That American modern classical music has suffered due to failure to follow Dvorak’s urging to ground itself on Black music is has a fair amount of truth.
Pages
- Home
- a page with an index of tagged posts discussing the history of the former Mars Hill Church
- a page with an index of posts on music and musical analysis--guitar sonatas and contrapuntal music for guitar and other musical stuff
- writings at Mbird on animation, superheroes and other things (nobody cares about Jarvis Pennyworth)
Thursday, September 26, 2024
Socratic Gadfly underwhelmed by a Joseph Horowitz book on music history (Artists in Exile)
Ethan Hein has a piece discussing Jeff Buckley's cover of "Lilac Wine" at MusicRadar
https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2024/musicradar-column-on-lilac-wine-by-jeff-buckley/
…
As befits Jeff
Buckley’s strangeness, Grace is a strange album. It’s nominally “alternative
rock”, but Buckley doesn’t sing or write like a typical 90s alt-rocker, and he
includes a couple of songs that are conspicuously not rock at all. One is
Corpus Christi Carol, a 500-year-old traditional tune arranged by Benjamin
Britten. The other is Lilac Wine. It’s only 75 years old, but it sounds even
less like alt-rock than Corpus Christi Carol does.
…
I don’t know anyone who
is neutral on Jeff Buckley; people either love him or hate him.
Goldin-Perschbacher attributes that to the shocking intimacy he creates with
the listener: “Buckley’s performance aesthetic could seem, to some, too private
for public performance. The relationship between Buckley and his listeners was
so intense that it felt metaphorically, if not literally, sexual, in terms of
privacy, pleasure, and self-discovery.”
…
It’s funny Ethan mentioned this because I have found that
Buckley really is that polarizing. I was introduced to Buckley’s signature
album decades ago and I have happily owned it.
My brother couldn’t resist making fun of the lyrics from “Mojo Pin” by
saying “White horses run through the fields as we make love, shaking their
sassy manes!” Which is pretty
funny! The song still sounds great to
me, though.
There was a lot of rock in the 1990s I frankly hated. I hated the bulk of the Seattle sound and
grunge in particular. I hated Nirvana’s
music back then and I still hate it.
Never cared for Pearl Jam. I had
a kind of grudging respect for Soundgarden but “Black Hole Sun”, though I liked
its chord changes, kinda reminded me of the glorious and elliptical final
movement of Toru Takamitsu’s “All in Twilight”. I don’t
know why I made the connection but I made it.
But Buckley’s album I enjoyed, and I remember meeting a
musician in my Mars Hill years who just flatly said he didn’t like Jeff Buckley
(who was named Jeff, if I recall). The
gender presentation topic is kind of interesting and I suppose for folks who
wanted to go DIY indie post-punk authenticity everything about Jeff Buckley was
so overtly presentational it would fail all the standardized tests of
rock-based masculinity … if rock is all you’ve saturated yourself in.
But another potential angle to consider is camp. Raymond Knapp made a couple of points in his
book Making
Light: Haydn, Musical Camp, and the Long Shadow of German Idealism that
spring to mind. The first and most basic
point (about Haydn) was that German Idealism became more hegemonic in its
influence on music criticism, history and reception and in German Idealism
authenticity and profundity were touchstones.
Knapp contended that these ideals in German Idealism were and are so
pervasive they saturate the criteria of authenticity in rock and jazz
criticism. By contrast, camp was
rejected as a mixture of not being highbrow enough (musical theater) and not
being manly enough.
Knapp made a subsidiary point that, owing to the outsized
influence of Sontag’s “Notes on Camp” Anglo-American literary criticism has all
but ignored the reality of camp as a feature of straight cultural
production. Knapp was specific, Haydn is
camp, very camp. Haydn is always aware
that you are in on his joke and he wants you to be in on the joke without necessarily
being insincere. Camp, Knapp contended,
has not always been coded as gay but as expectations of gender performance and “seriousness”
evolved in the long 19th century camp was not prized. By Sontag’s era camp was all but annexed by
or ceded to queer theory readings. Knapp
made a somewhat diffuse plea to remind readers of Making Light that
straight people made and make camp plenty and that Haydn was one of the most
successful purveyors of straight camp in classical music.
