https://blog.ayjay.org/this-post-is-obviously-against-all-new-things/
May 1, 2026
this post is obviously against
all new things
The culture … does get stuck. We
are too backward-facing already. The Metropolitan Review has
run its fair share of retrospectives, but I’ve been in the mood, of late, to
crack down on them. There is always going to be another anniversary of a great
old work of art. There is always another famous dead writer we can celebrate.
I’m as guilty of this as anyone, as I begin work, for this Substack, on an
essay celebrating the 60th anniversary of Pet Sounds. But I want
new musical horizons, too. Imagine if the rock musicians of the 1960s spent
much of their day fixating on the pop of the 1940s. As a culture, we need less
mimesis and less retrogression. A lot of this is the fault of the algorithmic
internet, which rewards copycat trends and wearying groupthink. Cultural
nostalgia is nothing new, though it can feel especially repressive these days.
Responses:
1) There
is no art without “mimesis,” in the sense that Barkan uses the term here: all
art responds to prior art in a thousand ways. And the problem, according to
him, is not people copying older
art but rather being
too interested in it. He seems to want, as an alternative to
mimesis, amnesia.
2)
Interest in and knowledge of the past is neither “retrogression” nor
“nostalgia” — not does it constitute “groupthink,” because a staggeringly wide
range of opinions is possible (and indeed extant) about pre–21st-century
cultural productions.
3) It’s
noteworthy that Barkan, because he edits a Substack publication, thinks of
himself as a cultural policeman who can “crack down” on those overly attentive
to the past. (Remember
this day the next time you want to write a piece about an old book, comrade!)
4) Writing an essay
on Pet Sounds is not, in my judgment, something to feel “guilty”
about. …
5) Indeed, “There is always going to be another
anniversary of a great old work of art” — which makes for a great opportunity
to write about it, alert readers to its existence and its excellences, and
maybe even inspire young artists to try to match it. Bob Dylan wasn’t “fixating
on the pop of the 1940s,” but he was compulsively fascinated by and profoundly
knowledgable about the long great history of demotic American music, what he
calls “historical-traditional music.” And his absorption in that vast old musical
world was absolutely essential to his greatness. When we write
about great things from the past, we’re helping to feed future Dylans.
…
This is
the point at which I interrupt Alan Jacobs’ rebuttal to point out that Stevie
Wonder’s masterpiece Innervisions has now been around for more than half a century
and literally nobody on the planet has attempted to publish a monograph
analyzing every track in musical and lyrical terms; situating the album in the
historical and cultural context of the United States in the early 1970s as a
way to convey its cultural impact; and a handful of essays I have come across
discuss Stevie Wonder as a disabled black musician without really seeming to
discuss his brilliant songs. Now I have
a visual disability myself so it’s not like I can’t connect at all to
discussions of how disabled musicians handle music in ways that maybe other
able-bodied musicians don’t. It’s just
that it would be nice if the music itself got discussed.
