The Crystallization of the New, New Music at UCSD

October 1, 2011

1. Ever-New California

In 1966 work began on widening the road leading from a sleepy San Diego beach community, La Jolla Shores, up to the area where an infant university, the University of California San Diego (UCSD), was quickly developing. The road was formerly well-known as a treacherous and winding path that was a hurdle on Highway 101 for pleasure seekers and drug runners between Southern California and Mexico's famous border town, Tijuana. The widened road filled in canyons and corners so that a steady grade climbed straight up, making two neat switchbacks before arriving at the university.

Plenty of parking now exists along the widened road itself and also above and below it in parking lots standing like graveyards on top of erased canyons. Historic highway 101 is now completely buried beneath the university; vestiges of it have been reborn into large walkways that connect the 1200-acre campus. The area has been so thoroughly transformed that the landscape of 1966 is virtually unrecognizable. The challenge for a historian interested in the institution is to attempt to see not only the present thoroughfares, but to animate the process of their creation, to attempt to recover the canyons that were filled and the value system that motivated their filling-in. This approach to history is archeological in the sense articulated by Michel Foucault in that that it attempts to uncover the multitude of processes that create a historical record.1 This essay seeks to explain the formation of an American music institution at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) in the same year, 1966, by examining the competing ideologies of three key stakeholders.

The 1960s were an important time for the United States in establishing itself as an autonomous player and leader in the world of music, including jazz, classical, and popular music. The stultifying political climate of the McCarthy period was over; the surf-rock craze brought popular music to a larger audience of baby boomers coming of age; jazz was increasingly exported to Europe; and the classical world's embrace of European post-Webern serialism had lost its influence. The decade marks the beginning of a uniquely American brand of musical pluralism. For classical music, establishing itself often meant retreating to the university, where composers were funded through professorial appointments and able to reach people who were sympathetic to their work. Universities were being built at a record pace, both to keep up with the surging demand from the baby-boomer generation and in response to the 1958 National Defense Education Act. One such university was UCSD.

The music department at UCSD provides an interesting case study within the larger trend in American music for several reasons. For one, San Diego is at the end of the Western frontier, a place described as a desert landscape at the time of the university's establishment. Such a "blank-slate" kind of environment is ideal for the establishment of a new school without the prejudices and social pressures that develop over time. Secondly, being located on the Pacific Rim allowed closer and more meaningful contact with American, Asian, and Polynesian musical practices than it did with European traditions.2 Thirdly, UCSD today is at the forefront of the American post-war avant-garde. Musical composition and experiment is considered research; with its use of the material sciences laboratory as its model, the department has become a musical think-tank forming international partnerships with post-graduate research centers around the world. In many ways, the department stands as an institutional embodiment of the post-war scientism that characterized a generation of composers whose discourse was articulated in the journals Die Riehe and Perspectives of New Music. It was in the pages of these journals that "new music" established an academic perspective for its critical interpretation. The authors, almost always composers, explained how they constructed pieces of music and explored new techniques and ideas about music and sound.3 UCSD's music faculty is made up almost entirely of composers and performers, all of whom are focused on creating, explaining and performing new music. It is the institutional equivalent of Perspectives, where a discourse around new music is produced through administrative and curricular design rather than text.

California's landscape embodied the ethos of the baby boomers. It was the destination for those who sought to establish a new order of free living in what might be thought of as the most recent gold-rush.4 In direct contrast to its current fiscal crisis, the future promised nothing but growth and prosperity. A "clean-slate" and full-of-promise ideological and intellectual landscape, coupled with the eternal sunshine of Southern California was the ideal condition for a department dedicated to the ever-newness of new music. But just what kind of structure did the formation of this department require? How was such a radical approach defended? What intellectual and ideological canyons and gulfs are now filled and paved smooth? To begin to answer these questions, I will attempt to animate three central actors whose visions sometimes coalesced but more often collided. The story is essentially one of conflict, where a new generation rejected the values of an older one. Yet it is not simply the rejection of old values to make way for progressive new ones, for the new values both transform some of the old ones and reject some new ones.

Over the course of my research I encountered many different views of the department from the faculty who were active in its early days. To some it was a kind of Garden of Eden where composers and performers could work without the interference of historians or theorists. Inevitably, these stories depict this glorious environment as eventually poisoned by things like professionalization or an incompatible hire. To others it was a place of enslavement where performers were made to be subservient to composers in a kind of new-music despotism. To some, "experiment" meant heading over to the empirical sciences in search of predictable neurological reactions. To others, experimentation was building a complex metronome or analyzing the harmonics of an ocean wave. In many cases, comparisons were drawn to the sciences, whereby musicians and composers demanded equal treatment: an active laboratory, ample funding, and the intellectual unity that Science as a field with a capital 'S' exemplifies—the ever upward quest for truth. Arguments of this latter sort followed from the question: Why should a musician have to answer to the demands of a public if the physicist doesn't? Similarly, the idea of newness as a scientific imperative: Why should we play old music, do we practice old physics? Yet the demand for equity with theoretical physics coexisted with the rejection of traditional intellectual scholarship; musical performance and practice were to be held as valid products for academic review. These tensions and contradictions were constitutive for the department; they are the expression of a particular idea in the act of finding a good fit with contemporary values. The struggles between the three leading actors illuminates the historical context and the primary concerns that shaped the institution for decades to come.

2. The Three Actors: John Stewart, Roselyn Tureck, Will Ogdon

John Stewart, a literature professor and musician who became an administrator in 1962, was given the task of establishing the second college at UCSD, which he named Muir after the western naturalist John Muir.5 Stewart's plan was to have this college embody Muir's creative and exploratory spirit by requiring a hands-on involvement with the arts as a part of the core curriculum—an ecological approach to education. Rosalyn Tureck, a Steinway pianos artist and a famous Bach interpreter and scholar, established a strong relationship with the university community, including faculty, administration, and their wives, after her appearance as a Regents' Lecturer in the winter of 1966.6 Tureck imagined a glorious Bach institute overlooking the Pacific Ocean; as a tribute to Tureck's practice, the institute was to integrate the study and performance of Bach. Will Ogdon, the founding chair of the department, was hired on the advice of the expatriate Austrian composer Ernst Krenek after Stewart's unsuccessful attempts to lure composers of his own choosing to the university.7 Krenek recommended Ogdon as well as Robert Erickson, two very different American composers who were students of Krenek in the years after the Second World War, when Krenek taught at Hamline University in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