Now the thing is, as a lifelong fan of Batman I get there
are gay readings of Batman. They are an option within the reception history but
obviously not the whole of the reception history of Batman. More recently Netflix is planning to reboot
Rumiko Takahashi’s spectacularly silly and affectionate rom-com send up or the
martial arts genre, Ranma ½, and if all you ever read about Takahashi’s
work was by, say, Noah Berlatsky, you’d think the only way to interpret her
work is as one long tract in favor of LGTBQ advocacy. Given Berlatsky’s activist commitments
regarding the nature and aim of art criticism that’s what he’s into.
That doesn’t change the fact that millions upon millions of
the most conventionally straight guys across the entire planet have enjoyed
Takahashi’s work without feeling obliged to read her work the way Berlatsky
reads it. One of Takahashi’s more easily
overlooked works was a series aimed at male readers ages 18 to 30 --for my time
and money Maison Ikkoku is a masterpiece of slice of life comedy manga. If anything I’d venture to say the reception
history of Takahashi’s work in Anglo-American contexts has been so curated by
feminist and LGBTQ readings of her work you might be forgiven for wondering how
her work got so popular in Asia that American LGBTQ readings were possible
since the 1990s in the first place. As
with Batman in American comics so with Ranma Saotome in manga, the prevalence
of a robust subcultural reception history is not the same thing as mainstream
reception. Rumiko Takahashi has been one
of the unparalleled comedic geniuses in the history of manga and you will
probably never have read much of anything about her in The Comics Journal,
unless Gary Groth really repented of not liking manga and I haven’t heard of
it. Perhaps the kinds of guys who spell
commix that way are the kinds of guys who wouldn’t want to listen to Jeff
Buckley because he’s not really rock?
Which only roundaboutly gets me back to Buckley and the
concept of camp. I don’t think anyone
would suggest Buckley came across as insincere but the problem for the rockist
bros would be that there’s so much affectation in Buckley’s
performances. Borrowing rubato from classical musical conventions would just be
one of those affectations for the rockists that would be
unacceptable.
Ethan Hein gets at something that I like about Buckley’s
work, his systemic-bordering-on-rpincipled disregard for genre purity. Old syrupy show tune? Go for it?
A Leonard Cohen cover? Sure, do
it! Benjamin Britten? Right on.
I also happen to love Benjamin Britten’s Nocturnal After John Dowland
for solo guitar (check out Marcin Dylla’s performance at the provided link,
which has a read-along score).
I think I get Hein’s point about Buckley’s gender
presentation and that is an interesting thing to read about but coming at
Buckley’s music as a classical guitarist who spent high school and college
years singing choral music I think the thing that jumps out about Buckley that
may be part of why people love him or hate him could be as simple as this,
Buckley always wore all of his “that’s not rock” influences on his sleeve and
lamp-shaded them conspicuously across Grace. I have contended for years as a blogger that
both pop and classical music have tended to be stuck in ruts over the last half
century and those ruts are as bad as they are because the purists in all those
lanes want to regain purity by “going back to basics” when that’s never been my
own understanding of when, why ad how music can be so much fun. I’m not saying music is fun when it’s “transgressive”
because that’s a tedious and stupid rockist trope. No, I am saying that fun rock and pop paid
attention to (and showed real respect for) other genres. I normally hate music about music but I love “Sir
Duke” because Stevie Wonder was paying tribute not to “his” genre of music but “our”
genre of music for those of us who love Ellington’s music and the masters of
big band. Buckley was a relatively rare
case study, if I may, of someone in the 1990s who was overt in showing how much
he was influenced by “not rock” music and for those of us who were sick of rock
`n roll versions of “authenticity” Buckley’s music and its success was a signal
that the future of music most likely belongs to people who make music that is
fun to hear and perform; music that draws on everything rather than “the good
stuff”; and which doesn’t pretend that the last century or so of “pop” and “classical”
have never positively interacted with each other.
So, sure, put me in the “love” category for Jeff Buckley’s
music and I hope I have managed to explain a little of why. Thanks to Ethan Hein for his post.
POSTSCRIPT
9pm
There is an actual third category on Buckley. A drummer I've been friends with for years regarded Buckley as immensely talented but as someone where it was potential rather than kinetic energy. The potential for greatness was there but Buckley died too young and too soon to develop further and my drummer buddy's appraisal was that it seemed to him Buckley fans resonated with the potential but, for him, the actual songs and performances were the tip of a never-to-be-realized iceberg, given Buckley's death.
