Parra early life

Hèctor Parra “Early Life”

As a child of two physicists, Hector Parra has always been inspired by science. In his Early Life for oboe, piano and string trio, he used the book Genetic Takeover by Scottish scientist Graham Cairns-Smith as a model for the development of his piece. He says, "I tried to create a music structure, inspired by the biological processes that originated life on Earth.". This book describes a theory of how life emerged from inorganic matter. It talks of complex clay crystal structures which started to replicate themselves, during which process there were errors and defects in the structure that occurred by chance (either by elimination, substitution, or dislocation of atoms in the inner structure) which eventually led to the appearance of the nucleotides, amino acids, etc. – the building blocks of life. According to the author, at one point these molecules began to self-organize, which one could consider the seed of the life itself. What does this have to do with Parra's piece? Early Life can be seen as a continuous condensation and entanglement of different parameters (mainly rhythmical, but also harmonic, density of the material, playing techniques, etc. ) which corresponds to the evolutionary idea that the simple inorganic crystals over time converted into complex organic matter. The oboe bears a semantic meaning, namely "life" and occurs quite late in the piece (bar 45). It is fairly easy to follow how the whole piece is divided into many smaller parts; each has a slightly different intrinsic development, but they all have the tendency to a culmination, ending with a short break. Originally Parra want to write a piece for percussion, piano and string trio. One can see in his first sketches how he describes the primordial texture with three different colors assigned to three different instrument groups. See Figure 1. It was supposed to be made of the following three figures: a) Genotype - jumpy, but rhythmically continuous sounds. b) Errors (in the structure) - accents, Bartok pizzicato, scratching on the piano chords, etc. c) Phenotype - long-held chords.

Figure 1.

The above stated figures were then assigned to the following instruments: d) Glockenspiel (Error), Piano (Genotype) and Strings (Phenotype) e) Temple blocks (Genotype), Piano (Phenotype) and Strings (Error) f) Vibraphone (Phenotype), Piano (Error) and Strings (Genotype). His idea was that the "crystal structure", represented by simple repetitive rhythms with equal dynamics, gets progressively more complex. As the rhythms, gestures and melodies would get more varied, so would the whole energy of the piece become more lively, which again corresponds to the semantic idea of the unpredictable, irregular and entangled structure of the genes of primordial creatures. In the later phase of his conception of the piece, Parra decided upon the following four gestalts, that you can see in Figure 2.: 1) FLAX (loose) 2) DUR (hard) 3) ENGANXOS (sticky) 4) GROMULLOS (clumpy)

Under the term loose, Parra is referring to simple rhythmical, pulsating texture with lots of breaks between the notes. One can recognize it in the string trio as lots of legno battuto sixteenths and triplets, or in the piano part as sixteenths, triplets and quintuplets in the highest octave, whose strings are prepared with a duct tape. The hard gestalt bares this name due to the rhythmic rigidity of repetition, which begins in measure 10. The strings play battuto but without the breaks present in the loose form. If one ignores the written ritardando at the end of the phrase, one could say that there is not much rhythmical variation. Piano moreover shows its “rigidity” by playing sustained chords, which also sets as the first harmonic element of the piece. The sticky structures can be recognized as arbitrary glissando movements on a half-pressed string, which then goes over multiple strings (mostly from the fourth to the first string), getting louder and ending with a stringendo. It is obvious that this figure is rhythmically much more free than the previous ones, but it also has a clear condensation of energy due to acceleration, crescendo and additional bow pressure towards the end of the figure – almost as if a floating sound has been attached to a very low and muddy sound. The piano adds to this texture by scratching on damped strings, with loose rhythms similar to the strings, and tends to energize at the end of the phrase. Obviously Parra associates the idea of stickiness with a certain intensity and density of the sound, which is being created by this gestalt. Somehow the face of this gestalt seems more compact than in the previous ones, and the interaction between strings and piano are perceived as one body. From bar 32 we can observe the clumpy gestalt, which seems to be some sort of texture between hard and loose, with a lot of diversity in rhythmical permutations, but also occasional breaks between notes (or better to say, complete absence of certain instruments for short periods of time). One can also notice the mirroring of the sticky gestalt in various ways. Each figure has a big arch which starts with one instrument, then the other instruments step in, they play together for a while, and finally instruments drop out until one instrument plays alone. In between there are some small phrases, made by crescendo/decrescendo or concentration/dilution of the number of impulses per beat. Thus it is not only an optical phenomena that one can observe in the score, but also an noticeable, clearly pulsating, "clumpy" acoustic effect. Even though Parra's complex method of notation makes it harder to recognize the clumpy gestalt in the piano, one can see how it underlines the tension of the strings, adding to the lumpiness by stressing the deepest piano register. I explain the further development of this figure later on.

