A frequent commentary chronicling the creative and intellectual
excitement of discovery at Washington State University.

Brought to you by Washington State Magazine

Archive for the ‘Performing arts’ Category

The Ritters Josh and Bob Talk About “The Curse”

Josh Ritter headed out to be a scientist but became a singer-songwriter.

His parents are longtime Washington State University neuroscientists, as well as the people Josh credits with being “the single greatest influence on my music.”

The worlds of science and music combine in “The Curse,” a song on Josh’s latest album, “So Runs the World Away.” Brought to video by drummer-puppeteer Liam Hurley, it’s the love story of an archaeologist and a mummy. In the hands of a nuanced writer like Josh, or in the mind of a nuanced thinker like his father Bob, the story is prone to varied interpretation.

Somehow that came up during a recent dinner with the parents Ritter as we researched a recent feature for Washington State Magazine on their lives and work. Bob said he thought of the song as a parable of science—the investigator embraces a subject for a lifetime but grows old and passes. Meanwhile, science continues apace.

“That song is like a person that has her career and the career kind of consumes her. In other words, the mummy is dead. She finds the mummy, displays the mummy and becomes so involved with the mummy and spends her life with the mummy. The mummy kind of comes to life and of course she gets old and dies. That’s the way I see that song. The science goes on. The mummy goes on. But the investigator becomes a thing of the past. That’s not a bad thing. It’s just the love and the attention she devotes consumes her and makes her discovery a household word.”

We asked Josh to comment on his theory, and since we were working on a personality profile, we asked what kind of eclectic mind might have such an interpretation. His response is indirect but intriguing.

“The luckiest people get a vocation.  They are called to do the things they do, to commit our lives to specific endeavors.  Often they themselves are the only ones hearing the voice and what they do seems crazy to other people, but they do it anyway because they are called and because they love it.  The world is filled with these people who have been lucky enough to find their vocation.  They find it because we are influenced by the people who have come before them.  Science is no monolith, it’s the continuing process of discovering and passing down knowledge from hand to hand over the course of millennia.  They’re light-bearers, and this, in the grand scheme of things, is about the best thing any of us can hope to be.”

Mild Upset in the Facebook “Idol” Vote App; Update Appended

Loyal readers will recall the Discovery blog last week extolling the wonders of a Facebook application accurately predicting the losers of “American Idol” for three weeks straight. John Tarnai and Danna Moore, leaders of the Washington State University Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, explained that this made sense. Whether they voted by phone during the show or by web on a Facebook fan page, said Tarnai and Moore, the survey’s self-selected participants are coming from the same highly motivated pool of “Idol” fans.

Now comes the upset.

Image courtesy of Idol Fanatic and Ribbit

Based on 1,700 votes cast through Facebook’s Idol Fanatic fan page, this seemed like the outcome after Tuesday’s Shania Twain-themed performances:

Crystal – 30.9%

Lee – 19.9%

Casey – 14.4%

Aaron – 13.6%

Siobhan – 12.5%

Michael – 8.6%

But on Wednesday’s results show, the bottom three were Casey–not Aaron–plus Michael and Siobhan. Siobhan–not Michael–was voted off.

We asked John Tarnai if the difference between Michael and Siobhan, or Casey and Aaron, might be accounted for by the survey’s margin of error.

John’s response:

“This is very interesting, especially that the bottom three on the show were also part of the bottom four on the Facebook survey.  Unfortunately, since neither the Facebook sample nor the voting on the show is from a probability sample, you cannot use the margin of error to explain the difference.  The margin of error is only accurate for probability samples.  For self-selected samples such as Facebook and the Idol show, there is no way to assess the true margin of error.

“However, if you did use margin of error, the appropriate one to use would be the total 1,700 vote sample, or plus/minus 2.3 percent.  It’s possible that the voting on the show came closer to the actual performance than the Facebook votes, which may have caused some people to switch their votes.  That’s my take on it.”

If it’s any consolation, the Idol Fanatic-meter proved more reliable than the dozen prognosticators tracked by the Los Angeles Times “American Idol” Buzzmeter. Only one of them, Steve Gidlow of In Touch Weekly, saw Siobhan heading for the door. Eight predicted Michael would be gone.