My brother thought Buckley was immensely talented but he's never warmed up to what he calls the soul-bro balladeer idiom. Buckley is better than, say, Shawn Mendes or Vance Joy or Jason Mraz or earlier variants like James Taylor and so on but Buckley was the apex of a performance idiom my brother just hasn't warmed up to. But it's neither love nor hatred it's more, "He was about as good as that genre of male performer I never warmed up to can get, which was really good but not my thing."
That, in the main, Buckley polarizes can still probably be generally true. But I might venture a guess that since the two "meh" people I know studied music formally there's that extra variable.
Augustine's De Musica is up at archive.org
Alan Jacobs on Mark Edmundson has me thinking professors who teach poetry should not actually be trusted to competently expound John Milton as an "archconservative"
https://blog.ayjay.org/what-milton-isnt/
September 25, 2024
what Milton isn’t
This is an excellent
essay by Mark Edmundson, so of course I am going to write about the part I
disagree with:
I like to teach a
class on Milton and Whitman. I do so from a political vantage, seeing Whitman
as an archetypal progressive, a breaker of boundaries, an opener of new roads.
Milton, by contrast, is an archconservative, someone who brilliantly dramatizes
the allure of order, degree, and hierarchy. Few students have trouble
entertaining Whitmanian values. What 20-year-old isn’t attracted to freedom?
But with Milton, matters change. He believes that people can be happy only when
they are installed in a hierarchy. We should revere what is above us and care
for what is below. Milton’s views of hierarchy implicate religious, political,
and family life. Reading these two poets side by side offers plenty of
illuminating conflicts.
The problem with this
account is that, while Milton indeed believed in “order, degree, and
hierarchy,” he thought it essential to ask which order, which model
of degree, which system of hierarchy a society embodies.
Because he thought his own society had radically misconceived such matters,
Milton was not an “archconservative,” but rather was a
political revolutionary who advocated for and then defended the violent
overthrow of the monarchy, and then worked for a decade in the new
anti-monarchical government. Moreover, his theology was very much his own;
though he never repudiated the Church of England and is buried in one of its
churches, he could not have been ordained in it, and probably not in any
other church either.
…
Alan Jacobs is clearly approaching this as a professor of
the liberal arts and as a humanist.
Approaching this as a journalism student back in the 20th
century I have an entirely different disagreement.
In what universe am I supposed to actually believe that the guy
who formulated the libertarian theory of the press could be construed as an "archconservative"?
I can't take anything Edmundson says seriously if in Edmunsonian parlance Milton is an archconservative, especially if presented as such to propose that Whitman was progressive.
I am perhaps overstressing the point — in many respects Whitman was a new thing in the world. But what I am trying to suggest is that our categories of “conservative” and “progressive” do not map very neatly onto periods other than our own.
If anything I suspect Jacobs is not overstressing the point at all. There are right-wing Christian variations of imposing a contemporary approach to polemic on to the past such as when bros in Idaho invoke Chesterton for insert-meme-lord-wagging here, and there's a progressive variation such as pretending that Teddy Adorno anticipated Trump. I'd say it's the bane of 21st century scholarship but it is probably more the temptation of hacks in academia in every generation.
Tuesday, September 24, 2024
be wary of using those great quotes by way of Steven Wedgworth and Jim West
https://mereorthodoxy.com/beware-the-great-quote
…
One famous quote that has far
outshined its source comes from the early 20th century journalist and critic HL
Mencken. Mencken was a highly talented writer, able to impress the reader with
his scholarship while also making them laugh, usually literally out loud. More
than one of his sentences have taken on a life of their own.
The one that appears more and more as
of late: “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” The line brings to mind a
civilized man of modern times who has finally had enough with the social and
moral decadence all around. It sounds the cry of the reactionary, the one who
must put his ordinary rule of life on pause in order to vanquish the rabble.
Usually, Mencken’s line is used to
justify a sort of rhetorical nastiness. Occasionally, though, one fears that
the person quoting it has less literary intentions. But what did Mencken
actually mean by the quote?
Has anyone in the past few decades
bothered to go read the essay? Mencken’s pirate metaphor appears in an essay on
modern poetry. He thinks most of what is being set forth as high-class artistic
writing is pretentious and fake. The normal man who is tempted to slit throats
is the one who knows what real poetry and true scholarship is. And he has one
specific such person in mind, Ezra Pound.
Mencken writes:
Pound, it seems to me, is the most
picturesque man in the whole movement—a professor turned fantee, Abelard in
grand opera. His knowledge is abysmal; he has it readily on tap; moreover, he
has a fine ear, and has written many an excellent verse. But now all the glow
and gusto of the bard have been transformed into the rage of the pamphleteer:
he drops the lute for the bayonet.
