W.I.P.>>>>>>>

 

Event 47-B (An Event Score including Flute, Piano, Sopranino Saxophone et al)

 

Misplaced Weather

 

Spring Flute

 

 

Fluxkits and Fluxus Multiples: The Score Becomes a Box

Fluxus understood something that music still struggles to admit: a score does not need to look like a score. It can be a box. It can be a card. It can be a game. It can be a matchbook, a tin can, a packet of beans, a printed instruction, a cheap object, a joke with consequences.

The Fluxkit is one of the most radical formats in twentieth-century art because it relocates artistic authority from the completed work to the activation of a situation. It does not present itself as a finished aesthetic object in the traditional sense. It arrives as a container of possibilities. Small, portable, modest, often deliberately unheroic, the Fluxkit asks to be opened, handled, rearranged, read, misunderstood, performed, and sometimes simply possessed as an unresolved proposition.

This is where Fluxus becomes indispensable to Sound Morphology. The Fluxkit is not only an art object. It is a score system.

It is notation that has become tactile.

The Box as Score

A conventional score organizes sound through symbols placed on a page. The performer reads, interprets, and realizes. The page remains mostly stable. The work is presumed to exist elsewhere, in the performance that follows.

A Fluxkit breaks that contract.

The score is no longer only a page that precedes performance. It becomes a box of materials that produce thought, gesture, uncertainty, touch, and event. The performer does not simply read the score. The performer opens it. Fingers enter the work before the intellect can contain it. The act of handling becomes part of the notation.

A box contains delay. You do not see everything at once. You remove one thing, then another. A card appears. A fragment of instruction appears. A small object appears whose purpose is unclear. The work happens through sequence, discovery, and hesitation. The Fluxkit composes that hesitation.

This is why the Fluxkit is closer to music than it first appears. Music is an art of time, but so is opening a box.

Multiples Against the Monument

Fluxus multiples also attacked the cult of the singular masterpiece. They were often inexpensive, editioned, portable, and materially humble. Their power came from distribution rather than monumentality. They refused the grand aura of the unique art object by becoming things that could circulate.

But this anti-monumental stance was not a rejection of seriousness. It was a different seriousness.

The multiple says: the work does not have to be rare to be charged.

It can be repeated. It can be mailed. It can fit in a drawer. It can be held in the hand. It can be owned without becoming obedient to ownership. It can exist as an edition and still resist completion.

In musical terms, the Fluxus multiple resembles a score that refuses to stabilize into one definitive realization. Each copy carries the same general conditions, but every activation is contingent. The work exists as a repeatable invitation, not as a closed object.

A symphony may seek permanence through grandeur. A Fluxus multiple seeks persistence through portability.

The Event Hidden in the Object

The deepest intelligence of the Fluxkit lies in its ability to hide an event inside an object.

A small card may contain a performance. A cheap trinket may become a trigger. A collection of ordinary items may function as a private theater. The object is not there to be admired in the old sense. It is there to produce a change in behavior.

This is the Fluxus lesson that composers should never lose: instruction can be sculptural.

A phrase on a card can alter posture. A sealed container can alter expectation. A small object can demand a sound, a silence, a decision, or a refusal. A score does not need to specify pitch or duration to become musical. It only needs to organize attention in time.

That is why Fluxus remains so dangerous. It collapses the distinction between performance and life not by inflating art into grand philosophy, but by reducing the artistic event to almost nothing.

Open this.

Shake that.

Listen here.

Wait.

Count.

Drop.

Fold.

Forget.

The gesture is small. The consequences are not.

Touch as Interpretation

Fluxkits make interpretation physical.

In conventional notation, interpretation is often discussed as an intellectual or expressive act. The performer decides tempo, emphasis, attack, phrasing, color. In Fluxus, interpretation can begin with the hand. The performer weighs an object, turns it over, opens a lid, reads a label, sorts cards, removes a packet, ties a string, tears paper, drops something into something else.

The hand thinks.

This is not a romantic statement. It is an operational one. The hand encounters resistance, texture, scale, fragility, weight, and sequence before language has fully processed the task. The score becomes haptic. It is understood by pressure, friction, grasp, and movement.

