1

Savannah Smith
ENG 481
Final Paper
Professor McCallum
5/1/2014
The Isolation and Reduction of Words in Event Scores in Kotz Words to Be Looked At
In Words to Be Looked At by Liz Kotz, the author explores many works of music, visual
art, and poetry in which language has been reduced to a kind of object that has been isolated,
broken apart, crossed out, and at times nearly evacuated of meaning or expression (1). As
shown by the use of the passive voice throughout this quotation, language, and later the
object to which it is reduced, is an entity that is being manipulated by an outside agent. The
ways in which language has been reducedto [an] object include being isolated, broken
apart, crossed out, and nearly evacuated of meaning or expression, since the past participle
has been is used for both the reducing and the four latter manipulations, which implies that
all these actions have already occurred around the same time. One can see the first three ways
that the object has been manipulated, being isolated, broken apart, [and] crossed out, as
different ways of causing the final characteristic of being nearly evacuated of meaning or
expression, since this final phrase is started by the phrase at times which indicates that this
does not happen as consistently or as often as the other characteristics. The key word of this
sentence is nearly because it implies that although language is reduced and objectified, not
all of the meaning and expression can be eliminated. An example of one of the ways that
language that has become a kind of object, the isolation of language in which language is
removed from its contextual surroundings, can be found in the examples of event scores that
Kotz provides, including works such as Exit by George Brecht and Composition 1960 #10 by La
Monte Young. Both follow the general model for the relationship that is demonstrated throughout

the book of a work being a notation and the many specific realizations that can be made.
However, both isolate language in different ways that lead to different results. For instance, La
Monte Young uses imperatives in his works, which can be seen in other artists scores, whereas
Brecht often eliminates these types of verbs altogether (92). The peculiarity of Brechts work, in
which the score is often a single word, along with Youngs work, can inform the reader about
how isolation, is nearly eliminating the meaning and expression behind language, rather
than actually evacuating it.
In order to demonstrate how language is functioning in these event scores, it is imperative
to explore the larger model of notation and realization that Kotz proposes from the beginning
with Cages 433, which is a musical score that contains four minutes and thirty-three seconds
of silence. Kotz argues, in regards to Cages famous piece, that if notation is now a way to do a
job, any tools-writing, graphics, diagrams, and even musical bars and notes-can be used (39).
This quotation proposes the general model for notation, which can cross the border between
music, art, and literature. It can also portray how notation and realization can function using the
level of the word, and it gives a chance to show what effects isolating language can have on
interpretation and meaning. It contains many words that have traces of action within them,
whether they are directly derived from an action verb or the verb is related in a more distant way.
In fact, these are the only words that contain action, since the verbs in this sentence are simply
the linking verb, to be, or the infinitive to do which implies that an agent has not performed
this action. The words that have action embedded within them, although they share this same
basic characteristic, are not connected to action in the same way, but rather have many different
connections and therefore many different meanings.

The first noun that is introduced in the quotation, notation, is derived from the verb
notate, and therefore contains action embedded within it. The suffix -ion, according to the
Oxford English Dictionary, indicates a noun formed from an action verb. In this way, one could
see notation as the object or the product formed from the act of notating. The noun
notation could be seen as a realization of the verb to notate. The infinitive verb to notate
could be the notation, and an agent could perform the action of notating, causing the realization
of this process to be the notation. With the simple meaning of -ion, it implies a unidirectional
movement of verb to noun. Looking at a word like notation even in isolation can generate a
very in-depth meaning in itself. It shows how trying to eliminate meaning from language can
only nearly happen.
However, the fact that notation isa way to do a job complicates this movement from
verb to noun and action to object within the context of the sentence. Isolated, the unidirectional
model for notation and realization within this word is the most logical, given the meaning behind
the suffix -ion. On the other hand, it is clear that in Kotzs work notation itself is an object, and
action needs to be taken in the realization of the notation. That being said, it is true that action
exists in order to form notation, but the word notation itself is not necessarily the realization,
since the notation is an object, as well. The contextual evidence indicates that notation is not
the product or the realization, but rather it is a way. The word way indicates some sort of
process to achieve a goal, which is a job (one of many jobs, as shown by the indefinite article
a) in this quotation. In this way, the job, would be the realization of notation (or the other
possible ways, since the article a indicates that notation one of many ways). The fact
that the verb to do is left in the infinitive form means that there is an action that has not been
performed yet, since there is no agent that has done a job. In this way, actions must be taken in