The story that is usually told about the formation of the department focuses on Ogdon as the agent leading the visionary establishment of an experimental music department whose relation to the new music of the European classical tradition was seeded by  by Ernst Krenek.8 As Ogdon tells the story, Krenek advised Stewart to install Ogdon and Erickson as the foundations of the department and Ogdon went on to bring in Tom Nee as a UCSD sponsored conductor for the La Jolla Civic Orchestra.9 Many interviewees suggested that the department under Ogdon's chairmanship was silently co-chaired by Erickson, the composer whose ideas and music are seen as examples of the particularly creative and engaging products of the department's early years. However we understand the authority of the chair, this narrative is a species of romance that necessarily omits the importance of other principals and their work, such as Tureck and her Bach institute, that acted as a vehicle for establishing the parameters of the new department's vision. Similarly, by focusing on Ogdon we forget about the constitutive function of the administrative directives that he was asked to institute by Stewart. Rather than imagining a kind of value-free zone into which a particular vision is expressed, an archeological method attempts to view the whole environment, to include both the excluded actors and the administrative directives together in a productive gathering of forces. This method allows a broader consideration of how the department became the crystallization of post-war musical culture in the US. Bound up with the emergence of the West Coast as a locus for baby-boomer reality, including victory culture, "Disneyfied" accessibility and the trans-historical subject, the music department at UCSD was and remains an important moment for understanding and expressing the unique response of post-war American education to these emergent socio-cultural values. In fact, the department's interdisciplinarity and intradisciplinarity—together with its experimental focus—foreshadow the ideas of many contemporary institutes and forward thinking programs. The program is not the product of a single actor and a mission statement; it is rather the acting out of various versions of its mission that amounts to a continued search for its expression. Maintaining a perspective on the whole allows a view of the institution's adaptability; we begin to see the unstable maneuvering and the last minute adjustments that respond to social and cultural change.

3. Tureck's La Jolla

The celebrated arrival of Tureck in La Jolla reveals something essential about the prevailing culture—both musical and ideological—of the time and place. The university was already a bit of a challenge for the community because of the sudden influx of students and faculty from all over the country. For example, the city had a real estate covenant that barred Jewish and Black people from obtaining residence, so the university had to construct housing for faculty that would allow them all to live close to campus. The relationship between the community and UCSD was mediated in part by the Arts and Lectures series, a joint venture between the city of La Jolla and the university that brought in lecturers and artists to present ideas and art to the public. The musical portion of the series was made up mostly of European chamber groups playing repertory from the Classical and Romantic periods.10 This musical environment can be characterized as conservative and nostalgic—a yearning for the past manifested in contemporary representations of traditional music.

Evidently, Tureck's brand of Bach interpretation and her personality in general were a good fit with the community. When she first came to La Jolla as an artist in the 1965 series, she was greeted by a flurry of media activity. Critics were ecstatic after her performance, referring to her as the "High Priestess of Bach."11 The success of the concert was confirmed by her being asked to return the following year, and in the summer of 1966 she ran a special music workshop in the community of La Jolla, an event that promised to attract the most talented classical musicians to the city.12 The following year marked Tureck's appointment as a professor at UCSD. The appointment made newspaper headlines, in which it was heralded as the action of then UC President Clark Kerr and Chancellor John Galbraith.13 Tureck's position as a leader in the community was cemented by her throwing a party for the famous chemist, Dr. Harold Urey, on the day that UCSD inaugurated a building named in his honor.14

In the first year of her position at UCSD (1966-67), Tureck attempted to move her summer school to the university and further develop her plans for a more permanent Bach institute. While there was support from the community both at large and internally, Tureck's plan ultimately did not pan out. Initially the university backed her plans, helping to secure extra funds in support of Tureck's Bach specialty course for the winter quarter. The amount, 6,000 dollars (which was, at the time, more than a third of a full professor's salary), was funded by special request of Chancellor Galbraith. The Provost, John Stewart, assured her that he would continue to seek more permanent support for the course through a Rockefeller Grant.15 Tureck planned that the institute would be a center that integrated the musicological, theoretical, and historical study of Bach with performance. The center was to have an orchestra, a festival, a library and research center, a publication, a dance division and an international society. Robert Tschirgi, vice-chancellor, was apprehensive of such a "grandiose" plan for "such a restricted Subject", but the Provost's office employed a consultant who suggested that the plan was possible under certain conditions.16 The institute never materialized, in part because of personality issues and conflicting visions with the music department.

The fact that there is a complete file devoted to Tureck in the Chancellor's subject files is indicative of the respect that she commanded from the top of the administration. However, Tureck's insistence that she bypass traditional departmental structures strained her relations with the music department.17 Tureck's departure from the university was preceded by an altercation in her second year (1967-68) with Ogdon, then chair, who insisted that her special course, and the 6,000 dollars, be extracurricular to her regular teaching load.18 She consented to Ogdon's demands (though she ignored his requirement that the funds be dedicated to a particular project), and made one of her own: that all of the students be able to read music, "unlike last year."19 This requirement is suggestive of the new character of the department: in an era of university-level music studies still wedded to the ideas of the traditional conservatory, admitting illiterate students was something quite radical. What was going on?

4. Stewart's Vision

The president of the University of California, Clark Kerr, approved the establishment of a Music, Drama and Visual Arts departments at UCSD on Valentine's day, 1965.20 In July of the following year, Chancellor Galbraith thanked Will Ogdon for taking on the chairmanship of the Music department to be compensated at an annual rate of $16,200. What happened in the intervening year is the story of John Stewart.21 Stewart had grown up with music before the Second World War. He started on the piano, learned the string bass, trumpet and saxophone. He double majored in music and literature at college and for a while considered becoming a composer. After moving from a faculty position in English Literature at UCLA to Dartmouth, Stewart began to play the oboe in several New England orchestras. At Dartmouth he was known as much for his involvement in music as he was in literature.22

Through his practical involvement as a player, Stewart felt his listening experience was enriched; he would notice things that others did not. His listening experience contained more nuances than others', even when others knew more about the historical circumstances of the work. Stewart's conclusion was that in order to learn about something, one had to experience it from the "inside."23 To accomplish this meant the study of art should have a laboratory-like setting in which the student can learn material by direct observation, much like the material sciences. Stewart's first chance to implement this "insider" idea was through his position on the committee in charge of the Hopkins Center at Dartmouth, a performing arts center that also houses the departments of Music, Theatre, Film & Media and Studio Art. After asking the president of Dartmouth what the philosophy of the new center was and finding out that there was none, Stewart was asked to fill in the void. He completed the task on a six-day solo retreat into the country, returning with a philosophy on the place of fine arts in a liberal arts education—the learning-from-the-inside philosophy. Stewart argued that the method offered a pluralistic way of understanding experience and would build the perception and appreciation skills of future audiences.

The president was impressed with Stewart's idea, and put him in charge of the center as a kind of dean of fine arts. His success at Dartmouth made Stewart an ideal consultant for UCSD's long term plan for establishing the arts on its twelve college campus. At UCSD's invitation, Stewart put together a plan for the campus that included a two-stage music department that would eventually develop an applied school in a different college and a center for the arts that would contain the infrastructure to support recording and broadcasting performances.