Figure 2. Even though Parra decided not to use percussion in the end and to stick to the second version, one can occasionally find elements shown in Figure 1. (e.g. long-held chords often used to stress the beginning or the end of a section - bars 1, 7, 18, etc.). By dislocation and ensnarement of the principal texture, Parra keeps generating new material, again related to the theory of how organic structures emerged out of inorganic clay crystals by permutation. This primordial texture is composed of piano resonance, percussive jumpy rhythms in the prepared part of piano (the lowest D and Eb with rubber, and the highest octave with duct tape), as well as short accents, pizzicato and legno in string instruments. Even if one does not notice the ambience of the piano so much at the beginning, Parra makes his idea more obvious from measure 8 onwards, as he begins to let the piano resonate. It is important to note that Parra uses the exposé (the part before the oboe starts to play) to present these four textures, the first three of which he views as failed attempts of independence. Only the clumpy gestalt “wins” and continues its development, while the others die out. There are however occasional occurrences of the first three textures in later parts of the piece; e.g. loose shortly quoted in bar 167, hard in bars 64-71, as well as the rests of sticky maintained in the web of clumpy gestalt, only as écrasé molto sul ponte to be recognized at the end of a phrase. From everything stated above, it is clear that evolutional principles play a strong role in the conception of the piece. Let us now try to analyze this "evolution" further based on the following

parameters: 1) Rhythm 2) Harmony 3) Register 4) Dynamics 5) Timbre 6) Form

1) RHYTHMICAL DEVELOPMENT As I already mentioned, the first thirty bars serve as a sort of “exposition” where all the important figures and playing techniques are shown. From the bar 31 the clumpy gestalt establishes itself as the dominant one and its further development (mostly in terms of rhythmical contortion) takes place. In order to build the form, Parra started using simple Koch curves. The first (A-curve) goes once up and then back, and the second (B-curve) goes downwards and back (see Figure.3). We can see that by simply bending the curve upwards and downwards, Parra managed to gain more complex curves. He scaled the curves by adding values to each section, thus enabling further manipulations necessary for creative handling of the parameters.

Figure 3. Depending on the complexity and the number of peaks, this curves are given the names A1, A2, A3, or B1, B2 etc. Instead of just exposing the curves as they are, he also combines A and Bcurves with each other, mostly by adding the next complex A-curve to the previous B-curve and vice versa. (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. One can trace this development quite easily until the bar 90, where the second big part of Early life begins. Taking a look at Parra's sketches, one can learn a lot about the way he composes. Firstly he notated the “genetic modifications” which he intended to apply to his sound material, and then he transferred them to the set of rules which determine the distribution of pitch, rhythm and dynamics. Even though one can always see the correspondence between the model and the actual score, Parra often avoids the strict rules in favor of musical expression: •

First of all, the sound material he calculated is not presented in its entirety (e.g. BA3-1, AB3-1, B4A, BA4 are not used in the piece, and we see the word 'NO' written in the sketches). Also the order of the figures is not linear, with simpler figures sometimes coming after more complex ones. The more complex figures also have a longer duration, and Parra probably wanted to avoid this systematic tendency.

•

Secondly, there are a lot of insertions, either as sort of cadenzas at the ends of a phrases, or as quotations of one of the four gestalts. The "inserted" bars between measures 30 and 90 are mm. 51-53, 58, 64-66, 71, 75, 79-80, 82-84, 87-88. Although the rhythm-sketches were mostly respected, in the sections that have an insertion one or more pulses were substituted by breaks in order to perserve the logical flow of the phrase.