order for the job to be realized from the notation. This is a great example of how the concept
of notation in relation to realizations functions within Kotzs text. There is the work, or the
object, of notation, and action must be taken in order to generate one of many possible
realizations.
On the other hand, the various tools for completing the action needed for notation
contain completely different types of traces of action. These tools include three categories:
nouns that can also be seen as conjugated verbs that have a vast array of specific meanings that
could all make sense, nouns that are derived from adjectives but also have links to verbs, nouns
that are also verbs in the state they are in on the page, but have very simple meanings even in
isolation. The first of these tools, the noun writing, belongs to the first and most complicated
category. The suffix -ing has many implications, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. It
can mean a process, practice, habit, or art which may or may not be regarded as in actual
exercise, the product of that process, or the material thing in which the actionis embodied.
In this way, the process, of writing, can be used within the general concept of notation
in order to do a job. Since writing here refers to a tool, or something used to complete an
action, such as that of notating, it could be the process itself, or perhaps the material thing
that embodies the action. This type of writing would refer more to the literal text on the
page that happened because the words have been written. It would be less related to the
product of writing itself, since writing is being used to create the product of notation, but it
is still a possibility, since the embodiment of an action and the product of the action go hand in
hand.
The word writing provides a view of how complicated the idea of notation and
realization can get when looking at it in isolation. The reader cannot ignore the fact that the word

writing can also be seen as the present participle of the verb to write, and along with this, the
reality is that someone was in fact writing in order for the word to end up on the page. In this
way, it is a self-referential word, perhaps even indexical, in the literal sense. Furthermore, it
fulfills the movement within itself, in that it is both a noun form and a verb form. If addressing
writing as a present participle form of to write, then notation and realization could be seen as
happening simultaneously. Even when acknowledging only the noun-form of this word, the
multiple meanings that -ing has in the English language that could all be correct in different
ways does not give the reader a simple link between word and meaning. It is as if there are
multiple, specific realizations of the same action of to write, embedded in the noun writing
itself. Even within the context of the sentence in which the reader knows that writing must be
a noun, it does not resolve the many implied meanings-that of process, product, and material
thing that this gerund form could have. One thing that is true is that the word writing when
looked at on its own is working on three different levels-that of a verb, or an action, that of a
noun, whether it be a process, product, or material thing, and finally, on a self-referential or
indexical level in which writing had to occur for the word to have been written.
The tool graphics would belong in the second category of being derived from an
adjective, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, due to its suffix -ic. However, it is very
easy to link this noun, however indirectly, back to the verb to graph. The noun graphics
would be some group of items that are graphic, or relating to graphs and the action of
graphing, in nature. It is not as directly related to action or an action verb, but one could say in
very general terms that on some level graphics are a realization of the concept of something
being graphic, but it does not relate as closely to this model of notation and realization.

The final category relates much more closely to the idea of notation and realization. The
tools that belong to this category are diagrams, bars, and notes. The noun diagrams in
this category demonstrates the idea of the word in isolation being both a noun and a conjugated
verb at the same time with a simple meaning attached in its purest form. It is an oscillation
between the noun diagrams which means simply multiple visual representations of concepts
and the verb to diagram, which means the act of making one of these visual representations,
conjugated to in the singular third person. In this way, this word is constantly fulfilling itself at a
conceptual level because the act of diagramming is occurring at the same time the product is
being mentioned due to the simple dual-meaning, which is quite similar to the how the word
writing functions. It is as if notation and realization are continuously happening at the same
time within the singular word. With bars and notes this idea continues, since one can bar
something physically, and one can note something. Obviously, when one adds context back
into the reading of these words, one knows that the author is referring to the noun form of all
three of these tools. One also knows that the bars and notes are, in fact, musical, which
adds more specificity to the imagery in ones head. In this case, both could still be seen as verbs,
as well, but the bars would be barring groups of notes, and the notes would be noting
certain sounds.
This close-reading at the sentence level has been a portrayal of choice words from this
sentence that in itself is about notation in order to demonstrate some ways in which notation and
realization are related to one another, which is a crucial point for Kotz. It has also demonstrated
in part the ways in which isolating language from its context can change the way one looks at it
and reads it. It also portrays how words, when isolated, can fulfill the rolls of notation and
realization at the same time, and even fulfill an indexical role at some points. These concepts