Update: One possible explanation for the Siobhan upset is a snafu in which the wrong phone number to vote for her was posted on her Facebook page. It turns out those votes went to Aaron. The error has launched a petition drive to get her reinstated. Chances are justice will come in the form of Aaron getting voted off after Sinatra night. Here are the latest numbers:

Crystal:  33.7%

Lee:  31.3%

Casey:  12.2%

Michael:  11.9%

Aaron:  10.9%

Early Word on “American Idol” Winners

Tis the season of America’s favorite white-knuckled adventure in opinion gathering: “American Idol.” Each week sees a blend of hype and talent reaching a crescendo as—obligatory drum roll and slow pan of contestant close-ups, please—a would-be star gets voted off the show.

Such viewer anxiety need not be. The Idol Fanatic Facebook page has an application through which fans can vote for their favorite contestants. So far the page’s 1,600 members have perfectly predicted the week’s winner and bottom three.

Researchers in Washington State University Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, the largest university-based survey research center in the Pacific Northwest, explain how this could happen.

“This isn’t really what we would consider a phone poll; instead, it is a self-selected survey,” says Director John Tarnai.  “That is, people self-select themselves into the survey, which I think probably explains why the Facebook page can predict the winners.  In both cases, it is people who are interested in ‘American Idol’ and the contestants who self-select themselves into the survey.   The fact that some people use the telephone and others use a Facebook page or texting is less important than that they are interested enough in ‘American Idol’ to want to send in their votes.”

The operating principle is what Danna Moore, the center’s associate director, calls saliency—the strong interest of the voting viewer. The stronger the interest, the more likely the act of voting.

To keep with this Tuesday night’s theme of “inspiration,” you might say both the phone and the Facebook voters are inspired. You might also say, as does Moore, that neither method makes for a legitimate survey, as it doesn’t reflect the broader population.

“It does not tell you anything about the portion of people in the population that had no opportunity to participate as they aren’t watching the show,” Moore says. “. . . Chances are that people not watching the show would be very different and they are also not asked to vote.”

That may be fine for the show, which has close to 30 million viewers and voters. But it may not be the best measure for the winners.

Says Moore: “The big question is: Will people selected on the show by these methods be true winners or successful in the long run when the whole population votes with their dollars and buys albums over time?”

(For more on that, note how Clay Aiken, season two runner-up, has outsold winner Ruben Studdard by nearly two to one.)

So far, the Idol Fanatic page and its blog have held off on announcing results ahead of the show. But starting Wednesday, they will be announcing results before the results show starts on the East Coast at 3 p.m. PST, said spokesperson Andrea Ragni.

Simply Beautiful

Twenty years ago, Charles Argersinger founded the Festival of Contemporary Art Music at Washington State University to celebrate the work of talented composers and has been its tireless advocate ever since. A composer of contemporary art music himself, the WSU professor of music has been, some would say, evangelical in his support of the genre.

Charles Argersinger. Photo courtesy Festival of Contemporary Art Music.

Charles Argersinger. Photo courtesy Festival of Contemporary Art Music.

For Argersinger, “contemporary art music” is music that nurtures the soul and engages the heart, speaking to the full range of human emotion. It is music that is multilayered and complex. It transcends time and language to make manifest the daily and epic struggle to find meaning. It is music written for the heart and the mind, not an abstract theory, and it sounds simply beautiful.

On Saturday, February 7, during the 20th anniversary of the festival, Argersinger’s own music will fill the Bryan Hall auditorium. From the opening triumphal notes of the brass “Fanfare” to the richly layered, hopeful melodies and harmonies of “Sonnets Upon Music,” WSU faculty and students will be performing some of the most well-crafted, technically challenging, and beautiful contemporary art music in the world.

From chamber music to symphonies and from piano concertos to choral music, Argersinger creates critically acclaimed concert music that puts him firmly in the tradition of the masters of classical music. Indeed, for a performance of the Junge Deutsche Philharmonie to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Berlin Airlift, there were three composers on the program: Johannes Brahms, Wolfgang Mozart, and Charles Argersinger.

Alecksander Sturnfeld-Dunn, a former graduate student and now a colleague at WSU, says he was an undergraduate when one of his professors played him a recording of Argersinger’s “Concerto for Piano and Chamber Orchestra.”

“I just knew I wanted to study with this guy,” he says.