•

Thirdly, the humming piano notes on D and Eb string of the third bass octave (both prepared with rubber) act as a sort of incomplete counterpoint voice. Those are mostly longer notes, visually hidden in the chord network of the score, but easily noticeable while listening. By so doing, Parra manages to link the string trio and the piano. It is not only that these notes, due to their timbral quality, sound similar to battuti of the string instruments, but it most

often occurs at the moment of highest tension, shaping the gestural-dynamic form of the entire string section. If we look at bar 50, we can see how these deep notes add to the climax of the dense (clumpy) sound texture created by other instruments. Examples like this one can be found all over the score. •

In terms of dynamic distribution, there are often small but important deviations between the sketch and the actual score, especially when the calculation gives a result in which the piano gets in the way of other instruments (playing ff while all others are quiet). Parra mostly solves it by adapting piano's volume to the other instruments. Finally, one could of course pose a question, “what is the purpose of algorithmic calculation

for the development of the piece?", but most of all, “is it perceptible?” As complex rhythmical pulsations, such as quintuplets, septuplets, etc with their proper pauses, are present already very early in the piece, one should take the term of development in the broader sense. Only then can one notice how the clumpy energy condensations which start in bar 30 tend to build more and more contrast and tension over longer periods of time as the piece progresses. Parra considers the piano to be a representation of the genotype, while the string trio (probably due to its rich playing technique possibilities) is the representation of the phenotype. This also carries out the idea on how a relatively simple codification has the potential to create an endless amount of variety.

2) HARMONIC DEVELOPMENT Despite the erroneous conclusion one might draw on first glance (that the pitches have a random distribution), Parra's harmony has very recognizable principles. Quite similarly to the rhythmic structures, Parra uses Koch curves in order to form his harmonic material. First, he chooses a period of time during which he wishes to have a certain harmony. Then he takes one Koch curve from the stack he previously created. Each bend on a curve has a value attached to it, which corresponds to the length of that portion of line. The values are then transformed into intervals so that “1” is substituted with minor second, “2” with major second and so on. Now he sets a sort of scale in the middle register on top of this curve. In order to make the intervalic structure fit the curve, he is replacing the positions of the notes in the "scale". Thus he manages to create the melodic line; one can see the example of this technique in the Figure 5.

Figure 5. The notes of the scale generated in this way aren't only used horizontally, but also to form chords. I repeat that we have two types of figures generated: the simplest A-curve goes up and down, and the B-curve is the opposite. If we transfer this into intervals, we'll always have smaller intervals becoming bigger and again smaller in the A-figures, and the other way around in the B-figures. Once turned into chords, it is evident why each chord has two or more clusters separated by large intervals. As soon as the rhythm has been decided upon, this curve undergoes another change, so that the number of impulses corresponds with the number of notes. However, they very often don't coincide. Parra solves this imbalance by either repeating certain notes (mostly with microtonal deformations) or by omitting some notes that don't fit the desired chord or his personal aesthetics. In the case that there are too many notes, instead of completely ignoring them, he either puts them into other instrument, or brings the omitted note as some passing note between this and the next chord. By repeating this principle, Parra manages to create interesting polyphonic lines in each instrument, retaining the intended harmonicity and the directionality, which again adds to the impression that each gesture follows a logical path. Even though Parra hardly used all the permutations of Koch curves he envisioned while doing the sketches (certainly not further than AB3,3), the identical recurrence of a given chord is extremely rare. Because he uses the same curve to generate multiple chords, but also because of his practice of repeating/omitting notes as well as choosing registers quite arbitrarily, it is often quite hard to pinpoint how each chord was made.

3) DEVELOPMENT OF REGISTERS In the beginning of the piece, all instruments play sounds with rather undetermined pitch.

