(Sorry for the delay, but I'm still drunk....)

Steve Schwartz in response to me:

>>chance is not a technique.  Sounds strange, but please remember
>>the classical meaning of the word "technique".
>
>You're confusing performance realization with the technique of composition.
>An aleatoric composer builds (thus satisfying the meaning of the word
>"technique") a frame in which something can be realized.

Nawp, Steve, "they" are (or were) confusing it.  In many aleatory works,
performance realization and "technique of composition" are often one and
the same thing.  To "build a frame in which something can be realized" is
just a rhetoric expression: you're not "building" anything there, actually
you're just giving to the performer a certain (little) material that he
must order at the moment of performance.  The work consists simply of how
should the performer put order (or chaos) in that material.  You can't call
"technique" to an operation on the material that leads to different or
unexpected outcomes.

Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]