writings & readings
August 2002
Interview with Richard Einhorn, New York City,
August 13, 2002
SHAPIRO: The first thing that raised an eyebrow
about you was that I learned
you produced a Yo Yo Ma record that won a
Grammy. Not everyone does that...
EINHORN: [laughs] Well, I don't know about
that. I think anyone that produces
a Yo Yo Ma record comes close. I was working
for CBS Masterworks for a time as
a record producer-it's the only straight job
I've ever had. I guess he was
assigned to me because I was young and he was
as well.
SHAPIRO: This was 1982?
EINHORN: Actually it was 1980 when we started
to work together. We made the
record in '81 and then it was released and won
the Grammy in '82. He was
amazing, he was incredible then and he's even
better now. Amazing.
SHAPIRO: Were you up on stage with him at the
ceremony?
EINHORN: Oh, god no.
SHAPIRO: The classical people never go up on
stage. They usually say something
coming out of commercial like, "before the
televised ceremony began, awards
were given to so and so for best world
documentary soundtrack" or some other
obscure category like that.
EINHORN: And yet it always seems to be the
obscure stuff that's interesting. I
remember Tito Puente getting like four or five
awards and the woman could
never pronounce his name correctly. So bizarre.
SHAPIRO: Your harp piece "New Pages" for two
harps is wonderful. It's the
first thing that I heard of yours in the form
of a 90-second mp3 clip. Very
soothing in the way that the parts fall over
one another. Is that just one
harpist, multi-tracked?
EINHORN: Right. It was actually originally for
piano but Elizabeth Panzer
liked it so I made an arrangement for harp that
basically consisted of me
copying the score with a few changes for harp.
It was called "New Pages"
because the piece was literally a test-- I got
annoyed with the manuscript
paper that I was using. I couldn't find good
paper so, I commissioned a
graphic artist to make me new paper. I figured
that the best way to see if the
paper worked for me was to write a piece. I
wrote "New Pages" in a day and a
half. It's only about four minutes. I've always
liked that piece because I had
fun writing it. That must have been in the late
ë80s because I've since
stopped caring about manuscript paper (laughs).
SHAPIRO: I should ask every composer I
interview "at what point did you stop
caring about the manuscript paper that you
use?"
EINHORN: [laughs] King brand was definitely the
best. But the problem was the
size. It's too big. Where can you get it
photocopied? This [shows me some
paper lying on his stand] is Judy Green paper.
What do you use?
SHAPIRO: I just make my own using Finale. So,
"Voices of Light" sold something
like 85,000 to 100,000 copies. That's a pretty
big deal for a classical
record, you were on the Billboard charts for
seven weeks!
EINHORN: Right.
SHAPIRO: And it was also successful as a live
performance piece.
EINHORN: Right, it sold out. We toured it for
two seasons. 1996-7. But we had
had six performances before that. We had the
premiere up in Northampton
(Massachusetts) in '94 and then it premiered at
the Brooklyn Academy of Music
(BAM) in '95. During the tour we had
performances all over the place. Now
upcoming performances are in South Africa and
in Australia in the Sydney
Festival. I just found out that it's going to
Singapore in 2003. I never
expected this. My idea of success for the
project was the one everyone else
has: getting a second performance. Suddenly, it
seemed to touch a chord with
some people. I wish I knew how I did it
[laughs].
SHAPIRO: So, you wrote the music knowing it was
going to be played along with
the silent film--
EINHORN: --it wasn't quite a film score. For me
the film broke naturally into
fifteen sections. I wrote movements with
lengths that corresponded to the
length of a particular section but within that,
whatever happens, happens.
SHAPIRO: It's sort of a strange story. I read
something about how the film had
disappeared only to be found years later in a
broom closet in a mental
institution.