One sympathizes with him in his
choler. The stupidity he combats is actually almost unbearable. Every normal
man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and
begin slitting throats.
Man, that really is a great line.
But do you notice something? Even
though Mencken sympathizes with Pound, even though he feels the temptation to
call for “No Quarter,” he is ultimately criticizing Pound. Mencken goes on to
say, “But this business, alas, is fatal to the placid moods and fine
other-worldliness of the poet. Pound gives a thrilling show, but—....”
In giving in to the call for war,
Mencken believed that Pound also gave up the calling of the poet. It was
Pound’s verse that suffered in the end. There was a great blast and show, but
the final product, according to Mencken, was a failure.
The true meaning of “Every normal man
must tempted… to hoist the black flag” is that the temptation is understandable
but destructive. It’ a visceral reaction to a real problem but it is a passion
which must be ruled over and redirected. If you give in and actually “begin
slitting throats,” then you lose. To understand the great quote, and its true
profundity, you have to read the whole argument.
…
https://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2024/08/16/quote-of-the-millenium/
“Emperors
could only believe in Christ if they were not emperors—as if Christians could
ever be emperors.” -Tertullian
That’s the quote that Brian Zahnd
shared on the twitter. Cool huh. He shared it, though, without
attribution. So I went hunting.
….
What Tertullian actually says is this:
Yes, and the Cæsars too would have believed on Christ, if either
the Cæsars had not been necessary for the world, or if Christians could have
been Cæsars.-*
The first part of the quote is nothing like the one above
claims. The second part is similar but not the same.
When people misquote, they misrepresent. Don’t take people
at their word. Verify.
Now I know of someone who has been reading through a
book Luther’s
Theology of Music (a de Gruyter title) and there is a passage that
cites an author who claimed Tertullian’s Apology XXX gave an example of
improvised music in the early church.
Part of me thinks it would be fun if it were
true.
However, I looked up the alleged passage and it’s not
in XXX, it’s in XXXIX and the passage is one where Tertullian mentioned that
songs could be based on biblical texts or original creations, none
of which indicates improvised music. It seems a second-hand use of
Tertullian by one scholar was brought in by another scholar to suggest
Tertullian was an early witness to the existence of improvised music in early
Christian meetings. If I hadn’t gotten anything Tertullian wrote I’d have been
duped by a scholar who used another scholar who CLAIMED Tertullian may have
been a witness to improvised music in the early church. All Tertullian really said was that Christians
could and did sing songs based on biblical texts or original inventions in corporate
singing.
There's no need to pretend Tertullian witnessed improvised music in the early Christian meetings. Do you want to know if music gets improvised in church settings happens any given week? Well, go to a service and ask, afterwards, if some of the music was improvised. Music historians have managed to do plenty of research into the frequency of improvised music in church gatherings without conscripting Tertullian into the cause regardless of whether or not he actually addressed that topic.
More positively about Luther’s Theology of Music,
I can at least say that the synopsis of Augustine’s De Musica is pretty
accurate (without mentioning the part that De Musica
is a punishingly tedious read which even Augustine himself admits and
apologized for in Book VI!!). At least
the old English translation has found its way onto archive.org, finally.
If scholars are seduced by “great quotes” then how much less effort will eager beaver culture warrior meme-lords exert to discern if that meme they already think pwns their real or imagined adversaries is a real quote and taken in context?
Saturday, September 14, 2024
links for the weekend: Ethan Hein on AABA form; Rick Beato asks why bands don't chart anymore; Richard Bratby writes on Mozart's God and Molly Worthen reviews a new biography on J Gresham Machen at First Things
Thursday, September 12, 2024
more on the back and forth between Alan Jacobs and Brad East, why I find it easier to take the former more seriously than the latter
https://blog.ayjay.org/one-more-enchanted-evening/
Alan Jacobs has had a back
and forth with Brad East in the last week or so about enchantment vs.
disenchantment. I am hardly in a place
to insist but I do think that for as much Jacques Ellul as Alan Jacobs has read
I hope he read Matthew T Prior’s book Confronting
Technology: The Theology of Jacques Ellul. For anyone who isn’t already
committed to eventually getting through eighty books on exorcism, diabology,
exousiology, spiritual warfare, the reception history of the Enoch literature
and Genesis 6 references to The Watchers, Prior’s book distinguishes
exousiology (a theology of powers and principalities a la Walter Wink) from
demonology (I better not have to explain that topic here at Wenatchee The
Hatchet of all places!) whether of the Merrill Unger variety or some other) in
Christian thought.