His proposal was a success, and Stewart was brought on board to establish the second college at UCSD, what would become Muir College. The central philosophy of this college was to include the learning-from-inside idea developed for the Hopkins Center. Students were required to engage in both arts and sciences in a way that was exploratory and hands-on. One possible outcome of this holistic program was that the artist might end up studying the material sciences and vice versa. Stewart, who remembers that this time was one of wide open funding, was given the job of finding the initial faculty for the music department.

Initially Stewart approached some composers on the East coast, but he could not lure them to San Diego. After the second rejection, Stewart sought advice from his old friend Ernst Krenek.24 Coincidentally, Krenek had been considering a similar hands-on approach to the study of music and recommended that Stewart hire Robert Erickson or Will Ogdon to chair the music department. Stewart contacted Erickson, who came to UCSD and impressed everyone with his broad knowledge of both music and other disciplines. Erickson recommended that Stewart get Ogdon to come from Illinois Wesleyan, where he was on faculty.

Both Ogdon and Erickson accepted positions at the department immediately, although Erickson had to defer his until he finished a commission. Their lack of resistance to the idea of establishing a new and forward thinking school hints at a preexisting desire to do just that. Indeed, looking at correspondence between the two composers and their friend Thomas Nee in the years before the department reveals an activism that would eventually be given an articulate structure by the new department.

5. Ogdon's Department

5.1 The New New-Music Activist Society

When Ogdon graduated with a Ph.D. from Indiana in 1955, initially he thought he would sell insurance if no teaching jobs were available.25 The idea of a composer earning his living selling insurance is surely related to the career of the outsider American composer Charles Ives who famously did just that. Ogdon obviously felt that he was the inheritor of this American maverick tradition, and over the next ten years he and his Hamline University colleagues Nee and Erickson would actively try to carve out space for an institution devoted to that tradition. Ogdon worked in various teaching jobs, teaching single classes, lecturing through University extension programs, working at University of Texas, Austin, and eventually ending up at Illinois Wesleyan. During the years between his graduate studies and his appointment as department chair at UCSD, Ogdon was a kind of activist for new music, trying to establish societies, make recordings and motivate his colleagues. Most of Ogdon's music was composed during this time; music that he claimed humanized the ultra rationalist twelve-tone technique. Later he characterized his method as a "liberal tonal" approach to the usually strict and caustic twelve-tone technique.26

The tone of Ogdon's letters to his friend Tom Nee during this time is urgent. There is a sense of us-against-them, a struggle to make a place for new music in the face of adversaries. The enemy was broadly defined from the "the institution of the symphony" to the generic "reactionaries."27 For Ogdon, the importance of new music was greater than the individual composer; it was an imperative. In a moment of spirited rhetoric, Ogdon writes openly of this implicit manifesto: "Hell . . . divided we fall. We have a long range responsibility to that goes beyond this ever present jockeying for individual success." Ogdon was continually advancing this agenda, challenging his friend Thomas Nee to get involved and warning, "take no activist steps and the reactionaries will."28 He was trying to raise funds for a new music listening room and library, what would essentially be a venue and buyer of his own and other contemporary music. Occasionally, Ogdon's musical activism verged on paranoia, for example, when he openly began to speculate that his music would "scare" departments in a way that "holds them [composers] back."29

The trio was constantly maintaining and fortifying its allegiances. When he worked at Wesleyan, Ogdon brought Erickson over from San Francisco to work with performance ensembles to perform Erickson's pieces.30 Erickson returned the favor by inviting Ogdon to a festival of new "American" music in San Francisco that he was in part responsible for.31 Both Ogdon and Erickson were strong advocates for Nee as the new music conductor, and Nee returned their admiration by purchasing and commissioning music from them for his orchestras.32

Erickson had a commitment to new music much like Ogdon's; it is he who speaks of a "new new music" as particular to an emerging American sound. Constantly on the lookout for commissions, applying for grants, and even a direct mail campaign, Erickson was a strong networker in the San Francisco classical music scene.33 He nurtured his alliance with Nee from the moment he arrived in San Francisco in 1953. His ultimate goal was to find Nee a job that would move him to California. To begin with, Erickson offered him tips on applying to San Francisco State when he had a small job there.34 Over the course of the next 12 years, Erickson would make many references to other jobs that Nee should apply to.35 It was during this period that Erickson worked on a committee that would establish a workshop and conference for composers in San Francisco.36 This conference had been an idea of Erickson's since his arrival.37 In its mature elaboration, the "composers' festival" would bring in performers and composers for 10 days, and include round table discussions, workshops, performances, and talks.38 The festival would establish Erickson, Nee, Ogdon, Pauline Oliveros, and Kenneth Gaburo, alongside a host of musical elites like Elliot Carter, Lou Harrison, John Cage and Milton Babbitt, as the leaders of a kind of "new Darmstadt" school in America. In fact, it was through exposition in this forum that the organizers of the Darmstadt festival of new music became interested in Erickson's work.39 UCSD has been called "Darmstadt west" precisely because of a long standing relationship between the festival and UCSD's composers and composition students—an association that came to a head in 1988 when the complete department went overseas for the festival.40 Erickson's festival, a celebration of new music composition in America, was the crowning glory of the trio's activism. Five years later, it would find a permanent home in San Diego.

To be offered to create a new department at UCSD must have been the realization of a dream for Ogdon. Suddenly he was given the power and institutional support to create a department that would be focused on new music, a department "influenced by the twentieth century in general and by the interests of composers in particular."41 Exactly what Ogdon means when he talks about influence and interests is unclear, although, by influence we might imagine the contemporary artistic movements of twentieth century such as serialism in music—influences, that is, of Ogdon. As to the "particular interests" of the composer, it might be assumed that these consist of employing professional players and having a venue to promote the particular composer's music. The department in this configuration was essentially the realization of Ogdon's earlier dreams and the institutionalization of Erickson's festival. Although Tureck would present a few obstacles, Ogdon had discovered a permanent venue for his new music activist agenda.

5.2 The First Years

The first year of the new department had limited course offerings. Its flagship course, "The Nature of Music." the first of a three-course series for undergraduates that would include lab work with percussion instruments and electronic media, was only to be offered in the Spring quarter. The only other courses offered were for upper-division students, including "Music of the Twentieth Century," "Bach," "The Orchestra and its Literature," and a series of three seminars for small ensemble. These courses no doubt represented Ogdon teaching contemporary music, Tureck teaching Bach, and Daniel Lewis teaching the orchestra class.42

It is somewhat curious for a department founded by Ogdon that there was no mention of his music in the local press of La Jolla or San Diego. Compared with the coverage of Tureck's appointment this absence suggests disapproval or at least a lack of interest. At the end of the first year, new music became a topic for the press, beginning with a profile of Erickson in the San Diego Union.43 The reporter visited Erickson at his new home and studio in Encinitas and wrote about the recordings of squeaks, bells and a digeridoo. The article celebrates Erickson's approach to composing, his attention to the sounds of things, and his coming from the cultural center of San Francisco. The respect and fascination with Erickson bears witness to Stewart's characterization of him as inherently amiable and engaging; interviewees similarly spoke of the compelling nature of his compositions.