EINHORN: Anywhere you go in the story it gets
weird. The film was burned by
fire twice. The film was entirely reconstructed
and then burned again. But the
truth of the matter is that back then that
happened a lot because the
materials used for the film was nitrate and so
it was very flammable. I've
been told that some crazy amount of silent
films, like 90% of them have been
destroyed because of fire. In the case of The
Passion of Joan of Arc, of the
two prints, one was sent back to Paris and one
went to a collector who
happened to be the head of a mental institution
and it's possible that it was
shown. But it's also possible that it wasn't
and that it just sat there,
forgotten about in Oslo. And then one day they
were cleaning out the janitors
closet and they found cans of old nitrate film
and they got an expert to open
it up. They sent it off to the Oslo film museum
and they opened it up and it
was like, "Oh my god, here's this undiscovered
masterpiece." Here's an
original print of a masterpiece that everybody
had thought had been truncated
or lost in some way. It's quite a story.
SHAPIRO: The liner notes in the jacket for were
generous, but not like an
irritating composer going on forever about
something cerebral or something
like that.
EINHORN: Well, I'm sure what happens with a lot
of composers is that writing
the piece is actually the end of a really long
process. If you write a large
piece you're going to be involved with it for a
long time. Discovering all of
that stuff about Joan of Arc and about the
movie and the text was amazing.
Being able to put it all together in terms of
writing the notes was like
summarizing the entire story. There's a level
for me where it's hard to talk
about the music because I think it's either
fairly obvious or it's so obscure
and just a part of your process. Who's going to
be interested in that? I mean,
the really exciting stuff for me to talk about
is the stuff that's "around"
the piece. Otherwise, why would you write it?
When I was at Columbia, and I
don't know if this is still true, to get your
doctorate you had to not only
write a piece but you also had to write an
analysis of the piece. That struck
me as something totally wrong and it was one of
the reasons why I dropped out
of the program. Everyone would do the obvious
thing: you'd write the analysis
first and then write the music based upon that.
If you write the piece first,
then you'd have to then discover stupid
justifications about what you're doing
such as finding some sort of hexachordal
bullshit. The bottom line is that if
you write a piece and you're not really
thinking in a strictly musical context
then there's something seriously wrong. A lot
of priorities are screwed up
there because you can't really focus on the
music--
SHAPIRO: --while you're trying to write
something at the same time you're
hoping that what you're doing is going to be
approved and sanctioned by your
teachers.
EINHORN: Right, it's the worst kind of
audience. There are plenty of things
going on in "Voices of Light." But my favorite
part of it is where I was able
to reduce the language down to just a C Major
chord and an A minor chord. It
just alternates between those two chords.
That's it! The more important thing
for me at that point is what's going on there
in a literary way. I'm setting
words by Hildegard that say, "Oh, feminine
form, how beautiful you are."
There's a lot of different ways of looking at
that but for me when I was
writing the music I was laughing. It's like
"hey, I'm a guy, a heterosexual
guy." In the seven years that the piece has
been going around, nobody else has
found that amusing but I always thought it was
hilarious.
SHAPIRO: One time I was talking to one of my
teachers at Oberlin about the
Grateful Dead song "Eyes of the World" that
bounced back and forth between two
chords [EMaj7 and A] for like 10 minutes that I
thought was fascinating. He
just said, "Oh, that sounds boring."
EINHORN: Yeah. The trick is to be simple. It's
easy to write complicated
music-- it's the easiest thing in the world.
All you have to do is sit there
and tally your little numbers up and it's easy.
What's really hard to do is
write C Major and really believe in it.
SHAPIRO: Do you think that that has something
to do with the popularity of the
record?
EINHORN: The fact that it's simple?
SHAPIRO: Right. I mean if you happen to know
what polyrhythmic activity and
other types of things like that are, you're
listening to it on a certain
level. But if you don't and just throw the
record on and don't care about
those sorts of things does that contribute to
100,000 copies sold?
EINHORN: Well, Mozart wrote this letter to his
father saying that he was
writing a new piece and it's got all of the
details that a connoisseur would
want and yet it's so simple that anyone could
get it on a first hearing. That
strikes me as just common sense. It's like a
lot of things that Mozart wrote
about his music-- when in doubt, jump an
octave.
SHAPIRO: You mean leap an octave?