Alan Jacobs is interested in
playing with an upgraded demonology a la Jacques Ellul’s The New Demons? Alright. A new variation on powers and
principalities? Okay! Robert Ewusie Moses’ Practices
of Power: Revisiting the Principalities and Powers in the Pauline Letters
should be on Jacobs’ reading list (if he can carve out time for it). I would suggest that the book builds upon
what strikes me now as a skeletal idea in James Cone’s Black Theology and
Black Power about Christ overcoming powers and principalities with a
specific eye toward white supremacism as one of those powers. Given the history of white Euro-American
Christians regarding BIPOC folks as either having demons, being demons or being
subjected to demons I trust Alan Jacobs has at least some inkling of the
delicacy involved in rehabilitating demonology as an element of Christian
discourse. I don’t for a second reject
the proposal since I’m a professing Christian and digging into the reception
history of demonologies and how they developed in the Second Temple period as
nascent Judaism grappled with serial imperial occupation was something I was
hoping to do grad work in. But I didn’t
manage to do that. Instead I just tried
to keep up with a smattering of books written on those topics. I haven’t pulled that off but there’s a big
old reading list you can peruse if you like.
https://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2021/01/updated-version-of-reading-list-from.html
So if Alan Jacobs really
wants to explore the way Christians and Jews have written about demonology in
the last two and a half centuries … I got a recommended reading list. I am openly sympathetic to the idea that
Christians in the United States can and should regard racial supremacist dogmas
as demonic but that’s not really what I intended to get at in this post. No, I’m thinking more broadly about the years
I’ve spent reading Alan Jacobs and Brad East and how, lately, I tend to lean
more Jacobs than East. Why?
I recall a rambling piece
that was published at one point in Mere Orthodoxy
which is currently available at East’s blog.
The title is so routine among theological metacultural punditry I don’t
even need to quote it since it’s right there in the html but …
https://www.bradeast.org/blog/2019/07/against-pop-culture.html
Against pop culture
Jul 3, 2019
Christians love pop culture these days. But the subset of Christians
who love pop culture the most is pastors, writers, and academics. Pop culture
as a mode of "engagement"; pop culture as a means of
"reaching" this or that group; pop culture as a way of
"relating" to students: all these and more are celebrated and
commended and practiced in churches, classrooms, and websites every day.
"Finding the gospel in [pop culture artifact X]" is a ubiquitous and
representative genre. Christians love pop culture, and Christians with an
audience want fellow Christians to love pop culture.
Why is that? Why should Christians like, love, or "engage with" pop
culture?
I don't think there are very many, or perhaps any, good answers to that
question.
…
So … then there’s this year’s
peroration from the same Brad East on how the Jedi in Star Wars are like
Catholics and the wizards in Harry Potter are Protestants.
https://www.bradeast.org/blog/catholic-jedi-protestant-wizards
Catholic Jedi, Protestant Wizards
Aug 12, 2024
A recent visit to Orlando brought home to me how different the
respective aesthetic visions of Star Wars and Harry Potter are. A thesis came
to me: Jedi are Catholic and Wizards are Protestant.
What was that about there
not being many or any good answers to the question about why Christians should
like, love, or “engage” with pop culture? I wouldn’t say Alan Jacobs is exactly
a poptimist but he’s not anti-poptimist in rhetoric or method. East has soap-boxed against Christians being
poptimists while then, a few years later, turning around and doing pretty much
the kind of thing you’d think he wouldn’t think is a great idea. Now I’ve made no secret here at Wenatchee The
Hatchet I love animation and comics and anime and manga. I’ve written tens of thousands of words about
Batman:
the animated series. I’ve had
over the years comparing thoughts with Ethan Hein about songs by Stevie Wonder
and David Bowie and John Lee Hooker among other things. I even recently wrote a piece called “Cross
Over Instead” suggesting that if, in the last few centuries, mainstream
classical music has never taken the guitar seriously maybe classical guitarists
should take that as a hint that we will never be welcome in mainstream
classical music and reach out to every kind of guitarist playing every kind of
music so that, should classical music as “civilization” die the miserable death
its would-be defenders claim it’s constantly in danger of, we guitarists will
not suffer much loss for that.
