STAYING in New York in the midst of a heatwave, where the smell of tarmac and weed shaped the air, isn’t necessarily my ideal set-up for a conference and music festival; but fate had other ideas. 

Between June 17 and 22 I was attending the Mise-En Festival in the proverbial big apple. I had been invited as a guest speaker to talk about my own research and my own music in a second public talk. What I was initially intrigued by when I travelled to attend was: what are the yanks talking about? 

The US has a proud tradition of radical political artists, or artists who were able to tap into the political with a profound insight which is still striking today. Figures like Paul Robeson, Claudia Jones, and Elie Siegmeister are for me stand-out examples, but are far from the only ones. 

The festival was an international one, which means my thoughts and feelings on it are not necessarily a clear reflection of where the US is currently. The first day was focused upon the conference element, wherein I had the fortune to open the session. The other three speakers presented varying strands of research.

One item that enthralled me was the research of Rodrigo Cadiz who talked about the work of Chilean electroacoustic composers, and how the use of electronics aided the creation of explicitly political work. 

Though an element of his argument was a smidgen naturalistic, the focus on works of Ivan Pequeno and Leni Alexander was important, as both composers are truly interesting, and I was captivated by them instantly. The use of their music politically is also fascinating, as both were severely impacted by Pinochet, and Leni Alexander’s own response is particularly poignant as a Jewish refugee from Germany who fled to Chile from Nazi repression, only to suffer the repression of Pinochet. 

The concert that evening was a particular highlight, as the two works featured were full of character, personal, and in the case of Jimena Maldonado vitally important and harrowing. 

Repeat Their Names was composed in 2022 and is for Vibraphone and tape. It is an already intimate work, but what struck to the core was the simple recitation of the names of women and girls who had either disappeared or were murdered in Mexico in recent years. The first movement recited nearly 1,000 names of those disappeared, and the mortifying second movement recited the names of over 3,000 women and girls who had been murdered. The finale is a powerful reconciliation as it is simply repeating the word “You” in Spanish, which serves as a reminder you are still here. 

Jimena Maldonado talked about the creation process, and the particularly damning circumstance that these names are only the ones officially recorded. 

Very few works strike so instantly, deeply, and immediately, and the lack of intensity from the vibraphone meant the whole piece was naked and direct, you couldn’t hide from it, except think of every single woman and child who is not with us and left loved ones bereft. 

The following days and discussions had their own elements of merit and intrigue, though it was hard to not feel that the first day was the most striking, and the others fell short of the finish line. However, there were some interesting elements that deserve some reflection. 

The most obvious character of the discussions was that it was primarily done by artists and academics who are at a remove from social reality. This is not to say they are aloof and hiding in an ivory tower when most of them have political concerns and ideas; however, there was a lingering feeling that they are unable to reach communities directly – without a lecture hall or peer-reviewed journal. 

There was a strange obsession with notation that almost presumed that notation alone will bring down all barriers we see in classical music. This is naive for many reasons, but ultimately, while composers have tried other ways of notating music, many musicians learn by chord symbols or tab notation, and the revolution has not been won. There is value is using other methods to convey ideas, but to act as though one were superior presumes that the revolution will be won through aesthetics alone. 

Overall, I’m unsure what I expected to witness. Given the absolute state in online discourse (on any topic) it’s hard to see how much of it is grounded in reality. Realistically, there were ideas that I felt to be a creative cul-de-sac or, in the cases of Cornelius Cardew, have intrigue and novelty but lack real depth. 

That being said, there were works that truly struck me and the fact that the interest exists in the fortress of US monopoly capitalism, there are elements to be optimistic about. If the composers involved in the festival are supported and manage to make the vital connections to our actual communities or trade unions, they could evolve into truly radical and potent composers even as they also risk descending into political navel-gazing in the course of their research. 

Despite the tarmac, there is fertile ground, but who will plant the seed?

For more information see: mise-en.org