on the page; some doesn't come alive until it's performed. These
days, some poetry only works as a web animation.
Of course, that's not to say that one is obliged to like it all. Just as
I don't like opera and can't understand the point of it.
I'm quite happy to perform things more than once. Each performance is a
different act - often the same words become a different poem (almost).
Best,
--
Peter
http://www.hphoward.demon.co.uk/poetry/
|