EINHORN: Right. It's a really common sense,
natural and normal thing to do.
There's nobody alive that doesn't write for an
audience. It might be an ideal
audience, an audience of one or 1,000. So if
you don't think that people
aren't going to appreciate and understand your
music on many different levels
you're a fool. If you listen to Rite of Spring,
it's like, "wow, that's
amazing, listen to those rhythms. Then if you
go back to it again it's the
same thing, but this time it's about the chords
and then it's just "who cares
about the rhythms and the chords. It's all just
incredible!" And it's that
kind of layering that I love.
SHAPIRO: You made the record with Sony
Classical. It must be nice to hook up
with people like that, the sort of outfit where
if they want to put up a
poster up about you in Auckland, they can do
easily. There are people that
would give up body parts to get that sort of
deal. But you said in your notes
that when you were asked by Sony to give them
the music you said no!
EINHORN: To this day the whole thing still
blows my mind. You have to look at
it from my point of view and then from Peter
Gelb's [the head of Sony
Classical] point of view. Again, from my point
of view, I'm just happy that
there's been a second performance. The piece is
impossibly expensive and it
costs a fortune to promote it since to mount
the piece you've got to get an
orchestra and chorus you've got to get four
soloists. If you're going to do it
with the film you've got to rent it and you've
got to find a hall big enough
for it. You've got to fund raise like crazy.
Who has the money to do this? The
other half of it is that it's too expensive to
record. Why go through all the
aggravation to sell only 4,000 records? Why go
through all of the aggravation
and all of the upset and the worry of finding
out whether or not you're going
to get accepted by a label when you know as a
foregone conclusion that it will
never happen? But now look at it from Peter's
point of view. What big record
companies want are big projects. Why? Because
big projects attract big
publicity.
SHAPIRO: The broom closet story must have been
good for a few articles.
EINHORN: Right. They don't want little
projects. They don't want recordings of
the chamber music of Louis Spohr. They can't
afford to record it. But what
they can afford to record is stuff that can
somehow make a splash in the major
press. From Peter's standpoint, here was an
undiscovered film and a large
piece that could attract large orchestras and
good soloists.
SHAPIRO: The movie helps because it's Joan of
Arc and it's a good movie--
EINHORN: --and nobody has seen it and there's
an amazing story to it. By sheer
accident I had done something that was of
interest to a large company. It was
a six-year effort but I knew I would do a good
job and that it would be
successful.
SHAPIRO: Was the Sony stuff going on before or
after you wrote the piece?
EINHORN: After. Nobody is interested in an
idea. They're interested in
objects. I think that there was nobody who
believed less that it would
actually get recorded than me. I didn't believe
it until I was on the plane
going over to Holland [laughs]. A great thing
in all of this was meeting a lot
of different people who had totally different
takes on the piece. I've heard a
lot of different groups do the piece in totally
different ways as well as
hearing feedback from audiences that heard
totally different things in the
piece.
SHAPIRO: Like the difference in the reactions
from the Brooklyn Academy of
Music and then somewhere else.
EINHORN: Like Elgin, Illinois. Two very
different audiences-- as big a
difference you can imagine. Elgin is a working
class town; they have a choir
that's been together for 50 years. It was the
50th anniversary of the choir
and they decided to perform "Voices of Light."
BAM was great. It's a wonderful
place and all of my friends were there. It was
like a dream. I thought that it
would be an ideal sort of thing for the Next
Wave Festival but it never
occurred to me that I'd be in a position where
that could happen. But I got
very lucky and it happened and it was one of
the best experiences that I've
had with the piece. So if you take an audience
like that which is very
sophisticated and demands an awful lot and then
take an audience like Elgin
which is a rural area pretty far away from
Chicago, it's a totally different
thing. Elgin is a working class, heartland sort
of place. There are probably
no Catholics around so Joan of Arc isn't
connecting immediately to them. So
the piece means different things to different
people, which, by the way, is a
good reason to have a second performance. You
get different insights into how
your music comes across.
SHAPIRO: So, a couple of years after finishing
up at Columbia you produced a
Meredith Monk record.
