La Monte Young in Fluxus 1

La Monte Young

Composition 1960 #2 (Relic)

New York City, USA: Fluxus, [circa 1964]

11.7 x 17 cm.

Edition size unknown

The score for Composition 1960 #2 was first published in the proto-Fluxus collection An Anthology, which was edited by Young and Jackson Mac Low, and designed by George Maciunas. It reads: 

Build a fire in front of the audience. Preferably, use wood although other combustibles may be used as necessary for starting the fire or controlling the smoke. The fire may be of any size, but it should not be the kind which is associated with another object, such as a candle or a cigarette lighter. The lights may be turned out.

After the fire is burning, the builder(s) may sit by and watch it for the duration of the composition; however, he (they) should not sit between the fire and the audience in order that its members will be able to see and enjoy the fire.

The composition may be of any duration.

In the event that the performance is broadcast, the microphone may be brought up close to the fire.

The "relic" version included in Fluxus 1 featured a burnt match. Versions of the piece featuring a matchstick in a jar were also advertised in Fluxus sales lists, but none are known to exist. 

Jon Hendricks posits in Fluxus Codex that the work was probably included by Maciunas without Young's authorization. 

In his 1965 lecture titled Lecture 1960, first published in the Tulane Drama Review, Young writes of a conversation with the poet Diane Wakoski about the work, and Composition 1960 #5: 

"Diane suggested that perhaps the reason the director of the noon concerts at the University would not allow me to perform “Composition 1960 No.5” on the third concert of contemporary music that we gave was that he thought it wasn’t music. “Composition 1960 No.5” is the piece in which the butterfly or any number of butterflies is turned loose in the performance area. I asked her if she thought the butterfly piece was music to any less degree than “Composition 1960 No.2” which consists of simply building a fire in front of the audience. She said, “Yes, because in the fire piece at least there are some sounds.” I said that I felt certain the butterfly made sounds, not only with the motion of its wings but also with the functioning of its body and that unless one was going to dictate how loud or soft the sounds had to be before they could be allowed into the realms of music that the butterfly piece was music as much as the fire piece. She said she thought that at least one ought to be able to hear the sounds. I said that this was the usual attitude of human beings that everything in the world should exist for them and that I disagreed. I said it didn’t seem to me at all necessary that anyone or anything should have to hear sounds and that it is enough that they exist for themselves. When I wrote this story out for this lecture I added, “If you think this attitude is too extreme, do you think sounds should be able to hear people?”