In 1966, the year before Muir College's establishment, Thomas Nee's arrival was eagerly anticipated in the area.44 Nee, a conductor making a name for himself as a specialist in the various challenges of new and experimental music for orchestra, was the man who would unite La Jolla Civic orchestra with the university. This coming together allowed that the small university would be able to host a full orchestra, giving students playing experience and local audiences a chance to make contact with the university. The appointment of Nee was in the place of Daniel Lewis, who was never considered as a permanent member of the department. With the arrival of Nee in San Diego, the Hamline trio was established.

Other faculty members for that first year of Muir had connections with the Hamline trio. John Silber, an improvising trombonist and medievalist scholar, had also worked with Erickson at Wesleyan during the visit organized by Ogdon. As an improviser, Silber was particularly helpful as a coach for Erickson's work that left spaces in the score for the players to improvise.45 Erickson had been very happy with Silber's coaching, and his arrival made news in December of that first year as the leader of a "Free-and-Easy organization."46 The organization was an open-reading orchestra that met for "pleasure" and had an open enrollment. Silber would later found an improvisation ensemble known as Kiva and take over as department chair after Ogdon.

In addition to the professorial faculty of four, there were three lecturers, James Campbell, Pauline Oliveros, and Harry Partch. Campbell, another friend of the Hamline group, was brought in as a specialist in electronics and recording. The department initially planned to establish its own record label, and Campbell was to be in charge of that project and recording campus music events. That the record label never materialized is indicative of the dissatisfaction an interviewee expressed: "James was a disappointment."47 Campbell stayed on as a lecturer for seven years, the maximum period in the UC system before the employee automatically receives a kind of tenure or job security.48

Pauline Oliveros had been a student of Erickson at the conservatory in San Francisco. As Erickson started to get more work, he began to employ her as a copyist, paying her with private composition lessons.49 Her promising career as a composer began with her inclusion in some of the composition festivals that Erickson helped establish in 1960.50 Erickson described her work as "exceptional," when he explained to Nee the conducting responsibilities for the festival of 1960—Nee was brought over to San Francisco to conduct a premier of an Oliveros piece. Evidently Oliveros had gotten on well with Nee, for two years later Erickson wrote Nee telling him that she was "scheming (through her rich friends) to get you a guest conductor spot with the San Francisco Symphony next year."51 Oliveros was brought on as the electronics specialist; she taught a seminar along with James Campbell on practical considerations of electronics as well as a seminar of her own in "Electronic Sound."52

How it came to be that Harry Partch, the famous hobo-prophet composer, was hired as a "Regents Lecturer" is not clear. During an interview for KEBS-TV of San Diego in 1968, Ogdon mentions that he had seen some of the Partch's instruments in Illinois, so it is perhaps during Partch's time there from 1956–62 that Ogdon met him.53 It is very clear, however, that Partch had an incredibly powerful advocate in Betty Freeman, the new music patroness and photographer. Freeman was working to get Partch the security of a position at an institute and a place to store his original collection of instruments. (Partch created microtonal instruments based on his understanding of Greek instruments and tunings.) Although Freeman contributed the funds to secure university positions for Partch and his exclusive players, the full Partch project never materialized.54 Stewart was trying to find funding for it at the same time as he was trying to get funds for Tureck's center, but evidently the University was not interested in supporting the Partch plan, and an application for a Rockefeller grant was rejected.55 Partch's lectureship consisted of a graduate level seminar on Partch's tunings, instruments and music.56 Partch's position was changed to "professor of composition in residence" for the next three years, but his course was no longer listed. As Regent's lecturer, Partch must have originally been funded in part by the University, but the title and funding for his residency in the following years probably came from Freeman exclusively. Interviewees never mentioned Partch as member of the department, which leads one to suspect that his position was a nominal one.57

5.3 The Quonset Camp

In a prophetic letter to Nee after the first composers' festival, Erickson spoke of his desire to have his own orchestra: "I wish I were rich, I'd buy an orchestra."58 Erickson treated Nee as his professional advisor on orchestration, and kept him apprised of any developments in his oeuvre that Nee might want to purchase and have performed. Erickson made progress on making this dream a reality with a plan to build a performance space on his rented property in Berkeley. He wanted to set up a temporary Quonset auditorium big enough to hold a symphony and perform opera on the back of his property. There is no record of whether such a vision was realized, except that as UCSD faculty, Erickson would now have Nee, a symphony orchestra, and a conglomeration of Quonset huts converted into classrooms and performance spaces on Mathews Campus. The quick conversion of the Quonset huts was meant as a temporary measure, so that the university could quickly accrue the enrollment needed to justify the construction of the gigantic new Muir college campus. The camp conversion was a kick-start to bypass the normal procedures and allowances for growth.

By all accounts the Mathews campus, a former Marine Corps rifle range, was a friendly site for some wild experimentation and grass roots revelry. University of California regent Dorothy Chandler, a remarkable woman with a hand in almost all the major West Coast cultural institutions, visited the campus in September 1966 and remarked that "of all campuses, there has been shown to us no other area with more concern for the human quality than here. It is especially outstanding to see how a bowling alley has been converted into an art gallery."59 The World War 2 vintage Quonset huts were converted into classrooms and studios. Exposed beams and plumbing were painted with pastel and psychedelic colors; redwood ceilings were hung, windows and new floors were installed, and the campus was born. Three San Diego newspapers printed stories about its establishment, including before-and-after pictures. The ribbon-cutting ceremony for the opening of the campus utilized an old meat cleaver found in the mess hall. The makeover of the cafeteria, with its orange rafters and white and blue walls lit by marquee like rows of bare bulbs, was described as "circus like."60

The students of the new department were an unruly group, not surprising for the times. The initial classes of Muir and Revelle colleges staged protests around American involvement in Vietnam and the administration's regulations on dorm room visitation hours with students of the opposite sex. Roger Reynolds, a composer who arrived in the department's third year (1969–70), recalled the students as particularly "psychologically complicated" bunch: "Seminars were like encounter groups, they were really, witheringly, complicated."61 Reynolds noted that the undergraduate students called him by his first name: "they were smoking pot in the back, their dogs were with them, they were lying on the floor, it was incredible."62 Nee remembers driving to a hot spring after a party to which both students and faculty came.63 For Nee, the close-knit community between faculty and student was a cause for celebration, for Reynolds it was an atmosphere that interfered with the dynamics required for instruction.