During the piece one can follow the refinement of the pitch as well as the continuous expansion of the range. Piano makes a very good example, because it initially plays on the prepared strings, then on the middle keys, gradually adding the low and high registers. The string trio behaves like a single body. Once it has surpassed the noisy techniques, each instrument starts going into the extremes of its range. From this perspective, the oboe is more or less an exception to the rule, because of its rather unstable and jumpy melodic line, which from its very start tends to build playful contrasts between its low and high register. It is as if Parra was trying to say that the living beings have all the characteristics of the non-organic matter present.

4) DEVELOPMENT OF DYNAMICS One can divide the dynamics of Early Life into micro and macro developments. In other words, we can regard on a micro scale how dynamic oscillations help in forming figures and sections, while on a macro scale the dynamics form the general tension of the entire piece. If one looks at the waveform representation of a recording, one can see that the piece starts very quietly with a tendency to get louder until bar 95, then there is a minor decrescendo until the solo, then another exponential crescendo until bar 167 and a sudden quiet ending, slowly fading out. On a small scale, dynamics have mostly a narrative character with small elevations and depressions of the dynamic following the speech gestures. Despite the fact that Parra notates the dynamics very concisely, it is futile to expect that a musician could carry it out as precisely as notated. This is why the true feeling of the material development, such that one can easily follow in other parameters, isn't as noticeable while analyzing the dynamics.

5) TIMBRAL DEVELOPMENT The development of the timbre can be best followed when analyzing the string trio. The totality of the figures presented can be divided into two groups: "minerals" and "organza" (a special type of texture). Playing techniques like battuto or gettato define the "minerals". In Parra's sketches one can also see the a1 notated for the gettato outside on the fingerboard, whereas a2 denotes gettato in the usual playing position. Parra considers battuti to be “automatic” and gettati to be “controlled” figures, even though it completely contradicts the logic of the production of this sounds. On the other hand we have the so-called "organza" which tends to use more arco techniques, thus having more rounded sound than the percussive "minerals". Systematically, one can divide the playing

technique into b1 - arco écrasé, b2 - arco sul tasto, b3 - arco sul ponte, b4 - flageolet, b5 - strung with full sound. If one listens to the piece very carefully, one can notice how every section brings a new technique, which is being exposed, implemented, mixed with other techniques and then slightly suppressed by techniques coming afterwards.

6) FORM The whole form can be divided into 5 large sections. The first one can be divided further into two sections which I call sections 1a and 1b. 1a is made based on the model of “genetic takeover” or rather Parra's interpretation of Cairns-Smith's book. That is why at the beginning we have expositions of the four different gestalts I explained earlier in this text. The overall impression of the first part is a very noise-like sound, which pulsates regularly and calmly with occasional accents being the exception to this rule. 1b is more about the evolution of the sound itself. Piano and strings retain the pulsations (this time more irregularly), but they play chords and flageolets more often, and they slowly develop a texture that lies further away from the ones we heard in the 1a section. On top of that we have the oboe whose long notes build a counterpoint and a very independent element from the rest. The phrasing in Early life is very organic, and one can easily observe that the musicians need deeper breaths in order to perform each successive phrase. The tension which had a relatively short span in the beginning, takes more and more time with every next phrase. Section 2 starts in bar 90 and Parra denotes it as the “drama of life”. This is almost the middle of the piece and the audience is already acquainted with all the figures and playing techniques. Now there is no more “evolution” of the timbre, but moreover the elaboration of harmonic, timbral and contrasting nuances. One could say that the second part is a sort of sonataform development of the first part, but it also has a character of further development, because the sound tends to condensate and get less noisy and more pitch-oriented. The overall instrumental balance up to this point is well done. We start without oboe, then the instruments mix, then there is a short pause in the oboe part, then again all together. From bar 109 the piano goes into the second plan, playing fewer impulses per beat and having long pauses. This gives space for the oboe part to unfold, but also opens an acoustic space for the solo which comes shortly afterwards. One should stress that the second part serves as culmination, and all the instruments seem to explode. As the pianist has to remove the preparations from the piano, there are no more damped percussive

