Steve Reich: Processuality of Music and the Unintended Mysteries Within

In our session on the development of minimal music, we talked about Steve Reich, an American composer who largely contributed to the development of this genre and who focused on the concept of processual composition, wherein processes are discernible in the music itself. Regarding Steve Reich’s first piece, “It’s Gonna Rain” (1965), I found particularly interesting, how clear and perceptible his concept of processuality was conveyed. Even without deeper knowledge about Reich, the musically cut sermon into rhythmic entities, played on a phasing loop, really lets the listener delve into the graduality of the compositional process. And even though the piece was created within a minimal framework, it produces a rhythmic effect with interesting sub-melodies. Finally, to me, the piece even sounded like the acoustics of raindrops falling repeatedly, which adds a nice meta-level to the track.

Another piece, we listened to in class, was “Music for Mallet Instruments, Voices and Organ” (1973). After listening and relistening to the track at home, I was still intrigued by it. To me, the piece fabricates a really beautiful, almost transcendental musical experience, that has an otherworldly character, as well as a healing compound to it. Again, through the repetition of the same melodic pattern played by instruments, together with an augmenting of female voices singing a simple vowel sound, the two interrelated musical processes build up to a new melodic entity. Throughout this sounding music, one is still able to hear the processes going into the track through closely detailed listening.

The piece also highlights the mutual interdependence of material and process, where simultaneously content suggests form and vice versa. To me, this correlates with a realization of intersubjectivity and interdependence of sound and the artist in musical processes. One of each doesn't exist without the other, while also one does not fully control or influence the other, since the influence is mutual. In comparison to John Cage, this again highlights the moment of attentiveness, that is necessary for a musical piece to be perceived. Whereas the process of composition can be heard in Reich, one cannot hear the processes going into Cage’s composition – even though that does not particularly mean, that one does not hear the produced sound, thinking about Cage’s 4’33, but rather that the compositional process is not perceptible when performed. In contrast, to Reich, music creation aims to make the processuality audible. For this, he uses surgical precision to make the process of a piece tangible for the listener. Contrary to any assumptions one might have, this does not disenchant music as melodic entity. As Reich has pointed out himself in his essay: even if the processes of musical production are disclosed, it is not like the magic of music evaporates with it. Rather, mysteries are always going to be part of it, as musical by-products, like sub-melodies and irregularities, emerge out of the intended processes unattended and unintended.

This can then again be tied to Deleuzian thought, where although repetition contributes to generality, within every repetition something distinct occurs, which accounts for change and creativity. It’s the very difference that changes concepts and things and in Reich, this approach to music composition has accounted for his influence in the development of minimal music.

Finally, if the listener manages to adapt to Reich’s conceptuality of music as a gradual process, I think, that the great take-away is the training of one’s attention span and focus. This can prove to be beneficial, if one thereby achieves to shift any introspective focuses away towards outwards processes and towards an immanent experience of music.

 

(Sorry for using the term “process/es” that often in my report. I found it to be challenging to find a proper, equivalent term to accurately describe Reich’s foci. 😊)