The courses that were offered to this new breed of student were equally experimental and new. Following the spirit of Stewart's learning from the "inside," two unique courses were introduced. The first course, Music 1, was a team-taught course for lower-division Muir students. The team consisted of Silber, Ogdon and Nee, and Nee characterized the class as a little "scattered."64 Various listening sessions involved all kinds of music from all eras. The a-historical approach to listening was no doubt an idea of Silber's; he was a musical postmodernist who radically questioned the trend in historical performance practices, arguing that we know nothing about early music.65 In addition to listening, the students were also put to work as composers. Borrowing the department's portable tape recorders, students were sent into the environment to listen and record interesting sounds. In a Quonset hut that was set up to handle tape editing, student assignments involved dubbing and splicing sections of tape together to create a piece. In another portion of the course, students used gongs and bells and "any big metal object" to improvise pieces—another Silber specialty.66 The course, in 1967, open to all incoming freshman, was no doubt the only one of its kind in United States.

The second class was created and taught by Erickson in order to satisfy the arts requirement of the Revelle student. Music 2 taught standard western notation, the Indian Raga, and contemporary music. The premise of this course is ambitious; to take a possibly illiterate student and teach them competence with the music of elite cultures from around the world in ten weeks is no small feat, and it was said to be a difficult class. Like its cousin, Music 1, it was certainly unique to undergraduate education in the late 1960s.

5.4 The Ph.D and the CME, Two Key Statements of Departmental Philosophy

Despite the general celebration of Ogdon's career, there is some dissenting opinion about his administrative effectiveness as a chair.67 Yet it was under his chairmanship that the department established its core program and developed a M.A. and a Ph.D. program in music, both of which make important statements about the department's values. The President of the University initially rejected the idea of Ph.D. in music, but a second application was approved in January 1970.68 Key to the revision and acceptance was the removal of performance and the insertion of "theoretical studies and composition," thereby accounting for the "basic principles reserved for programs leading to the Ph.D."69 Even without the Ph.D. program, graduate courses were offered in that year (1969–70), but a description of the graduate program and requirements did not appear in the official catalogue until the following year.70 Ogdon's final year as chair (1970–71) coincides with the most eloquent articulation of the structure of the program—a structure that remained relatively unchanged until the 1980s.

The catalogue states the department's mission as stemming from a liberal education in which "individual freedom" and "invention" characterized the forefront of its approach.71 The diversity and ambition of the new department are immediately apparent in the pledges to "perform the widest scope of music from all times and places"; to engage creative scholarship in "experimental research and its applications to electronics, computers, acoustics, extended instrumental techniques and possible social contexts"; to create a smooth flow from undergraduate through to graduate work, and finally, to "encourage the broadest possible range of student action and participation [. . . ]."72 The idealism expressed here is connected to the philosophy of new music as exploratory, scientific, technological and all encompassing. But more importantly, we see the fervor of the commitment to the aesthetic imperative of new music as explicitly tied to the "freedom" of a liberal arts education that would lead to a socially "active" and concerned member of the community. The social responsibility and holistic rendering of music and life is described as an output of the program, whereby the exiting student's "constant trafficking in a whole and vital reality will [be committed] to artistic and social independence, concern and action."73 Clearly there is a relationship between the new-music activism that characterized Ogdon's early post-graduate years and this new music department's bid to support a practice-based liberal arts agenda.

The scope of the department's goal was realized in a five-fold division of areas: experimental studies, composition, performance and technology, theoretical studies, and literature and special studies. The first of these categories brought students into an active experimentation based on faculty interests, which were originally given as timbre, compositional linguistics, and time perception. All of these interests were connected to sciences, respectively, physics, linguistics and psychology. Composition was taught through seminars and individual lessons with the unusual allowance that it could be taken as "an instructional mode of learning" by students who were not primarily interested in composition.74 Exactly what this means is unclear, but it is logical in light of Stewart's idea of "learning from the inside." The performance and technology division included the practical techniques of realizing a composition: conducting, playing, and wiring electronics, alone or in combination. The idea that performance is a technique of music rather than a constitutive element retains a traditional musicological value that is still a subject of debate.75 Theoretical studies focused on Schenkerian analysis and notation itself. Literature and special studies offered more traditional courses based in particular times and places. The last category included Tureck's Bach seminar and also a yearly course taught by Ogdon on the opera seasons of the West Coast companies (San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco). The literature category also included Tom Nee's courses in the orchestral repertoire and Silber's study of Medieval and Renaissance music. The five-fold division reflected a plurality of perspectives and importantly a department whose foundation rested in the multiple specialties of its faculty.

The focus of the new department on the current interests of composers, in particular Erickson, is revealed in the structure of the curriculum. Erickson's next book was about timbre, and he was also interested in developing forms of notation that could include improvisation, hence an experimental category focused on timbre and a theory category on notation.76 In the 1950s, when synthesis and electronic tape were new technologies, Erickson's correspondence with Nee showed that he was following all these developments: there are frequent digressions on tape speeds and width, playback, and other related matters. Erickson's frequent discussion of recordings and performances would suggest that he understood the recording as directly related to performance and critical compositional products. For Erickson, composition was not about splicing tapes and recording sounds as much as it was about writing for the orchestra in ways that created tape sounds. Ogdon had been interested in vocal music as a way of humanizing twelve-tone composition since his settings of Wordsworth's poetry as a post-graduate, thus making his seminars on opera a natural fit. The courses in structural analysis and twentieth century music were no doubt the domain of Ogdon, whose graduate thesis had been on the latter topic. On the whole, the department was approaching musical scholarship as a holistic blending of theory, history and practice that included the latest scientific discourses and technological developments, all of which issued from the particular perspective of the composer.

The idea of a practical and intellectual workshop laboratory for composers achieved its most succinct statement in the establishment of a graduate center called the Center for Music Experiment (CME).77 Roger Reynolds obtained a Rockefeller Grant in 1970 to fund this institute for interdisciplinary encounters and productions. The campus-wide center had four divisions: technical, performance, colloquiums and documentation (archiving and publishing the center's findings). The center acquired the most modern technology, funded visiting artists and ensembles, and gave faculty time away from teaching to focus on their professional work. A huge archive built over the course of the CME's existence is currently housed in the music library awaiting scholarly attention. The center no longer exists, but its legacy can be seen in UCSD's current research unit, CRCA (Center for Research and Computing in the Arts). The world-renowned center in Paris created by Pierre Boulez, IRCAM (Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique), which opened its doors in 1977, took the CME as its operational model.78 IRCAM has become a modern leader in the realm of electronic and modernist music by bringing together artists and scientists, primarily engineers, to model and develop new music. UCSD has continued to have a relationship with IRCAM, with frequent student exchanges, and Roger Reynolds has been active in a series of perception experiments that involve researchers at IRCAM, McGill University and UCSD. Most recently, Phillip Manoury, the famous French composer and IRCAM resident, accepted an appointment at UCSD.79