For Sound Morphology, this is essential. It means that notation can be more than visual instruction. It can be material encounter. The performer’s body does not arrive after the score has been decoded. The body is the decoding mechanism.

The Fluxkit does not ask, “What does this mean?”

It asks, “What happens when you touch it?”

The Comedy of Serious Systems

Fluxus is often funny, but the comedy is not decorative. It is structural.

The humor comes from disproportion: a tiny action treated with ceremonial gravity, a banal object presented as a cosmic proposition, a deadpan instruction that destabilizes the entire apparatus of performance. The joke is serious because it exposes how much of art depends on framing, authority, expectation, and belief.

A Fluxkit can look like a child’s game, an office supply box, a magic trick, a mail-order product, a religious relic, or a failed laboratory experiment. That instability is the point. It refuses to let the viewer know whether they are dealing with art, music, instruction, prank, philosophy, or debris.

This is also why Fluxus is so useful for composers working outside conventional notation. It gives permission to use absurdity as structure. Not as ornament. Not as comic relief. Structure.

A ridiculous instruction can be precise. A trivial object can be formally decisive. A joke can be a method for breaking the performer out of inherited obedience.

The Fluxkit smiles, then rewires the room.

Against the Clean Score

The clean score often pretends that music arrives purified of the world. Staff lines, notation paper, formal systems, and performance conventions create a sense of distance from ordinary material life. Fluxus rejects that distance.

It brings in beans, boxes, nails, toys, strings, labels, stamps, food, paper scraps, games, and household objects. It lets the everyday contaminate the score. It allows music to arise from the same material world that official culture tries to keep outside the concert hall.

This contamination is liberating. It returns music to contact.

The score is no longer an abstract command. It is a thing among things. It can be misplaced, damaged, touched, laughed at, collected, performed incorrectly, or reactivated years later by someone who does not know the original context.

That vulnerability matters. It makes the work less authoritarian and more alive.

The Archive That Performs Back

Fluxkits now often sit in museums, archives, and special collections. This creates an interesting contradiction. Objects made partly to resist the museum have become museum objects. Works designed for handling are now often protected from handling. The Fluxkit becomes historical evidence, preserved behind glass, its performative potential suspended.

But even in the archive, the Fluxkit performs.

It performs as a challenge to classification. Is it visual art? Music? Performance? Design? Publication? Game? Relic? Score? Edition? Object? Instruction? The archive must choose categories, but the Fluxkit quietly defeats them.

This is one of its lasting strengths. It does not become less radical because it has been collected. It becomes more complex. The museum can preserve the box, but the box still points beyond preservation toward activation.

A Fluxkit behind glass is a sleeping score.

It has not stopped working. It is waiting for the conditions of touch to return.

What Fluxkits Teach Contemporary Composition

For composers, Fluxkits and Fluxus multiples offer more than historical inspiration. They propose a different ontology of the score.

They suggest that a score can be:

a container

a kit

a ritual device

a tactile interface

a joke machine

an archive

a provocation

a distributed object

a portable theater

a set of permissions

a trap for habits of interpretation

They also suggest that musical form can begin before sound and continue after sound. The event includes the approach, the opening, the reading, the handling, the uncertainty, the decision, the action, and the residue.

This matters now because contemporary notation often risks becoming either too decorative or too software-bound. Fluxus reminds us that the most radical score may be materially simple. A box, a string, a card, and an instruction can still do violence to musical expectation if the relationships are exact.

Complexity is not always density. Sometimes complexity is the instability of a very small proposition.

The Score After the Page

Fluxkits and Fluxus multiples show us that the score does not end at the page. It can migrate into objecthood, touch, game, mail, collection, performance, and memory. It can be held. It can be opened. It can wait.

This waiting is part of its form.

The Fluxkit is not simply a container of art objects. It is a container of deferred actions. It is full of events that may never happen, or may happen differently each time, or may happen only in the imagination of the person who opens it.

