Speaking in very broad brushstrokes (where would the fun be otherwise?), there have been two different ways to approach making music in the time since it has been possible to issue recordings.
The first is that exemplified by classical artists, which is to utilise pre-existing pieces of music, written usually by other people (often long dead), and to become both exceptionally technically proficient at playing them and exceptionally expressive in interpreting them - such that one is able to combine one's own creativity with that of the original great genius who put the notes to paper.
Canadian pianist Glenn Gould would be a good example of this. Gould, like most classical musicians, devoted his career to playing pieces that had been written by other people (chiefly Bach and Beethoven) in order to use them as a vehicle for his own creativity. His recordings can therefore in most part be thought of as Gouldian elaborations or variations on pre-existing forms. When he was playing Bach, he was in effect using Bach's music to explore themes that he was interested in.
The most famous and controversial illustration of this may be his recording of Beethoven's 23rd Piano Sonata, the 'Appassionata', which is normally played at a quick tempo, but which Gould played almost absurdly slowly - thereby transforming it into an altogether different listening experience. (He did the opposite with the 2nd Sonata, 'Moonlight', which he played at an unusually high tempo.) Whereas in the hands of, say, Daniel Barenboim, the Appassionata's second movement is stately, grand, filled with saudade, but then exploding into joy, in the hands of Gould it is tentative, hesitant, contemplative, and finally melancholic. The same notes are being played, and in the right order, but to very different and distinct effect.
(On YouTube there is a recording of Leonard Bernstein, shortly to conduct Glenn Gould playing Brahms' Concerto No. 1 in D Minor, giving a speech to the audience in which he disclaims any responsibility for what follows.)
The important thing to note here is that the classical performer does not just 'play Beethoven'. He or she plays his or her interpretation of Beethoven. It is about putting one's own motifs, ideas, feelings and concepts into a familiar, accepted structure.
This can be compared with the approach taken in the world of pop music. Now, pop bands of course are known to play covers, and to play music written by other people. But since the 70s at least, the preference has increasingly turned towards newness. Yes, there is still the existence of form (some might even say formula) - verses, choruses, bridges, and so on - and still generally a recognisable pattern depending on the genre (the guitar four-piece, for example), and indeed genre itself imposes certain requirements. But all this is rather loose. The emphasis is really on creativity and innovation; the way to win status and admiration is to create new songs, not just rework old ones.
This is epitomised by the Beatles, obviously, who spent their (strikingly short) careers continually reinventing what they were doing - always writing new songs and always pushing beyond new musical frontiers. They are hardly alone in having done that, it goes without saying, but it is sometimes worth reflecting on the world of difference there is between a song written at the start of Paul McCartney's career ('Love Me Do', say) with one seven years later at the end of the Beatles' run (such as 'Golden Slumbers'). Here, the personal expressiveness comes not in the interpretation of pre-existing works, but in the creation of new works themselves - and indeed in re-interpreting the boundaries of what is thought possible within existing musical forms.
DMing styles are a lot like this. One the one hand there are the Glenn Goulds of the world. These are the people who dedicate themselves to the perfect technical execution of a particular campaign type (the megadungeon perhaps being the most obvious) and use the formal structure provided to channel their own personal creativity and ideas. And on the other there are the Paul McCartneys, who are always endlessly seeking to do new things - with their creativity being given much freer reign within a greatly looser set of parameters, ranging across genres, campaign styles and modes of play. Both are, needless to say, equally valid, and so is everything in between. Which are you? Gould or McCartney?
I'm more the progressive rock version; I make up my own stuff but I also take sizable chunks from "classical" modules. Like "The Barbarian" by Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, which is a piece heavily inspired by another piece by Bela Bartok.
ReplyDeleteThe Heretic
Then again, you could be hip-hop, by the same token...
DeleteCall me Starman - Ziggy Stardust.
ReplyDeleteI am always trying to do something new and different. I love to try out new games, modify classics, and attempt atypical ways of presenting a game.
I am also prone to kitbashing old and new ideas together into what I hope results in a system more effective than its individual parts. A good example of this is my Ghostbusters TRPG homebrew, a combination of the original West End Games D6 game, InSpectres, and the ALIEN RPG version of the Year Zero system.
That doesn't guarantee it will work for my players or even for myself but hey, you never know until you try, right?
All that said I will admit to being a fan of 'IP Gaming', running games of Star Trek, Star Wars, Smurfs, Ghostbusters, and many other franchises. Does that make me secretly a 'Classical' type? Am I not reinterperting the work of the masters?
Maybe I'm a bit of both?
Maybe!
DeleteCab Calloway.
ReplyDeleteMy personal way of dividing GMing styles (which overlaps with rule systems used) is to have to axes:
ReplyDelete-How much scene-setting improvisation is there? In the average scene how much is planned ahead of time or determined by the rules and how much does the DM make up on the spot? A megadungeon would be a classic example of low scene-setting improvisation, everything is laid out ahead of time. Things like random encounter tables and the like also indicate low level of scene-setting improvisation.
-Scene resolution improvisation: is resolving the scene handled more by following procedures laid down in the rules or by the players making shit up and lots of Cunning Plans?
Low scene setting improvisation/low scene resolution improvisation: modern adventure paths.
Low scene setting improvisation/high scene resolution improvisation: Old School.
High scene setting improvisation/low scene resolution improvisation: Indie.
High scene setting improvisation/high scene resolution improvisation: improv.
I get what you mean, but this is a little bit tricky. Because, yes, the megadungeon is determined in advance in terms of content, but not in terms of the route the players will take through it?
DeleteSure, but I often find that something like a megadungeon requires less DM involvement on the scene-setting level than even the most railroaded railroad since you can just sit back and let the players hack through it any way they want you're not doing any improv at all, while a railroad often requires a good bit of DM improv to keep the players on the rail.
DeleteI do like the kind of passivity and lack of scene-setting improv of a lot of OSR games on the part of the DM, makes me feel like Crom just sitting back and letting his people do their own thing while sending occasional dooms at them.
Surely the comparison isn't formal structure vs doing new things, but rather using published modules (covers) vs creating your own content (originals)?
ReplyDeletePerhaps you're right!
DeleteI like to take classic modules and jam them into my campaigns, applying my creativity to adaptation, opposition machinations, and occasional original quests. God help me ... does that make me Oasis?
ReplyDeleteHaha.
DeleteI said maybe...
Delete"Golden Slumbers" is an interesting example, since the lyrics were actually adapted from a 17th century play! So in a way, it is closer to the "classical" style than "Love Me Do".
ReplyDeleteIndeed, although he made up the tune himself. I think I'm right in saying he had the sheet music for the original version, but since he can't read music he just made up a tune of his own to fit the lyrics.
Delete