Some of the most original faculty members were initially fellows of the CME. Trumpeter-vocalist Ed Harkins, a member of the Extended Vocal Techniques Ensemble along with Phillip Larson, both of whom went on to form a group, The, which was immensely popular on campus.80 The CME brought in Dick Moore, an international expert on acoustics, as well as Gerry Balzano, a cognitive psychologist from Stanford, filling a position of "musical scientist." Balzano's work on music perception, published in the 1980s, continues to be cited as foundational research.81

6. Conclusion: Place and the Stylistic Stasis of New Music

When Leonard Meyer attempted to characterize the stylistic plurality of the late twentieth century he settled on the idea of "stasis."82 Many musical styles exist and develop simultaneously in this view, which might be thought of as a prototype for post-modernity. The analysis of the formation of the department at UCSD supports Meyer's diagnosis but also places stasis within the structures of an academic institution that afforded experimentalism, neo-serialism, psycho-acoustical research, and a whole host of other practices under a single roof. These structures were linked to the economic conditions of the time, the emergent 1960s culture and the political interests of the UC system. Importantly, the institution was founded in the negotiation of a vision that emphasized individual knowledge and the integrity of various artistic and academic choices. The department emerged from the collaboration between Stewart's vision and the Hamline trio, and also through a rejection of Tureck's competing vision. By forcing out Tureck, the department was able to coalesce around a particular philosophy. The rejection of a Eurocentric and subject-specific model in favor of a pluralism through which Tureck was removed by a longstanding group of friends affords a glimpse of how the institution's focus was from the outset a struggle characterized by fractures. Ultimately Tureck established a successful Bach organization in New York, and in this light we find an important aspect of the department, for New York may have been suitable for Tureck, but could a radically new institution like UCSD have accommodated her?

I asked all my interviewees if the place, San Diego, and even more specifically, La Jolla, was important to the identity of the department. I had expected the responses to be overwhelmingly affirmative: "Yes, it could only have happened here because of such and such." But alas, no such answers were forthcoming. Most interviewees remarked that the place was of no consequence to the product and structure of the institution. The closest anyone came to my expectation was Roger Reynolds, who told me his peers advised him not to go to San Diego, warning that he would loll about on the beach all day and get no work done. Reynolds found the opposite to be the case; without the bother of inclement weather he was able to be more productive. For Reynolds, place was arbitrary; the institution was completely "about the music."83 Yet one can imagine that in fact the location was extremely important; the department could not have developed the way it did in New York, Los Angeles, or Nevada, and even though a massive organization like IRCAM, which took the CME as its model, may have recreated it in Paris, it began in the open dessert that backs onto the ocean in La Jolla. Moreover, the very notion of the inconsequence of place speaks to an overriding insularity of the program, one that severed itself from the community in order to preserve its autonomy. One interviewee explained that the faculty was hostile to members who had involvements outside of the department's circle. Several interviewees suggested that a single regret might be their alienation of the larger community of La Jolla. Both of these recollections suggest a possible fallout from a unified "us against them" mentality, one that might be traced back to the activist rhetoric of the Hamline trio. It is probably something within the radical nature of the ideas and materials of new music that required such a fissure with the community and strict confidence amongst insiders. Rather than lament this era as the lost Eden, a more archeological view sees it within an ongoing and adaptive process. Ultimately we are left with the questions of the relevance of new music today, is it still new, and what are the conditions that it is adapting to.

Whatever our answers may be, it is clear that the music program at UCSD had an important role to play in a complex and fascinating process.

Primary Sources and Abbreviations

Thomas Nee Collection of Letters from Composers = NCL
UCSD Chancellor's Subject Files = CSF
UCSD 25th Anniversary Oral Histories = AOH
University Communications Public Relations Materials = UCPRM

All the letters and other documents are archived in the Mandeville Special Collections Library of UCSD. The abbreviations given above will be used in the citations. The individual sources in the collections are catalogued with respect to document number (MSS), Box and Folder. In the citations only the numbers will be given, as seen in the following example: MSS 609, box 1, folder 6 = 609,1,6. Dates have been given when available.

Works Cited

A Festschrift for Will Ogdon: Collected and Compiled by J´anos N´egyesy & Garrett Bowles. La Jolla, Calif.: UCSD Press, 2003.

Bach, Johann Sebastian and Rosalyn Tureck. An Introduction to the Performance of Bach. London: Oxford University Press, 1960.

Balzano, Gerald J. "What Are Musical Pitch and Timbre?" Music Perception 3/3 (1986): 297–314.

Bowles, Garret. Interview with the author. May, 2008.

Cavell, Stanley. "Music Discomposed." In Must We Mean What We Say?: A Book of Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

___. Sound Structure in Music. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.

___. The Structure of Music: A Listener's Guide; A Study of Music in Terms of Melody and Counterpoint. New York: Noonday Press, 1955.

Farrel, Peter. Interview with the author. May, 2008.

Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge (World of Man). Translated by A. M. Sheridan Smith. New York: Pantheon Books, 1972.

General Catalog, 1966-67, University of California, San Diego. La Jolla: University of California San Diego, 1966.

— 1967–68, University of California, San Diego. La Jolla: University of California San Diego, 1967.

— 1969–70, University of California, San Diego. La Jolla: University of California San Diego, 1969.

— 1970–71, University of California, San Diego. La Jolla: University of California San Diego, 1970.

— 1974–75, University of California, San Diego. La Jolla: University of California San Diego, 1974.

Harkins, Edwin. Interview with the author. May, 2008.

Hinton, Sam. Sam Hinton Sings the Song of Men, All Sorts and Kinds (audio recording). Folkways Records FA 2400.

___. Whoever Shall Have Some Good Peanuts, and Other Folksongs for Children (audio recording). Folkways Records FC 7530.

Kassel, Richard. "Partch, Harry." In Grove Music Online. Edited by L. Macy. Oxford Music Online: URL: http : / / www . oxfordmusiconline . com / subscriber / article / grove / music/20967 (visited on 11/26/2008).

May, Kirse Granat. Golden State, Golden Youth: the California Image in Popular Culture, 1955-1966. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002.

McAdams, Steve. "Prolog." Music Perception 22/2 (2004): 171–172.

Meyer, Leonard. Music the Arts and Ideas: Patterns and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Musical Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [1967] 1994.

Morris, Robert. "Aspects of Confluence between Western Art Music and Ethnomusicology". In: Concert Music, Rock and Jazz since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies. Edited by Elizabeth Marvin West and Richard Herman. New York: University of Rochester. 1995: 53–67.

Nee, Thomas. Interview with the author. May, 2008.

Newmark, Leonard. Interview with the author. May, 2008.