That makes it one of the great models for post-notational composition. It refuses the hierarchy of composer, score, performer, and audience by turning the work into a set of unstable relations. It replaces the page with the situation. It replaces obedience with encounter.

A Fluxkit does not say, “Perform this correctly.”

It says, “Here are the conditions. Now find out what kind of event you are willing to make.”

And perhaps that is the real legacy of Fluxus for music: not anti-art, not joke, not historical style, but a new understanding of the score as a portable field of activation.

A box can be a composition.

A label can be a dynamic marking.

A cheap object can be an instrument.

A gesture can be enough.

The score, once opened, may never return to being flat.

Codex Corpus Pharmaceuticum: Mechanics, Function, and Ontology of a Drug-Centered Musical Script

Toward a Pharmacopoeial Notation

This ongoing project represents a radical interrogation of the boundary between the somatic and the sonic, currently manifesting as the primary development of Volume 1. This inaugural collection is composed specifically for the piano, an instrument re-imagined here as a high-precision diagnostic interface for the administration of the Codex. In this context, the piano functions not as a tool for artistic expression, but as a delivery system for complex frequency-based formulations where the traditional note-head has been supplanted by the rigid, clinical iconography of the pharmaceutical pill.

The work posits that the score is a living pharmacopoeia, where each pill-shaped glyph carries the weight of regulatory finality and metabolic intervention. These icons of modern synthesis...the capsules, tablets, and perforated solids represent discrete, quantifiable units of time and affect, implying a half-life and a rate of absorption rather than a simple musical duration. The "ingestion" of the score by the performer translates these chemical artifacts into acoustic events, where the physical properties of the pill...its density, surface architecture, and "solubility" dictate the mechanical onset and decay of the sound.

The breath and range of this system are anchored by the symbolic power of the accidental. Sourced from a vast array of historical and microtonal traditions including the Just Intonation of Ben Johnston, the archaic flourishes of the Renaissance, and the hyper-precise Spartan-Sagittal systems act as essential catalysts. They represent the "molecular" fine-tuning of the performance, modifying the primary pharmaceutical directive with a staggering depth of historical and biological subjectivity. As Volume 1 unfolds, the pianist navigates a landscape where the ancient geometry of the pitch meets the cold certainty of the dose, treating the act of performance as a controlled trial that seeks the exact point where notation becomes a prescription for the human spirit.

This notational system proposes a fundamental reorientation of how musical information is encoded, perceived, and acted upon. Rather than treating sound as an abstract temporal phenomenon to be mapped onto staff, pitch lattice, or gestural instruction, it adopts the pharmacopoeia as its primary conceptual and visual substrate. Musical events are framed not as notes to be executed but as administered conditions, dosed states, and regulated interventions within a sonic body.

At its core, this system understands notation as a technology of control, mediation, and belief. Traditional Western notation encodes idealized relationships between symbol and action, presuming a stable subject who reads, interprets, and performs. By contrast, pharmacological imagery foregrounds ingestion, latency, metabolism, tolerance, side effects, and systemic uncertainty. Sound is no longer something simply produced. It is something introduced, absorbed, resisted, and transformed over time.

Mechanics of the System

The functional center of the notation is the pharmaceutical object itself. Pill-like forms act as the primary carriers of musical instruction. Their geometry, surface articulation, scale, and internal segmentation encode temporal span, density, dynamic pressure, and spectral emphasis. Rather than representing pitch directly, these objects define conditions under which pitch behavior may occur. Duration is implied through mass and volume. Articulation emerges from surface complexity or smoothness. Density and repetition are suggested by modularity and patterning rather than counted beats.

Type functions as a secondary but critical layer. Text does not label sound in a conventional sense. Instead, it operates as regulatory metadata. Like pharmaceutical labeling, it conveys dosage, constraints, and thresholds rather than expressive intention. The typography is deliberately clinical and procedural. It instructs without persuasion. It informs without interpretation. In this way, language becomes a stabilizing force that tempers the visual excess of the system while reinforcing its bureaucratic authority.