EINHORN: Well, at that time she was a friend of
a friend's girlfriend who was
in one of Meredith's early singing groups.
Meredith needed someone to produce
some demo tapes and so she suggested me. I went
down and met her and then one
thing led to another and I ended up producing a
record for her called "Tablet
and Songs from the Hill." They're both
beautiful pieces. She's amazing. A
genius.
SHAPIRO: I wonder how you assemble your texts.
For instance, the text of
"Carnival of Miracles."
EINHORN: I'm very proud of that text. The
choices are really carefully done.
Typically I'll read thousands of pages in order
to get one sentence.
SHAPIRO: Do you read with a highlighter in
hand?
EINHORN: Yes. And another thing that I do is
type them into a word processor.
I like the collage method. What interests me
about the text in "Carnival" is
the way that people construct emotional
meanings from where text comes from.
For instance, if you know that a bit of text
comes from someone that you like,
you think you like it. But if the text is
coming from a place that you don't
like then you don't like the idea. So, in
"Carnival of Miracles" I played with
that idea by taking a text by Victoria
Woodhull, a feminist, and I mixed and
matched it with a quote from the Marquis de
Sade. Most of us would agree that
your right to love or not love is almost an
inalienable right. But when the
Marquis de Sade says it then it means something
totally different! The idea
is that the listener's perception as to what is
good and correct and proper
gets fucked up. Right now I'm doing something
with Old Testament, New
Testament and Qu'ran text with the Albany
Symphony. Having those texts side by
side, someone will listen to it and not know -I
don't even know anymore--
which text is coming from which source.
SHAPIRO: It's all in English?
EINHORN: Yeah, for two reasons, one so that it
can be understood. The other
reason is because there's a tradition in Islam
that the Qu'ran cannot be
translated-- to translate it into something
else is basically to distort the
word of God. So, in a sense, translating the
word of God is, in effect,
corrupting it. I wanted to address that.
SHAPIRO: When is it going to be performed?
EINHORN: September 12th, 13th and 15th. I have
a feeling everybody is chilling
out on the 11th.
SHAPIRO: For "Carnival of Miracles," what is it
that brings all of the texts
together? They're from such diverse places.
EINHORN: The texts are all connected by the
idea of freedom. It's a very
strange collection of texts that all deal with
different aspects of freedom. I
started with the text from "The Thunder:
Perfect Mind" from the Gnostic
Gospels. I knew the texts for many, many years
and I loved it because that
stuff stood for the notion that there isn't a
mediator between you and
whatever you think of as being God. That's a
very strange notion, particularly
in Christianity because you need Christ and the
Church as your mediator in
your own striving towards God. The Gnostics
took away that mediator and gave a
sort of direct pipeline to God that gives one a
different sort of freedom, one
that you don't have otherwise. Then I found a
Szymborska poem from 1986. I
created an abridgment of it because I needed a
certain length. The poem is
about all of these very simple miracles, the
final one being that the
unthinkable can be thought. After reading it
for the first time I thought,
that's a beautiful poem, why is it affecting me
the way that it is? I was
really crying when I finished it and I thought
that it was about possibility.
SHAPIRO: Like about what was going on in Poland
at that time.
EINHORN: Exactly. Then I bought a Polish
dictionary and I looked up the words.
SHAPIRO: You made the translation yourself?
EINHORN: No, I found an English version but I
checked it out for myself to see
if any of the words had alternate meanings.
Many of the words were almost
like a code talking about gaining freedom from
an oppressive regime. I
realized then that the juxtaposition of that
poem with the one from the
Gnostics gave me a great thing to hang a piece
of music on-- the notion of
different kinds of freedoms. Some of these
conflict with each other, like
religious and scientific freedom in the sense
of the Galileo quote that I used
"...and yet it moves". So at that point I'm
forced with the issues of how I
can make all of these aspects come out
succinctly. With Galileo it's easy. If
you know his story all you have to say is his
one statement that sums up the
entire story.
SHAPIRO: What about the Beethoven quote, "Does
he suppose that I am thinking
about his miserable violin when the spirit is
speaking to me?"