___. "Musical Chairs." Chronicles: Newsletter of the UCSD Emeriti Association 7/4 (2008): 4–5.

Odgon, Will. "Series and structure: An investigation into the purpose of the row in selected works of Schoenberg, Webern, Krenek and Leibowitz." Ph.D. diss. Indiana: Indiana University, 1955.

— "The Formation of the Department of Music." Chronicles: Newsletter of the UCSD Emeriti Association 2/1 (2002): 6.

— "UCSD at Darmstadt 1988." Perspectives of New Music 27/2 (1989): 300–303.

Partch, Harry. "Delusion of the Fury: a Ritual of Dream & Delusion." American Composers Forum. [1968] 1997.

Pasler, Jann. "The Political Economy of Composition in the American University, 1965‒1985." In Writing Through Music: Essay on Music, Culture, and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Small, Christopher. "Why Doesn't the Whole World Love Chamber Music?" American Music 19, no. 3 (2001): 340‒59.

Tureck, Rosalyn. "An Introduction to Bach." Music & Letters 42/2 (1961): 196–198.

___. "Bach in the Twentieth Century." The Musical Times 103/1428 (1962): 92–94.


1The idea of thinking about historical formations as an archeology is attributed to Michel Foucault; see his The Archaeology of Knowledge.
2On the deep relation between new music in America and the study of other musical practices see Robert Morris, "Aspects of Confluence between Western Art Music and Ethnomusicology."
3The nature of the relationship between this new discourse and new music is discussed by Stanley Cavell in "Music Discomposed," 180–213. Another detailed discussion of the relationship of the discourse and the university can be found in Jann Pasler's study "The Political Economy of Composition in the American University, 1965-1985."
4A history of the 1960s boom in California is documented in Kirse Granat May's Golden State, Golden Youth.
5Stewart, AOH 52, 1, 9.
6Tureck led the way for the Bach revival of the 50s. Before coming to UCSD, she had published an important edition of keyboard works, An Introduction to the Performance of Bach, and interpretive articles, including "An Introduction to Bach" and "Bach in the Twentieth Century."
7Stewart, AOH 52, 1, 9.
8Krenek's connections to a European musical tradition were made manifest when he sent Tom Nee on a Fulbright Scholarship to Vienna with a letter of introduction for opera house directors (Krenek, 10.7.1951, NCL 609,1,6).
9The La Jolla Civic Orchestra did not have enough funds to hire a conductor, so they partnered with UCSD, using their facilities and Tom Nee as conductor (Will Ogdon, Letter to Dirk Sutro in music department publicity, June 2008 [UCSD Music department]).
10A few notable exceptions start to take place in Winter 1967, for instance, a lecture-recital by the pianist Leonard Stein. Stein, Regent's Lecturer for Winter 1967, gave a lecture-performance on playing Schoenberg that was well received (UCPRM 6020, 5, 5 [pp. 185, 198, 204]]). The performance of this new music coincides with the first year of the department's existence, so it is possibly related to a new set of institutional values taking hold. While classical music was the norm, a local popular music performer, Sam Hinton, played regularly as well. Hinton's concerts come up at regular intervals in the clipping files (UCPRM, 6020, 5, 5 [pp. 42, 67, 74]; UCPRM 6020, 4, 6 [pp. 50–1]). Hinton's style of old time folk music can be found on Folkways Records, including, Sam Hinton Sings the Song of Men; "Whoever Shall Have Some Good Peanuts," and Other Folksongs for Children.
11UCPRM 6020, 4, 4,(pp. 185–204).
12UCPRM 6020, 4, 7 (pp. 113, 126, 130).
13The appointment of well known professors is often noted in the local news, but of the music department, Tureck was almost alone—the exception is a single article on Dan Lewis, a local conductor and violinist who was with the department for a year (UCPRM 6020, 4, 5 [p. 212]). Lewis' appointment was mentioned in the San Diego Tribune; however, according to Stewart, his appointment was a temporary helping out of a man down on his luck—the following year he disappeared into the vacuum of a rich patroness (Stewart, AOH 52, 1, 9). Tureck's appointment appeared in all the area newspapers of the time, including the San Diego Tribune, the La Jolla Light Journal, the San Diego Union, and the La Jolla Sentinel.
14The occasion was attended by seventy guests, including a "who's who" of the university: Chancellor John Galbraith, Vice Chancellors Carl Eckhart and Robert Tschirigi, Provosts Edward Goldberg and John Stewart of the two colleges, and Dr. Nierenberg, then Dean of Scripps. Reviewed as a magnificent hostess, Tureck served paella to all and rounded out the evening with a private performance of Bach's Goldberg Variations (UCPRM 6020, 4, 7 [pp. 109, 110]).
15The search for funding involved a pledge of funds from physicist Walter Kohn (Kohn, 12.5.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5]), soon after which Tureck was informed that the funds had been found by both Will Ogdon and John Stewart (Ogdon, 12.14.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5; Stewart, 12,19.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5).
16Tschirigi, 7.11.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5.The full feasibility report suggests that the center would be possible if it were a sub-center of the music department without an orchestra or a dance company (Laggini 12.1.1966 CSF 1, 25, 5). Stewart had enlisted Dr. Laggini as an outside evaluator of Tureck's planned center the previous month (Stewart, 11.15.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5).
17Tureck's dialogue with the chancellor includes a letter suggesting they create a course for her to teach on the "history of ideas and the structure of concepts" (Tureck, 2.20.1967, CSF 1, 25, 5).Earlier that year, Tureck had asked that she be answerable only to the Chancellor, who coolly responded that she must engage with the department (Tureck,12.13.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5). Before her last year at UCSD, Tureck wrote, concerned about the Chair's role in deciding how she should allocate the funds for her course, that "We also agreed that my work being of a very different nature from that contemplated by Professor Ogdon, was to be maintained separately according to my design and not mixed up with his plan." (Tureck, 9.1.1967, CSF 1, 25, 5).
18There is no record of Ogdon's letter to Tureck, but a draft document was sent to Stewart and the Chancellor for approval (Ogdon, 6.20.1967, CSF 1, 25, 5).
19ureck 12.4.1967, CSF 1, 25, 5. The letter was an enclosure in another from William McGill of the psychology department to Bob Hamburger about Tureck's "predicament" (McGill, 12.8. 1967, CSF 1, 25, 5).
