Robert Fripp's Diary

Our second night at the

In return the performer cannot be asked, even expected, to continually absorb the negative consequences of inappropriate behaviour by innocent audients who have bought a ticket with their hard-earned pay, and assume the right to behave as they want without regard for the repercussions.

What a pity.

09.08
Up at 05.45. A good period reflecting on the process of discipline, e-flurrying, future-speaking to David Singleton (now in Los Angeles) & talking to The Little Horse in Chiswick.

11.25

Response To The Guestbook:

RF: Charles' post is perceptive. My sense from the stage was very similar. The questions for me address the why & how of how the audience responds as it does to any particular performance. I ask the other Crims for their views, then move onto the Crimcrew. Their views are reliable & insightful, & John Sinks is an opinion I've learnt to trust for its clarity. Josh the FOH sound mixer is also a good one.

So, how & why? Data on process:

The first of anything has its own power by virtue of the fact that it is the first.
The second of anything is always (potentially) the weakest by virtue of the fact that it is the second.

So, of the three shows in the Fillmore, Friday was the most intrinsically vulnerable.

The performance process acquires a life of its own only if certain things happen at particular points in that process. The beginning is dependent upon the group: that is our responsibility. We can set things moving in the "right" direction.

Part of this is planning a set list for that evening. Part of that is to write the set list on the day (rather than punch up automatic or filed lists). Both evenings so far have been my suggestions, modified only slightly by Adrian for practical reasons (voice state & guitar changes).

Part of this is how the group links together & walks on stage. We centre in on the Crimson affirmatory "fisting", in private & in onstage public. Part of this is an invocation of the Muse, which falls to one of the group to act on its behalf (whether this is articulated or assumed privately & individually). Part of this is attention to the quality of the first note.

Then, we have to let go of that planning, direction & control so the performance is given room to acquire a life of its own. Otherwise the show is destined to be a form of living death ("extreme" professionalism, as in some cabaret) where there is no room for organic development.

For the show to take on its own life, the audience must necessarily come to life in its own way. This is not good news for the "consumer rights" part of the innocent audience which wants what it wants in the way that it wants it when & how it wants it - because it has bought a ticket! If audient contribution goes no farther than this, the show will die on its feet. Or, at best, fall asleep. In a qualitative sense, the show moves forward sequentially in time but in its process unravels & unwinds "backwards".

So, the show seemed to begin well. Then, something didn't "trigger". Was it the set list misreading the currents of the day? Was it the distinctive energies of a Friday night at a later time than the Thursday show? Was it the herbal ingestion wafting onstage not only affecting Adrian's voice? Was it the vulnerable second step of any process? My personal question: did I fail to be present to what was necessary?

Maybe all of this. Maybe these factors all came together to allow other potentially disruptive influences to surface: when the show's "protective shield" falls away, or doesn't come into play, basement behaviour is able to surface. So, with the band aiming to pull the overall show towards a completion through a series of encores (a mini-process at the end of the larger process, a mini-show with the potential to complete both processes enfolded within each other) off went the flash. An arrow fired straight to the guitarist's heart took him out of that mini-process (let's note: "punishment" is not involved here, although tragedy is).

The first (Thursday) night at the Fillmore was fabulous. Not because of the group: because of the audience. The audience made that show happen. I applauded them in gratitude and acknowledgement. The faces I saw on Friday didn't look as "up" to me. But then, how can I "blame" the audience? And what did the band do about it? Well, as Charles notes, the band was "more polished overall tonight (despite a couple of missteps by Fripp)". So, I think we were delivering. Then, something changed significantly during "Frame By Frame". The how & why is mysterious.

And tonight is tonight.