EINHORN: Well, with him obviously that's
talking about artistic freedom which
is something that we all cherish. It sort of
goes back to Beethoven in a way.
He's saying what do I care about your damn
fiddle when the spirit is running
through me? It's sort of true but it's also
pompous and self-important. So I
wanted to poke some fun at that.
SHAPIRO: Would it be true to say that for you,
it all goes back to the text?
EINHORN: Well, these days it's totally true but
one of my favorite pieces that
I've done is "The Silence" which doesn't have
text. It's a piece for double
string quartet that I feel was a big
breakthrough. It was such a pain to get a
quartet together so when it finally came around
to writing for string quartet
I figured I might as well get two for the price
of one. So I expanded it.
SHAPIRO: Can we talk about your film scoring in
L.A.?
EINHORN: Getting into that business is a really
great way to lower your
self-esteem quickly because everybody will try
to use you as a punching bag.
SHAPIRO: But if you have written something like
"Voices of Light" and loads of
other things outside of that business then it's
like producers and directors
want you to give them your "sound."
EINHORN: Right, when they call you up there's a
sort of built in understanding
where it's like you do what you do. The best
way I've found to deal with the
film business is entirely on your own terms.
But that doesn't mean acting like
a fool-- it means knowing what your music is
and knowing what you'd like to
contribute musically to a specific project.
Just like with chamber music or
ballet or opera or whatever. If you don't and
you're sensitive in some way
you can be ripped to shreds because there is so
much money and ego there and
it attracts very unstable people who are in
positions of power. Most films
that come out every year are really bad. And
then there are a handful of them
that are really good and they don't necessarily
correlate with money but to
some extent they do. And of those films, unless
you're an incredible
chameleon, you're only qualified for like one
or two of those films at best.
And the amount of money that you'll make from
it very quickly wears off when
you realize how much work is involved.
SHAPIRO: So if you were going out to L.A. and
you wanted to try it what would
you do? If there are a just a few of movies
that would be "in my pocket," how
do you go about finding them and become friends
with the people that are
making them?
EINHORN: The best way of getting a shot there
when you're young is to write
absolutely the best music that you can, no
matter what the project is and then
to get it recorded in the most professional way
that you can, with the best
players, the best sound, edited, mixed, etc.
Put that stuff on a demo tape and
blow everybody away. That's the best thing to
do. But there are so many other
better things to do with your life-- it's awful
work. You're talking about six
to eight weeks of 14-hour days. You don't see
your girlfriend/boyfriend and
you don't eat well. It's tremendous stress and
the deadlines are awful. And
besides, at the end, the music gets drowned out
by a garbage can or
something--
SHAPIRO: --or, I'm sure this has happened to
you, when I've composed cues for
closing credits or even for something that's
going inside the film, the
director or producer ends up using that music
for a different part of the
film.
EINHORN: There's a level at which that is done.
Today, when you're talking
about the whole filmmaker, director, editor,
producer world, you're talking
about very unsophisticated people unless
they're really great. It's amazing
the movies that they don't know! And they
really need to know them. But the
best filmmakers that I've worked with know what
they're doing. Arthur Penn
knows exactly what he's doing as do Kathryn
Bigelow and Walter Murch. They can
draw from a lot of stuff and the best part is
you can learn a lot about drama,
theater and film making from them. But you'll
often work with someone who
hasn't seen the major Bergman films or hasn't
even seen Hitchcock films. More
often than not they've reinvented the wheel,
meaning that by accident, they've
done something that someone did 10 or 15 years
ago. You have to contrast that
with someone who knows what they're doing when
they take your music and move
it from point A to point B. If they've done
great work in the past you trust
their sensibility insofar as when they move
your music around you realize that
it's actually not too bad an idea and you wish
you'd thought of it! But it's
very rare that you run across something like
that. For me, what happened was
that I went from one bad movie to another and
it didn't matter how good my
work was.
SHAPIRO: What year are we talking about?