20Kerr 2.14.1965, CSF 1, 25, 2.
21Galbraith, 5.19.1966, CSF 1, 25, 5.
22Stewart, 7.24.1984, AOH 52, 1.
24Stewart had met Krenek in 1949 when he was at UCLA (Stewart, 7.24.1984, AOH 52, 1). A student of Stewart at that time had approached him thinking that he was interested in new music and told him that Krenek was living with her in L.A. while trying to get his feet on the ground (Krenek had left Hamline to come to southern California and was having trouble finding work). By the time Muir College was being formed in 1965, Krenek had succeeded in making a living off of his music and was located in Palm Springs.
25Ogdon, 8.20.1955, NCL 609, 1, 8).
26His dissertation at Indiana was on twelve-tone music; a close reading of the use of twelve-tone techniques in representative works by European masters Schoenberg, Webern, Krenek and Liebowitz (Will Odgon, "Series and structure: An investigation into the purpose of the row in selected works of Schoenberg, Webern, Krenek and Leibowitz", [Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1955]).
27Ogdon, NCL 609, 1, 8.
29Ogdon was clearly getting frustrated, at the same time that he thought modern music might scare departments, he was going to "borrow a small cannon" if the jobs he was applying to turned out to be "ringers"(Ogdon, NCL 609, 1, 8).
30Erickson, 10.30.1960, NCL 609, 1, 4).
31Erickson, 6.30.1961, NCL 609, 1, 4).
32Erickson writes of "beating the Tom Nee drum" in San Francisco (Erickson, 5.3.1962 NCL 609, 1, 4) and Ogdon, when heading off to Europe, mentions that he will "sound your [Tom's] horn if there's anything [conductor work]" (Ogdon, 04.1956, NCL 609, 1, 8).
33There are two references to direct mail schemes that would send out commission and funding requests to lists of possible supporters (Erickson 7.4.1955; NCL 609, 1, 4; 9.12.1958; NCL 609, 1, 4]).
34Erickson, 11.14.1953, NCL 609, 1, 4.
35Erickson, 3.8.1957, NCL 609, 1, 4; Erickson, 5.25.1956, NCL 609, 1, 4; Erickson, 4.1.1958, NCL 609, 1, 4; Erickson, 1.10.1959, NCL 609, 1, 4; Erickson, 4.28.1961, NCL 609, 1, 4.
36Erickson, 10.9.1959, NCL 609, 1, 4.
37Erickson, 10.11.1953, NCL 609, 1, 4
38Erickson, 10.9.1959, NCL 609, 1, 4.
39Erickson, 4.23.1961, NCL 609, 1, 4
40Ogdon, "UCSD at Darmstadt 1988."
41Ogdon, "The Formation of the Department of Music," 6.
42UCSD, General catalog, 1966–67.
43UCPRM 6020, 6, 2 (p. 75).
44Several reviews between October and December 1967 in UCPRM 6020, 6, 2 (pp. 18, 26, 37, 58, 70), UCPRM 6020, 6, 5 (pp. 151, 189, 190), UCPRM 6, 6 (pp. 225, 239).
45Erickson, 3.16.1961, NCL 609, 1, 4.
46UCPRM 6020, 6, 6 (p. 204).
47Nee, Interview with the author (May, 2008).
48Leonard Newmark, an interim chair appointed by the university when the department was in receivership in 1977, suggested that it was under his oversight that Campbell left. Apparently, Campbell went on to start a music store that went bankrupt. Newmark. "Musical Chairs," 4–5; Newmark, Interview with the author (May, 2008).
49Erickson, 5.23.1960, NCL 609, 1, 4.
50Oliveros had pieces played at the composer's forums from 1960–2. In 1962 she was also enlisted as a coach for the improvisational elements of Erickson's pieces (Erickson, 5.23.1960, 11.18.1961, 5.3.1962, NCL 609, 1, 4).
51Erickson, 4.23.1962, NCL 609, 1, 4.
52The 1967–68 catalogue listed instructors alongside courses. UCSD. General Catalog, 1967–68.
53The interview is on the second half of a video recording of Partch's multimedia work, "Delusion of the Fury." On Partch's move to the Midwest, see Kassel, "Partch, Harry," in: Grove Music Online.
54Stewart, 7.10.1969, CSF 1, 25, 2. In another memo to the chancellor, Stewart explains that Madeline Tourtelot, a filmmaker whom Partch worked with during his time in Urbana Illinois, was willing to build a house and music center for Partch, but clearly this never happened (Stewart, 6.17.1969, CSF 1, 25, 2).
56UCSD, General Catalog, 1967–68.
57Ed Harkins mentioned Partch mainly to register his own surprise that Partch had been on the books at UCSD during Harkins' early days. Edwin Harkins, Interview with the author (May 2008).
58Erickson, 10.2.1960, NCL 609, 1, 4.
59UCPMR 6020 (box 4, folder 7 [pp. 50–55], box 5, folder 1 [p. 111], folder 2 [p. 259], folder 5 [pp. 168–9], box 6, folder 2 [p.163]).
60Ibid., box 5, folder 1 (p. 111).
61Reynolds, Interview.
63Nee, Interview.
65Garret Bowles, Interview with the author (May, 2008).
66Nee, Interview.
67Celebratory recollections of Ogdon's tenure are in A festschrift for Will Ogdon: collected and compiled by Janos Negyesy & Garrett Bowles (La Jolla, Calif.: UCSD Press, 2003); a description of some of his works may also be found in John Stewart, "Will Ogdon," in: The Music of Will Ogdon (New York, NY: New World Records/CRI, 1997): Contrary opinions about both his effectiveness as an administrator were suggested by interviewees who wished to remain anonymous.
68Taylor, 1.21.1970, CSF 1, 25, 2. The M.A. was accepted in July of 1969 by President Hitch's office via Angus Ried, but the Ph.D. had to be revised before it was accepted (Taylor, 7.30.1970, CSF 1, 25, 2).
69As explained by former Chancellor John Galbraith, then coordinating commissioner of graduate affairs at the UCLA Office of the Dean, to the current chancellor Robert McGill (Galbraith, 12.11.1969, CSF 1, 25, 2).
70UCSD, General Catalog, 1969–70; UCSD, General Catalog, 1970–71.
71UCSD, General Catalog, 1970–71, 223.
74Ibid., 224.
75The issue remains key to the methodological shift of the 1980s known as "New Musicology". See Small, "Why doesn't the whole world love chamber music?"
76Erickson, Sound Structure in Music. Erickson's book is listed under Library of Congress Subject headings "Sound, Music, Acoustics and Physics," but its content is more speculative and critical than scientific. The title of his first book was the same as the course he would teach at UCSD (Erickson, The Structure of Music: A Listener's Guide; A Study of Music in Terms of Melody and Counterpoint.) Published during his first years in Berkeley, the first book is more of a listener's guide to traditional classical music.
77Initially considered a "project" with acronym PME, the CME became a center in 1974–75. See UCSD. General Catalog, 1974–75, 125.
78Reynolds, Interview.
79The results of the threefold institutional collaboration are studied in a special issue of Music Perception, see McAdams, "Prolog."
80A thorough collection of this ensemble's work and history can be found at (visited November 2010). Several interviewees attested to the popularity of the ensemble.
81See especially, "What are musical pitch and timbre?" 297–314.
82Leonard B. Meyer, Music the Arts and Ideas.
83Reynolds, Interview.

4469 Last modified on March 6, 2019