The symbolic accidentals play a decisive role in destabilizing expectation. Sourced from disparate historical and speculative tuning systems, they refuse a single lineage or hierarchy. Johnston, medieval solmization, Renaissance chromatic theory, sagittal systems, Wyschnegradsky’s micro-intervallic expansions, Klein-Zimmermann variants, and other notational frameworks coexist without reconciliation. These symbols no longer function as precise pitch modifiers alone. They operate as signals of deviation, contamination, or noncompliance within the pharmacological field. Each accidental marks a departure from normative dosage rather than a simple alteration of frequency.

Functionality and Performance

Functionally, this system does not demand uniform realization. It invites calibrated interpretation. Performers are positioned less as executors and more as clinicians or test subjects, navigating a score that prescribes conditions rather than outcomes. Decisions emerge through exposure and accumulation rather than linear reading. Repetition does not guarantee stability. Increased familiarity may instead produce distortion, fatigue, or resistance.

Time in this system is non-linear. Like pharmacokinetics, it acknowledges delayed onset, overlapping effects, and residual presence. A notated object may remain active long after it has been visually passed, just as a drug continues to act after ingestion. Silence is not absence but clearance. Change is not modulation but interaction.

Philosophical and Ontological Implications

Ontologically, the system reframes music as a form of administered knowledge. The score becomes an instrument of belief as much as instruction. To read it is to accept a set of assumptions about efficacy, authority, and compliance. The pharmacopoeial metaphor is not decorative. It exposes the degree to which musical systems, like medical ones, rely on trust in abstract representations that promise predictable effects while masking variability and risk.

By grounding notation in pharmaceutical imagery, the system aligns itself with broader questions of agency and autonomy. Who controls the dose. Who defines normal response. What constitutes an adverse reaction in sound. The visual language of medication carries cultural weight related to care, dependency, optimization, and surveillance. When translated into notation, these associations destabilize the romantic notion of musical expression and replace it with a model of managed intervention.

Purpose of the System

The purpose of this radical notation is not to replace existing systems but to reveal their underlying assumptions. It foregrounds the fact that all notation is a fiction that produces real consequences. By drawing from the aesthetics and logic of pharmacology, it makes explicit the transactional nature of performance. Sound is administered. Bodies respond. Outcomes vary.

In doing so, the system resists virtuosity, expressivity, and narrative closure. It privileges condition over gesture, state over phrase, and consequence over intention. The pharmacopoeia becomes not merely a metaphor but a structural foundation. Music is treated as something taken into the body of a performer and audience alike, something that alters internal states rather than illustrating external ideas.

This is notation as regulation, as speculation, and as quiet coercion. It does not promise cure or clarity. It offers a controlled exposure to uncertainty and asks what it means to perform under such terms.

Assembling The Elements of My Scores

 

Assembling The Elements of My Scores

By Bil Smith

My scores are not merely instructions for music; they are synthetic objects.  They are assemblages of sound, symbol, architecture, and language. They function as performative systems: visual environments saturated with musical, poetic, and semiotic potential. Their construction is not procedural, but material and linguistic, developed through acts of layering, collision, translation, and provocation.

To describe how these scores are put together is to describe an evolving practice of sonic image-making where visual syntax, textual interference, and invented language operate together as compositional matter. In these works, notation is not a code to be deciphered but a living diagram.  They become a  space of negotiation, indeterminacy, and active authorship.

From Pre-Notation to Visual Grammar

The process begins in a pre-notational state.  This occurs before staves, measures, or rhythm where gesture, form, and conceptual impulse guide the creation of visual fields. I often begin with what I call vectorial provocations: drawings, splines, structural schematics, or 3D renderings that behave like sonic catalysts.

These gestures generate a visual grammar, what I call a a proto-score. It is not yet musical in the conventional sense, but it contains the kinetic and affective energy of music. These early constructions consist of curved architectures, broken staves, mechanical arms.  They become the armature upon which notational and textual systems are later anchored.

The Syntactic Scaffold: Building a Score in Layers

Once these vectorial elements are in place, I begin to construct what I call the syntactic scaffold. This is where musical notation, spatial logic, and typographic systems intersect. I embed traditional notational marks such as clefs, accidentals, and rhythmic fragments into distorted staves that collapse linear time and expand spatialized logic.