elements we had in the beginning. On top of that there is a very strong presence of piano in the middle register. All of that gives the possibility of showing the piano's natural power. The string trio uses the techniques like battuto, gettato and flageolet less and less, while stringendo, écrasé, trills as well as leaps between sul ponte and sul tasto are more present as they are producing more and more power and tension. The oboe progresses through the rhythmical schema of “genetic algorithm”, which up to this point has been the role of the piano. The ecstatic expression of the oboe is there from the onset, and it only goes down for a bit two bars before the solo cadenza. After almost two minutes of a very saturated sound, the cadenza appears like a true refreshment to the audiences ears. It seems that the role of oboe is to make a comment on previous events. There are no new playing techniques exposed here, still the expression stays somewhat different. One feels the calmness, not simply because the oboe plays alone, but more because of the way it is played. If you look at the Figure 6. where red marks the phrases which end with tension and blue marks the phrases which end in relaxation (very often with smorzando), you can see that most of the melody lines are marked blue. But even the tense phrases, in contrast to previous sections where oboe would jump abruptly between extreme register or stay for a long time on a shrill-sounding multiphonic in high register, red phrases mostly end with a short note in the middle register.

Figure 6.

This is natural, because Parra tries to make a contrast before the fourth part which brings back the old tension relations. In these 15 bars that follow the cadenza, the piece goes from a calm solo to the final climax. First the strings start with their double stop stringendo, then the piano with accented chords, with the rhythmical figures becoming ever faster. The piano builds to a frenzy of martellato and a full pedal until the triple fortissimo in bar 167, where suddenly the music freezes. The oboe stays on a multiphonic for a long time, the piano plays quite quietly and the trio evokes a reminiscence of the hard gestalt with their col legno battuto pulsation rhythms. The concluding section has a very calm character, not only because the instruments are playing very quietly, but also because there are not many impulses, only long notes being held with occasional small figures in one instrument. This is a big contrast to the previous sections where most of the instruments had their polyphonic discourse most of the time. The piece ends with a dying out sound, without oboe, in a quiet tremolo of string flageolets. This probably has nothing to do with “genetic takeover” nor with the semantics of the origin of life, but poses a usual musical closing of the entire piece.

CONCLUSION The greatest strength of this piece lies in its incredible richness of its rhythms, timbres, and expressive playing techniques. Parra's refined treatment of these parameters makes it possible to develop a large number of sound textures out of fairly simple gestural figures. Despite the extensive work with details, the listener is given a sort of golden thread, which enables focused listening and capturing of the main ideas. Besides that, in each section and in its entirety, the piece seems to be well organized, so that the dramaturgy is always natural and organic. The Koch trajectories Parra used in this piece enable the listener to sense the rhythmic, harmonic and timbral development as a fractal structure in every moment, but it also provides a pulse which is present for the whole composition. One could think that this algorithmic kind of thinking tends to make music rigid and étude-like; fortunately, Parra very often strays from the results of his calculations, promoting musicality to a position of greatest importance. Besides scientific background, one feels Parra's pianistic education very strongly. On one side the energy that this massive piano part brings is very live and vivid, yet on the other side one can notice how it tends to slide off into flowery phrases of romantic composers, especially noticeable with martellato in bar 154 etc. which is very reminiscent of Rachmaninov, Skryabin and

similar composers. The only objection one could make is that, despite a lot of effort to create various details in piano and strings, it seems as if Parra was not sure what to make with the material he semantically characterized as "life" in order to make it even more lively. The oboe, as a symbol of life, has a colorful texture right from the start – but this exaggerated potpourri, after a minute of listening, starts to act like a soundscape made of constant change between trills, jumps and microtonal glissando, which overburdens the listener if not earlier than certainly shortly before the oboe solo. If we compare the subtlety of the playing techniques, rhythmic and timbral development in the other instruments with those of the oboe, we could say that the semantic function of the symbol of life is too superficial to keep such an unvaried multitude of playing techniques tense throughout the piece. That is why with this kind of compositional approach, in which the new material continues to exist inside of already known material, reminds me more of an archeological excavation, which unfolds new layers one by one. It does not have the strength of a Schoenberg-ian development, which takes us to the top of the mountain, thus making it possible to get a completely new perspective. However, Early Life is, due to its timbral refinement, fascinating expression and unrelenting tension, an excellent example of what musicologists call "the new complexity".