EINHORN: Mid-eighties. I would get great
reviews in Variety and Hollywood
Reporter and my friends would see the movies
and love the music, but who
cares? The movies were terrible. They were
unwatchable. When they start
praising the music you know something is really
bad. That's what happened. Not
every time but a lot of times. I got fed up
with it.
SHAPIRO: So there's nothing on your screen
right now in film music?
EINHORN: Yes, but some of "Voices of Light" was
used in "K-19" which is the
Harrison Ford film that's out now. I think that
the music is used brilliantly.
Totally differently than I would have ever
expected. They said they were going
to mash it up and I thought, oh shit. But then
I heard that Walter Murch was
going to do it --he's a brilliant man, the
editor of Apocalypse Now and The
Conversation-- and so I thought to myself he
can do whatever he wants! And
then I met Walter and Kathryn Bigelow. They
said, you've got to understand,
we've really mashed it up. I was really worried
by that point but it was
great. I told Walter that I had wished that I
had thought of some counterpoint
he created. He had layered two different
sections of Voices of Light on top of
one another and it was really wonderful. So,
when you work with really good
artists, the best thing you can do is just stay
out of people's way. They know
the same thing about you. For instance, when I
was working with Arthur Penn,
he absolutely did not want to hear every piece
of music. He said, we'll deal
with it later and he gave me carte blanche.
SHAPIRO: So, you never had a spotting session
or something like that before
starting your end of things?
EINHORN: Right.
SHAPIRO: I don't really like spotting sessions.
You have to sit there and
pretend to be things that you're not and prove
yourself by saying the key
phrase that's going to make the director and
the producer say yes to you being
brought on to the project.
EINHORN: Sometimes there are good things that
can come out of spotting
sessions. You're best bet is to talk their
language. By the way, that's always
a pretty good idea, I've found. If you're
talking to a performer that's
playing your music and you start talking about
flowers in the fields and your
personal reasons for writing this greatest of
your great masterpieces, sooner
or later, a player is just going to say, "Would
you mind telling me the tempo
please?" Tell people what they need to hear in
order to get their job done.
It's common sense but I think that that's
something that takes a while for
some people to learn.
SHAPIRO: Are you someone that looks to very old
music as inspiration and then
really modern stuff as inspiration and not
really much in between?
EINHORN: It seems that everybody I know of my
generation, with some notable
exceptions has almost the same template of
taste. Somewhere around Bach our
interest starts to wane and by the time you get
to Liszt we're just totally
uninterested and then it picks up a lot with
Debussy and Stravinsky. Then when
you get to 1950 it starts to--
SHAPIRO: --suck?
EINHORN: Get very exciting [laughs]. It was
very exciting music for us to be
listening to at that time. Of course tonality
reared its head again but with
exciting rhythms. Gesang der Junglinge was
something that I listened to
obsessively. Telemusik, which hardly anyone
knows, is another electronic piece
of Stockhausen's that I love but it would be
hard to know that from listening
to the music that I write now. With Boulez, I
didn't really know that much of
it when I was a kid but I've started to listen
to more of it and then of
course rock music which transformed everything.
SHAPIRO: What songwriters do you like?
EINHORN: PJ Harvey. Kate Bush is as great a
songwriter as Gershwin or
Schubert. She's a genius. It's hard to believe
that she's someone who is
totally unsellable in the United States. You
can't give her records away here.
She's fantastic. With PJ Harvey, for the kinds
of songs that I like she's
enormously talented. My interest in pop music
peaked with Frank Zappa and
Captain Beefheart. But that was in 1971. That's
when I started to turn away. I
came back up again with the Talking Heads but
then turned away until Kate
Bush.
SHAPIRO: It said on your website
[www.richardeinhorn.com] that you like
Nirvana.
EINHORN: Yeah [laughs], I like that stuff. I'm
also an obsessive Captain
Beefheart fan of course. They're wonderful. I
went to Gary Lucas's show where
he did Beefheart covers. I interviewed
Beefheart when I was 19. I had a chance
to do that when I was working at a radio
station. One of the high points of my
life [laughs].