If I wanted to I could
probably write 20,000 words about manga by Rumiko Takahashi. I’m not sure if I will but I sure could. So I’m probably firmly in the poptimist
category of criticism even if I have written extensively
on how Beethoven shifted his developmental episodes into the transitions of the
first movement of his final piano sonata; and on the first half of Nikita
Koshkin’s formidable and rewarding 24 Preludes and Fugues for solo
guitar; and more recently I’ve begun a slow-going and I hope thorough
analysis of the solo
guitar sonatas of Wenzel Thomas Matiegka. I haven’t touched that project
since February 2024 and Grand Sonata II is a very big piece with a lot
going on it, both in terms of how much Matiegka appropriates and transforms
themes by Haydn and what he does across his three-movement work. Which is to say that I can toggle back and
forth between classical guitar and cartoons and manga fairly comfortably. If Brad East is worried that kids these days
are too glued to their screens I am just not sure I share that worry because in
my experience, to be blunt, old people glued to their screens and imbibing
paranoid conspiracy theories are not coming off as much better off than people
scrolling through TikTok videos watching the antics of their favorite influencers.
When Jacobs writes:
… Can you bind the strong man? I can’t. Which makes it
strange to me how small a part Jesus plays in the current discourse about
enchantment, even among people who claim to be Christians. …
I’d say that Emil Brunner’s
quip about liberal Protestantism eliminating the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as
mediator was the whole point of The Mediator. Germanophile highbrow art asceticism or
lowbrow trance-seeking mysticism, the old Pythagorean and Orphic impulses, may
have been cultivated and assimilated in Christian patristics but we live in the
days of Ted Gioia where this dualism has to be held up as irreconcilable and
insoluble as if faith traditions haven’t spent millennia demonstrating and
arguing otherwise. When I read Philip
Ewell and John McWhorter (both black atheists) differing on questions about
classical music, I enjoyed reading both of them for the insights they have and
grumbling at the insights they most assuredly do not have, which they might
have picked up if they were willing to dust off some books by James Cone.
Christians can contribute to
aesthetic debates within contemporary culture as good-faith contributors
whether or not Christendom exists.
Jacobs has read his Jacques Ellul so he knows there have been Christians
in the last century who have taken this approach. My soap box in the last ten years at
Wenatchee The Hatchet has included a concern that if Christians want to be
taken seriously it would behoove us to explore potential theoretical and practical
solutions to issues and problems that people who are not the least bit
Christian would actually want solved. In
my case, as a classical guitarist and hobbyist composer who loves Thelonious
Monk and Haydn in comparable measures, the various highbrow/lowbrow and
white/black dualisms entrenched in musicology and history are things that I
believe need to be overcome. I agree
with Philip Ewell on that basic issue even if he would not agree with me about
maybe much of anything else, least of all Christian dogmatics.
I hope I can say I’ve staked
out a consistent and coherent position about taking “high” and “low” equally
seriously. I don’t want to say that insipid
music is made by insipid people and it isn’t worth taking seriously because,
well, too many Christian cultural pundits forget that Romans 12:16 is still in
the New Testament no matter how much they inveigh against pop culture. Do you know people who like Taylor Swift
songs? Be willing to hang out with
them. I find Katy Perry annoying myself
but I don’t have to make an issue of that if I’m hanging out with someone who
likes to listen to her. I’m sure there
are plenty of people who would be baffled as to why Oshii’s Urusei Yatsura
2: Beautiful Dream is one of my favorite movies, and who’d want to read my
case for why, if there’s a Maison Ikkoku anime remake it should be 1)
more faithful to the source material and 2) Saori Hayami would rock as Kyoko Otonashi.
And I could still turn around and write
more about cross-referencing Aquinas’ discussion of intra-Trinitarian forms of
relationship with John of Damascus’ discourse on perichoresis as a way to
recalibrate conceptions of musical time as they’ve been presented by Adorno, Zuckerkandl,
Rochberg, Scruton, Yust and others.
I get that for polemicists
who want to polemic there need to be dualisms but all too often the dualisms
seem too convenient and sometimes I even suspect they get wielded in bad
faith.