Another former student, Austin Schlichting, says he was compelled to attend WSU for his undergraduate education after hearing Argersinger’s piano piece, “…Between Scylla and Charybdis.” Now, as a graduate student in music at Ithaca College, he says he continues to be inspired and awed by Argersinger’s music and can see Argersinger’s influences on his own compositions. “I keep a recording of his first piano concerto with me wherever I go so I can show people,” he says. “In fact, I have a copy in my backpack right now.”

“His compositions are incredibly well crafted and constructed,” says Jeffrey Haas, director of Indiana University’s Center for Electronic and Computer Music and the featured festival composer in 1991. “Charlie has a breath-taking clarity of thought. You really understand what he’s thinking about the music as you hear it.”

Michael Schelle, the festival’s first guest composer back in 1989, also speaks about Argersinger’s clarity, marveling at “the clarity with which he presents his material as a teacher and the clarity with which he presents his music as a composer.” There’s an economy to his work, he says. “He writes to share rather than to show off.”

But for all that clarity of thought, Argersinger is anything but single-minded, especially when it comes to music.

What his friends know, but many people don’t, is that Argersinger is equally skilled at creating˜and performing jazz charts.

“He’s a phenomenal jazz arranger with an extraordinary voice, melodically, harmonically, in every way,” says Sunny Wilkinson, a jazz vocalist and music professor at Michigan State University. Wilkinson, who met Argersinger when they were both undergraduates at Arizona State, says Argersinger may compose award-winning symphonies, but he also “swings like crazy.”

For most musicians, says Martin Rokeach, the festival guest composer in 1998, “You can’t walk both sides of the street.” But in fact, Argersinger does. “I’m really jealous of his jazz side,” Rokeach says. “I’d flaunt it if I could play like that. To me it’s a testament to a powerful talent.”

“It’s like being Kobe Bryant and Kurt Warner at the same time,” said Jim Linahon, a professional trumpet player who has been creating award-winning music for television, film and special events for 25 years. Linahon and Argersinger have collaborated on dozens if not hundreds of projects, but he still remembers the first Argersinger composition that he ever heard, “Imagination Flight 5:15,” written when he was a master’s student at Arizona State.

As Argersinger tells it, he wasn’t impressed with the music his student group had been practicing for a jazz competition in Las Vegas, and he said as much to his conductor. The conductor challenged him, on a Friday, to write something better, so on Monday he showed up with his own chart and it premiered at the competition.

“It was brilliant,” says Linahon. But also brilliant, he says, was the music Argersinger wrote for “Gradus ad Parnassum,” a CD of contemporary art music featuring Linahon on trumpet.

“Charlie is an absolute omnivore,” says Todd Gustafson, who first met Argersinger when he was teaching jazz studies at DePaul University in Chicago. “Whatever he’s going to do, he’s going to do it to the hilt.”

Argersinger’s love of both classical music and jazz started at an early age, nurtured by his parents. Nancy Hass, his sister, a professional oboe player and wife of Jeffrey Hass (Argersinger introduced the two at Interlochen music camp), says her older brother spent hour after hour listening to works by the masters–Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Vivaldi–and to Dixieland jazz.

Dixieland? “Yes,” Argersinger says, smiling. “Dixieland is pure unadulterated happiness, and that’s a good part of the emotional spectrum to address.”

In fact, he says, while he’s still most powerfully affected by the classical music he first loved as a child and still loves today and by the contemporary music that grows from that tradition, he’s come to appreciate just about all types of music.

“It used to be I had no interest in country music,” he says, “but even that has been accepted into the hall of possibilities.” It’s honest music, he says. People are talking about what they feel in a language they understand.

“I’ve often thought I might compose a country song,” he says, completely deadpan. “It’d say, ‘I’ve lowered my standards, now up yours.’”

But Argersinger isn’t lowering his standards. Next month he will be joining the ranks of emeritus faculty at WSU, a move that will allow him to concentrate more fully on composing. Several years ago he was a fellow at the prestigious Yaddo artists retreat and made substantial progress on a second piano concerto. With two movements finished, he’s working on the final movement.

“Every note counts,” he says. “The choice of every note has to be thoughtfully deliberated on.”

It takes time to write music for the ages, but that’s the music that speaks to him most powerfully. Hear it for yourself this Saturday at the Festival of Contemporary Art Music.

You can also listen to recordings of Argersinger’s music at, or at Argersinger’s website:


Festival of Contemporary Art Music

Charles Argersinger’s web site