apply directly to how the event scores of La Monte Young and George Brecht function in
general, along with what makes George Brechts event scores unique, since they are both
working at the sentence or even word level, as well.
La Monte Youngs Composition 1960 #10 reads Draw a straight line and follow it (84).
The imperative use of the verbs to draw and to follow means that Young is sending out a
command to whoever may be reading his work. The command is very indefinite throughout.
Anyone is performing the task must simply draw a straight line. The article a is indefinite,
and therefore it refers to one of many possible straight lines. The only definite thing about the
realization of this art piece is that the line must be straight. After this, the reader is
commanded to follow it. The pronoun it refers specifically to whatever line the performer
comes up with. There are no specifications about time or space in regards to the line, so it could
potentially go on forever, since the person realizing it would technically be drawing the line
and following it. If it was realized in this way, that performance of the command would link it
back to the kind of dual meaning and simultaneity that was shown earlier in a word like
diagrams, but it would be at the level of the realization itself. This is only one specific way that
one who is reading Youngs work could interpret it. There is an infinite amount of ways in which
to realize it, and in this way, it relates back to the complicated meaning behind the noun
writing.
Although Young does not condense his concept of the line all the way down to its essence
of a simple image (although in Composition 1960 #9, there is a line on a small card, curiously
enough (86)), the concept of notation and realization can be seen very clearly. As already shown,
the actual command he makes is the notation, in which many specific and unique realizations can
be performed by anyone. The act of drawing a straight line and then following it, if realized

in a certain way, can be a simultaneous action. However, the work in itself does not realize itself.
It requires an agent to fulfill the task that is presented. It is true that the instructions themselves
are the actual work, but the work in itself is not a realization; it is a notation. It does contain a
single concept that is isolated, that of the line, but it does not condense the idea to the bare
minimum. It still contains explicit verbs, with an object that is to be realized and acted upon. It is
clear that there is an agent and a realization, and there is a division between the two. In the score
itself, the agent is even specified as Bob Morris, since that is who the work is addressed to
beneath the title itself (Kotz 84). The fact that the score is documented as being given or
dedicated to someone else indicates that Young desired there to be an agent to realize his work.
The notation itself does stand alone as the piece of art known as an event score, but this action of
addressing the work to someone demands that a person realize it.
Whereas in La Monte Youngs event score, there is a simple imperative sentence that
demonstrates a single concept, in many of George Brechts works, the event score is a single
word. He has gone so far as to eliminate the need for an agent. This is shown in his work, Exit
(93). In the score, the word exit is basically isolated, although there is other text, including the
title Word Event along with George Brechts name and the date. Spatially, it is very much
separated from these other examples of language found on the score itself, which could indicate
that they are not meant to be read as connected to one another. The bullet point that sets off the
word exit also indicates its difference from the other parts of the text. The title itself could just
put the person looking at the score into the right mind-frame so that they will experience the
score for the wordexit in all of its complexity. The date, Spring, 1961, adds a temporal
element to the score, but it does not necessarily influence the interpretations and realizations of
exit in any way. The word exit has many meanings to it, not unlike the word writing. It