Tuesday, September 10, 2024
Ayano Kamei performs "Prikazki" (2020) by Atanas Ourkouzounov
Internet Archive loses recent court case
Monday, September 09, 2024
Alan Jacobs has doubts about bids at re-enchantment, what exactly do people want the world to be (re)enchanted with?
https://blog.ayjay.org/some-enchanted-evening/
September 8, 2024
some enchanted evening
It seems that
“enchantment” is having a moment right now — e.g. —
and, well, okay, but I’d like to make two points:
1.
Experiencing the world as enchanted has absolutely
nothing to do with acknowledging that Jesus Christ is Lord, and that
at the end of history every knee will bow and every tongue confess this. That
is to say, Christians who have boarded the Enchantment Train should realize
that what it promises is often (if not always) something quite different than
what the Christian faith — which is often disenchanting —
promises, and demands.
2.
A related point: As
I wrote a decade ago, “The porous self is open to the divine as well as to
the demonic, while the buffered self is closed to both alike. Those who must
guard against capture by fairies are necessarily and by the same token
receptive to mystical experiences. The ‘showings’ manifested to Julian of
Norwich depend upon exceptional sensitivity, which is to say porosity —
vulnerability to incursions of the supernatural. The portals of the self cannot
be closed on one side only.”
You want to live in an
enchanted cosmos? Cool. But be careful what you wish for. You
might get it.
Is the cosmos
enchanted? Is it disenchanted? Is it standing on one leg and singing “When
Father Painted the Parlor”? (Tom Stoppard reference there.) It’s not something
I’m inclined to think about much, because for me — YMMV, and it really and
truly may vary, you may be aided enormously by such
reflections — it’s just another way to avoid thinking about Jesus. I already
have a thousand of those, I don’t need a thousand-and-one.
…
So Jacobs is not on board with the re-enchantment
train. I can’t say that I am, either,
and I’ve still got an roughly eighty
book reading list surveying Christian thought on powers, principalities,
unclean spirits, exorcism, and spiritual warfare. One of the fun paradoxes of playing with an
idea that racial supremacist canards about music could be informed by
principalities and powers is that it’s not a remotely new idea. Not only would I not take credit for the
idea, I could say the idea is implicit in James Cone’s Black
Theology and Black Power, although I think far better explications of
what the powers and principalities can be thought of as being have been written
not by Cone in his famous book but by Esther Acolatse, Robert
Ewusie Moses, Daniel K
Darko, and Albert
Kabiro wa Gatumu.
Alan Jacobs may not be as into literally academic study of
evolving Christian and Jewish concepts of demonology as I am but I take his
point that merely pining for re-enchanting the world doesn’t address the
question of what that world is going to be enchanted with.
Since Jacobs alluded to David Bentley Hart’s latest I am
reminded of Emil Brunner’s old book The Mediator where he contended (at some
length) that the general impulse in liberal Protestantism as it emerged in
German theology (and elsewhere) was ultimately a rejection of Christ as
Mediator. All other dogmatic and
doctrinal concerns such as rejecting penal substitutionary atonement, expiation
and propitiation understandings of the Cross as “barbaric” were subordinate to
the actual final goal, which was to reject the exclusivity of Christ. Reject “that”, Brunner contended, and you
have rejected being a professing Christian altogether. All the art mysticism Europe could churn out
in the wake of Friedrich
Schleiermacher or Rudolf Otto was
not going to change that basic move.
Attempting to expand art mysticism and art asceticism to a
more global swath could eliminate the Eurocentrist impulse, perhaps, but not
the elitist impulse. Anglicans such as David Brown and Gavin Hopps can argue
that John Coltrane’s A Love Supreme can be regarded as equally
expressing a desire for universal human fellowship as Beethoven put into his Ninth
Symphony. But in Pauline terms that
would amount to the altar to the unknown god, natural religion and natural
theology only get so far. In the case of
both Coltrane and Beethoven it’s still the cognoscenti who are enlightened and
not the ordinary people who might balk at Beethoven’s bloviating length or not
follow Coltrane’s harmonic and melodic idiom.
That’s not a knock against either Coltrane or Beethoven, by the way, I’m
just pointing out that enchantment projects in the liberal arts advocated by
academics tend to have a strong gnostic/mystery cult aspect to them. That’s the element Alan Jacobs didn’t discuss
but it’s not a count against his basic point. He has written elsewhere about
highbrows worrying about the activities of levelers, and leveling may be its
own kind of disenchantment project.
