I thought the American Mavericks Festival was absolutely fantastic! It was really a wonderful experience to be able to hear so many seldom performed works in a single week.

The first concert was an amazing kick-off to the whole thing, particularly the Cowell concerto. I was really impressed with how lyrical Jeremy Denk’s playing was, even though the majority of the piano part is cluster chords. I think it’s really a testament to how powerful these kinds of sounds can be when treated seriously rather than as a bunch of gimmicky effects. I also really enjoyed Mason Bates’ piece, and the Harrison concerto.

I seem to be one of the few among the people that I’ve talked to that actually enjoyed the performance of the Cage on the second night. However, I didn’t really consider it to be a piece of music. The work seems much more in line with the performance art and fluxus movement that were taking place at the time, and I think it’s helpful to view it in that context more than in the context of the concert hall. The rest of the concert was full of great music, although I didn’t care too much for the Adams; I’m a big fan of his music, but “Absolute Jest” felt really unfocused to me.

The third concert was probably my favorite night of all. I was unfamiliar with the Ruggles piece, and I ended up really enjoying it. From what I had read about Ruggles, I was surprised at how colorful and delicate the piece was at times. Feldman’s “Piano and Orchestra” and Ives’ “Concord Symphony” were probably my two favorite pieces on the whole festival.

I have to admit that I was a little let down by the chamber concert. The first half was fine, but the second half didn’t seem to balance out the concert very well. I found the Monk piece uninteresting, and the Subotnick seemed overly long, and didn’t benefit from the poor audio quality of the speakers in Rackham.

As a side note, I must say that I was somewhat upset at the Friday night concert when, after I was seated, I overheard the ushers continuously bad-mouthing the program from the previous night to each other and to the other incoming patrons. While they are certainly entitled to their opinions, it’s incredibly unprofessional for the people representing the UMS to speak so derisively of their events.

The Andersen Project was absolutely fantastic! Yves Jacques’ performance was truly mesmerizing, but what really drew me into the play was the staging. I was amazed at how clever and innovative the different sets were, and how effective the use of lighting and projection was. The cinematic quality that the staging gave the play was really amazing. During the train sequence, I couldn’t help but think that it was almost like I was watching a sequence in a movie, the way that time seemed to speed up and then slow down again. All around, a really wonderful production.

The Hagen Quartet put on a truly amazing performance. I was impressed by how many risks they took in their approach to playing such well known pieces. Their exaggeration of articulation and dynamics made the pieces much more visceral and dramatic, and avoided the overly perfect nature that we’ve become accustomed to in classical music. I agree that single composer concerts are not always the best of ideas, but I felt like there was enough variety in the quartets to keep it interesting.

The Tallis Scholars concert was very well done. I’m not a big renaissance music fan, but I thought there were several moments in the Gesualdo that had some genuinely surprising moments, especially in the harmony. However, it would have been nice to hear some of Gesualdo’s secular music, which is much more “maverick” than his sacred music.

I was incredibly excited to attend a live performance of “From the Canyon to the Stars.” I’ve been a fan of Messiaen’s music for a while, and it was wonderful to have the opportunity to see such a landmark piece in concert. I was also interested in the concept of having the music accompanied by a film. Multimedia presentations of works can be a wonderful way for us to take a new look at an established piece.

First of all, the Hamburg Symphony’s performance of the piece was absolutely fantastic, and the soloists were really outstanding. Messiaen’s music is incredibly rhythmically and harmonically complex, and it was wonderful to hear it played so expertly.

That being said, I, like many others, was not terribly impressed with the film that accompanied the music. As a whole, I didn’t feel as if the film really enhanced or in any way positively affected my conception of the music. That is not to say that I thought that the film was completely without value. I entered the performance with little to no expectations of what the film would contain, and after reading the program notes, I was given the impression that the film would at least loosely correspond with the various movements and themes of the music. While I think that the film did in some ways reflected the themes that Messiaen sets forth, I think there were a lot of ways in which it went beyond the music and set forth its own agenda. While I don’t necessarily think this means that the film was a failure, I think it raises some troublesome issues.

It is difficult to view the performance as a collaborative piece, given that the music and film were not created in conjunction with each other (the music being close to 40 years old and Messiaen having been dead for the last 20). As with many of Messiaen’s works, the piece is also full of very specific references and programmatic elements. While I didn’t expect the film to be merely a slideshow of majestic Western scenery, I don’t know how faithfully it reflected Messiaen’s music. This kind of juxtaposition of ideas is not in any way an invalid artistic statement, but it seems a little difficult to justify without the involvement of both the filmmaker and the composer. There were many instances (such as the second large Piano cadenza in the 9th movement) when the character of the music was completely contradicted by the more confrontational and abrasive elements of the film. While this could have been Landau’s intent, I am left to wonder whether Messiaen would have appreciated the jarring effect that this created in his music. I also felt that the film tended to take focus away from the music, sometimes to an excessive degree. Despite the “collaborative” nature of the project, the music and image spent more time clashing against each other than they did creating a unified artistic vision. It was also very difficult to understand how much of the film related to Messiaen’s ideas, such as his use of bird songs or the profound influence of his religion on the work. It was almost as if two separate things were happening at once, and while there is nothing wrong with that, it seemed to go against the stated intent of the piece. It is almost impossible to conceive of how one could “collaborate” with a dead composer by so drastically deviating from the complex framework that is already laid out in the music.

Again, I do not necessarily think this means that the film was an outright failure, just poorly paired with a work that is already full of so much meaning and significance. I think the film would have been much better served by being part of a true collaborative process, with music that was created with this pairing in mind. While the effect might have been exactly the same, it would have reflected an intent on the part of both the composer and the filmmaker. As it was, the work seemed to only reflect an intent superimposed upon an already existing piece.

Being able to witness and be a part of “Einstein on the Beach” was truly an amazing opportunity. One of the things I found most fascinating was how the lack of a narrative structure seemed to enhance my experience with the various aspects of the work. Although I am admittedly not much of an opera fan, I often find if difficult to take everything in without getting too wrapped up in trying to follow the story (this is particularly true if it is a work that I have not previously studied). It felt very freeing to not feel as if I was obligated to watch the different characters as the story developed. I was able to let my attention wander from one place to another, and really take time to appreciate the absolutely stunning visuals that Wilson presented. This increased focus on the more visceral aspects of the work made everything from the subtle shifts and movements of a characters hands, to the complex and constantly changing staging an incredibly intense and captivating experience. Though it lasted 4 and half hours, the piece was often so mesmerizing that it was truly a challenge to find anything about the production “boring.” I was very much surprised by how quickly the opera seemed to affect my perception of time. From the very first scene, the work really pulled me in, and I stopped thinking in terms of minutes and hours, but began to really follow the progression of musical and visual themes that I was being presented with.

“Einstein” was truly an amazing experience, and I’m grateful to be able to have the opportunity to see it performed live.