At this stage, the score functions more like a site than a system. Performers do not read left to right but traverse.  They drift, navigate, dig, orbit. Temporal relationships are encoded through density, contrast, layering, and spatial juxtaposition, not metronomic measure.

This scaffold is also where I integrate non-musical systems.  This may include medical imagery, circuitry, and architectural blueprints which behave like parasitic notations, challenging the performer to read outside of familiarity.

Language and Neologism: Text as Sonic Intervention

Integral to my process is the integration of language and invented text. I treat language not as annotation, but as a compositional material that transforms into a sonic-textual event that generates rhythm, texture, and conceptual dissonance. Words appear not to clarify, but to complicate, confuse, and reorient.

I often use:

• All-caps imperatives ("FREEZE!", "REFREEZE!", "SPILL!") as performative commands or false directives

• Fictional acronyms (e.g., "SZEOC") that echo corporate or technical language without yielding transparency

• Neologisms ("TICTRAP," "AURALAND," "LIMOLELLEOPELLI")—synthetic words that operate as naming mechanisms without fixed meaning, inviting the performer to speculate their purpose

These textual artifacts introduce a linguistic entropy into the score. They create zones of language noise, where the semantics collapse into phonetics, and the performer must decide whether to speak, vocalize, ignore, or sonify the text.

This use of invented language is part of a broader project: to queer the idea of legibility, to dislocate the authority of notation, and to allow language itself to become musical...a visual and sonic irritant embedded in the score’s architecture.

Symbolic Density and Iconographic Assemblage

The next phase involves iconographic integration: the placement of symbolic objects, signs, and rendered textures that introduce non-instructional meaning into the score. These may include:

• Classical sculptures juxtaposed with circuit paths

• Industrial icons adjacent to notated glissandi

• Film strips winding through note clusters

• Diagrams of unknown systems bordering musical instructions

These are not narrative symbols, but they are visual agents that destabilize the reading experience, suggesting metaphor, critique, or satire without prescribing a single interpretation.

Here, the visual density serves a performative purpose. It creates zones of friction, asking the performer to navigate complexity rather than decode clarity. Notation becomes relational and atmospheric, not absolute.

Temporal Distortion and Sonic Topography

Despite their architectural stillness, these scores are deeply concerned with time.  I am not referring to not measured time, but experienced time, disrupted time, and synthetic duration.

I achieve this through:

• Graphic compression (tight clusters of micro-notation) to suggest intensification

• Visual rupture (large gaps, overlapping layers, jarring shifts) to imply interruption or spillover

• Repeated neologisms or visual motifs (e.g., “SPILL” appearing amid expanding glyphs) to reinforce time-as-affect, time-as-collapse

These operations replace tempo with topology. The performer doesn't just “play through” time, but they encounter it, shaped by the score’s material architecture and textual disruptions.

Final Assembly and Performativity

The final stage of building the score is not print layout or PDF formatting.   It is the construction of a total encounter. The image must operate on multiple levels:

• As a standalone visual artifact

• As a performative script

• As a semiotic labyrinth

• As a linguistic playground

• As a conceptual critique of notation itself

The performer becomes the final assembler who is tasked not with executing instructions, but with translating, embodying, resisting, and resonating the score’s material.

It is in this moment between score and body, between symbol and gesture that the assemblage becomes alive.

 Toward a Post-Notational Poetics

How are these scores put together? Through graphic architecture, linguistic invention, and semiotic layering. Through the deliberate use of interference, opacity, rupture, and fiction. Through the belief that a score is not a map to be followed but a site to be performed.  One to be read as an object, not as a message.

By integrating text, language, and neologism alongside notation, I aim to produce scores that think.  These scores  refuse transparency, reward curiosity, and demand a creative reading of the world and its signs.

These works are not merely visual music. They are epistemological performances, designed to be as rich in silence as they are in sound, as much about reading and misreading as about playing.

In a world where meaning is always mediated, I want the score to be the place where that mediation is made visible, audible, and unstable.