could mean the action of exiting. If so, it could be realized by someone leaving the room, for
instance. Another meaning is the noun form exit, which could mean the event of someone
exiting, or the actual means of exiting, such as a door. The concept of an exit sign adds
another meaning or significance to the word itself. Since the word exit can often indicate the
means by which someone exits, the actual score itself could mimic an exit sign, and in this
way, it can be seen as akin to the indexical meaning behind writing. The first meaning, that of
the event, so to speak, shows how the word exit, when isolated, actually fulfills its own
realization simultaneously. The fact that the word also provides the means for the action to occur
helps in this realization. It does not require an agent for action and product (or realization) to
happen. This is similar to the idea in the word writing and other words that end in -ing that
the process may not be regarded as the actual exercise. The event score may not be regarded
as in need of an outside agent to perform the actual exercise.
Although Exit does fulfill itself in a circular way, this does not mean that the event score
is closed from other realizations from different interpreters. As already shown, each different
meaning behind the word exit can relate to a different type of realization. Within each of these
types of realization, there is an infinite amount of ways to interpret that realization. Because
the meanings overlap so much, there is no reason that someone could not show the overlap in his
or her realization of the notation. One could show a person exiting the room through a door
that happens to have an exit sign over it, for instance. As far as the potential for realizations goes,
Brecht and Young achieve the same goals with their works of an indefinite, or indeterminate,
amount that can be performed by anyone.
When the works by Young and Brecht are put side by side, they both seem to be
concerned with the idea of isolation that Kotz posits at the beginning of her work. For Young

10

in Composition 1960 #10, it is not that language, objectified, is isolated, but rather the concept
of the image of the line. He does use minimal language to focus the person reading it on the
instructions and the potential realizations. One could say that Young isolates language by
focusing its trajectory on the very minimal but concept-specific type of notation he portrays.
However, Brecht truly exhibits language that is isolated in Exit, since it only contains the word
exit. Brecht has completely isolated not only a concept, but the word exit itself.
Both Young and Brecht reach similar results with their works, but the way in which
language is functioning within both of these event scores is entirely different. In Youngs work, it
is true that the instructions are the score, and in this way, they are an object, so language
itself is technically reduced to an object. In Brechts, due to the various meanings of exit,
including that of an exit sign, the word itself can be seen as an object. It is also fully isolated
from other language, except for the title of Word Event, along with Brechts name and the date,
which are distinctly separate from the word exit on the score itself. In both cases, the process
of isolation and (partial) objectification lead to a work that is simplified and focused to an
extreme extent, but has the potential to be realized in any way by anyone. The realizations
themselves, once they are produced, are specific, but the notation found in the event score does
not indicate any specific realization. Perhaps this could be linked to the indefinite language
found in Youngs work, in which the person must draw a straight line, rather than draw the
straight line, which indicates one of many possible outcomes in itself. Along with this, the
multiple meanings behind the word exit found in Brechts work that indicate both action and
object also reject specificity in the instructions for the various realizations.
It is clear by the many words that have been analyzed in-depth that language being
isolated does not always mean that it will be evacuated of meaning or expression. Kotz

11

herself admits this by inserting that phrase at times, which indicates that it happens
occasionally but not consistently. Furthermore, the word nearly that is put before evacuated
means that this evacuation actually never happens, but rather comes close to happening. It is
interesting that the options are that either meaning or expression is removed. The concept of
meaning being removed is easier to understand because if the language itself has been
reduced to a kind of object, and objects hold meaning in a concrete way that is entirely
different than that of language. Kotz does not even feel comfortable saying that language is
objectified in terms of certainty. Language becomes a kind of object, which could mean that
it is one of many types of objects, but kind of also carries the meaning of almost or
something that carries some of the characteristics of something else. In this way, she is subtly
hinting that language cannot be fully objectified. If it cannot be fully objectified, it will still carry
some meaning within it, since this characteristic is inherent to what language is. In this light,
the idea that expression could be evacuated is even more difficult to believe, since
expression deals more with portraying ones own ideas, and if someone is acting on language
to create a work, obviously some sort of idea is going to come through. It would be safer to say,
at least in the case of event scores, that the artist is guiding others thoughts towards one direct
thing, such as a concept or a word, in order to generate a multiplicity of meanings within a
concept that is often thought of as very simple. The same principle of focusing on one word that
can produce many nuanced meanings applies to the close-reading of any sentence in general. In
both cases, it is true that language has been reduced, and in this case, isolated in different
ways, but meaning or expression are certainly not even nearly evacuated.

12

Works Cited
Kotz, Liz. Words to Be Looked At. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007.
Print.
-ic. Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press, 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
-ing. Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press, 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
-ion. Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press, 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.