An interesting hypothesis, but I see no mention of the Synthi 100 in the sketches—on the contrary, it appears to have been conceived from the outset in terms of traditional instruments and voices. I know that Stockhausen was disappointed in the Synthi 100, and SIRIUS was, after all, finished only in 1977, just before he embarked on LICHT. Are you saying that there is reason to believe he meant to use the Synthi 100 in LICHT, or that his thinking may have been conditioned by its limits to the extent that he could not feel comfortable working in more than three layers?
As I already mentioned, I could imagine that Michael initially was an angel when Stockhausen planned LICHT. Jerry's answer taught me that this obviously was not the case. But what puzzles me now even more: In Texte VI, p. 203, Stockhausen speaks (talking to Kurtz in 1981) about Michael as a "creator angel", and Kurtz quoted this in his biography on p. 275. "Creator angels" is nothing you can find in the UB. And the attributes of this "creator angel" Stockhausen mentiones are these of the UB's Creator Sons. So I wonder why Stockhausen, talking to Kurtz, spoke about a "creator angel". He certainly knew that the UB's Michael is not an angel. Can someone explain this?
When Stockhausen speaks of Michael as a "creator-angel" in TEXTE VI, 203, he also says that this Michael is the master of "our universe" - a strong hint to the cosmoloy of the Urantia Book. Therefore my conclusion is: Stockhausen was not very interested in any form of correctness in this respect - son of God or angel: in a dogmatic thinking that is quite different, but I would think for St. that is not really important. Also in SONNTAG Michael is very near to the angels: The singer of Michael in LICHTER-WASSER should be the same as the tenor who sings in the seventh angel-group of ENGEL-PROZESSIONEN.
A question to contribution No. 9 by Jerry, where you speak about the early sketches on LICHT and the protagonists of LICHT: In TEXTE V, 147 I read: 1978, not 1977. Therefore the sketch on page 149 with the 4 protagonists is earlier; in the sketch on page 150 (May 26, 1977) there are the 3 formulas = 3 protagonists. And a question to the sketch on page 148 from March 1977: is it on LICHT in general, or just an idea for JAHRESLAUF, when the different "plays" are mentioned?
You are right, of course, about 1978 vs 1977. I was careless.
The sketch on page 148 is so early that it is difficult to know whether Stockhausen was concentrating on the project for the Gagaku orchestra, or was also daydreaming about other projects. Often his sketches contain ideas that he abandons for the work in hand, but are revived later for other compositions. (As Richard Toop has pointed out, many ideas used in LICHT can be found in sketches dating back to the early 1970s or even late 1960s.) Stockhausen later recalled that the idea for LICHT only came to him during his visit to Tokyo in the autumn of 1977, when he asked someone what the Japanese word was for "light," and was told it is "hikari". Nevertheless, it is obvious from this sketch that at least the word "Licht" was in his mind some months before he travelled to Japan, and almost certainly connected in some way with JAHRESLAUF. Did he first think of using the title "Licht" just for the composition we now know as JAHRESLAUF, and later apply it to his expanded concept to a cycle of seven operas? Was it at first an idea for only a component part of JAHRESLAUF, or possibly for an entirely independent work intended for Israel in 1979? Or were all three of these possibilities (and others besides) fired in his imagination when thinking of the things traditionally associated with the word? Probably Stockhausen himself couldn't tell us for sure, and the use to which he might put such a vague conception probably changed in his mind a hundred times before he finally made a firm decision.
I think DONNERSTAG shows that Stockhausen was not a UB fundamentalist: otherwise he would have had to present the man Michael as Jesus (and give him an other childhood than a similar one to his own). It's also interesting that Stockhausen believed in astrology and (as far as I know) considered reincarnation on earth as possible - both is denied in the UB. And that's quite typical for many UB followers who find it hard to accept that their beloved book says that astrology is nonsense and that there's no reincarnation here on earth.
Jerry: KS does not mention the Synthi 100 in the work notes you cite (and you haven't claimed to have seen them all in any case) for the same reason that he does not mention the make and hardness of pencil he refers to in his remarks on intuition in music. But he was the WDR representative responsible for selecting the Synthi 100 over other synthesisers, who did the research, met the makers, and discussed what different devices could do "to his specifications" (Stockhausen on Music: interviews). It was after the Synthi 100 was acquired that KS changed his outline specifications for a major theatrical work from four leading characters (SIRIUS, ATMEN GIBT DAS LEBEN) to three. The Synthi 100 could handle a maximum of three layers but not four, meaning that KS could sketch three-part superformulae for LICHT as a whole, and the various days, and make changes to transpositions of the layers etc. in advance. The Synthi 100 was a composing sketchpad and tool as well as an instrument for realizing sounds. This is how every last detail of the cycle came to be presented as a sequence of expansions in time and diminutions in scale of the original superformula.
I'm a little confused here, Robin. You seem to be saying that Stockhausen changed "from four leading characters (SIRIUS, ATMEN GIBT DAS LEBEN) to three" after acquiring the Synthi 100, but surely this was the synthesizer he used to produce the electronic music for SIRIUS. If SIRIUS required four layers and the Synthi 100 could produce only three, wouldn't this have required him either to find a different piece of equipment for its production, or reduce the number of parts to three? (Of course this would pose certain dramaturgical problems, such as working out just three points of the compass, three seasons of the year, etc.)
I feel that it could be useful to have a discussion-forum on the music of Stockhausen. There are so many people from all over the world, young and old, learned and eager to get into contact with this musical world: musicologists, composers, musicians, music lovers; people who plan concerts - who write books or have to give lectures and so on. So there should be much stuff, many ideas that we can share. And when we have open questions, there may be people who studied just that and could give a hint or a stimulus.
A problem might be the English language, but i feel that is the only possibility that many people who are interested can participate. And we can exercise tolerance to mistakes!