Tuesday, September 03, 2024
Vote Like Jesus is out
Monday, September 02, 2024
Cross Over Instead: a thought on Matanya Ophee’s Repertoire Issues since his passing--crossing over instead as the only viable path guitarists have after centuries of being marginal in the classical music mainstream
https://www.digitalguitararchive.com/2022/03/repertoire-issues/
From 1986 to 2000 the guitarist and music publisher Matanya
Ophee gave variations of a lecture he called “Repertoire Issues”. His core claims in the lecture were:
1) the guitar has never
been taken seriously within classical music for the entirety of its history
2) this lack of regard
manifested in the absence of guitarists from chamber music festivals across the
world in what is colloquially known as classical music
3) this should not
dissuade guitarists from doing their best to be taken seriously by not only
audiences but other musicians within concert music.
It is with that in mind I want to quote extensively from
Ophee’s concluding remarks about what he saw in the classical guitar scene, particularly
on the relationship guitarists (and their music) had in connection to the
classical music mainstream. Distinct
from the chamber music mainstream scenes of classical music many guitarists
were playing music influenced by (interacting with) non-classical genres and
styles of music. This was a phenomenon
that has emerged since the 1970s or so and has been called “crossover”. Ophee’s comments were as follows:
Repertoire Issues
Published by Legacy of Matanya Ophee on March 7, 2022
…
No doubt, attitudes have changed in the
last ten years [the lecture was given in 2000]. There are more performances of
chamber music with guitar today. I dare say though, that this activity have not
yet resulted in a change of perspective in the general public. I read a lot of
lofty pronouncements regarding chamber music with guitar in many interviews
with guitarists. This is, for the most part, empty lip-service. I do not know
of any leading guitarist-performer today who is willing and able to settle on a
career which is dedicated to chamber music. There are no active professional
chamber music ensembles today, which consist of more than two spouses and which
include the guitar.
In my country, there are some 800
festival each summer dedicated to chamber music. You can see there the names of
Itzhak Perlman, Yo-Yo Ma, Mstislav Rostropovich, Pinchas Zukerman, Rudolf
Serkin, Murray Perahia, and scores of other leading instrumentalists and
singers. I have never seen there the names of Andres Segovia, Julian Bream,
John Williams or Alexander Lagoya. This unfortunate verity should not deter the
leading guitarists to appear there on a regular basis. The inevitable question
is: what do our virtuosi have to offer musicians and an audience who have been
nurtured for generations on a steady diet of the Beethoven string quartets, the
Brahms Clarinet quintet, and the Mendelssohn Piano trios, not to mention
chamber music by Mozart, Haydn, Schubert and Dvorak?
Before we attempt to answer that, we must
shed any inferiority complex regarding our repertoire and realize that even
though the great masters of chamber music have not written for the guitar, we
still have a great deal of valuable contribution to make. In evaluating chamber
music for guitar, we must avoid judging it by reference to the guitar part
alone. What matters in chamber music is the artistic worth of the composition
as a whole, NOT the relative merits of the guitar part. Few guitarists are able
to read a chamber music score, and few publications of chamber music with
guitar, particularly those which date from the time of Heinrich Albert, not to
mention the more recent spate of so-called “facsimiles,” actually have one. A
guitarist who wishes to embark on a career of music making in public, and would
like to achieve anything like the job security offered by professions such as
the architects, engineers, doctors, airline pilots or college teachers, would
better learn the tricks of the trade. Not memorization, but sight-reading,
score analysis, and the ability to breath together, sometimes with total
strangers. Look for those works who would offer your future colleagues
something new and exhilarating. Even if this means that you have to go
oom-pah-pah for a while. That too, can be a valuable and profitable
contribution to your own economic survival and to the future of the guitar as a
viable musical discipline. If we want to actually function “on the first rank,
such as the violin, piano and cello,” we must break away from the restrictive
mold of the solo recital, the guitar master-class, the guitar competition and
the guitar festival and to propel our way into the general society of music.
I cannot leave this discussion without
some words about the programming used by many guitarists today when they play
solo recitals. The old Tarrega/Segovia type of programming has been replaced,
for better or for worse, with a new type of programming which employs mostly
music based on the cross-over phenomenon, that is to say, new compositions
based on the popular genres of jazz, rag-time, tango, and country-western
music. Thus, besides the leyendas and the Villa-Lobos pieces, we also get the
Koyunbabas, the Sunbursts, the Usher Walses and the Piazolla pieces. In
principle, all these pieces are actually very good music. But the number of
times you get to hear them in the course of a guitar festival, makes them into
hackneyed, unimaginative lollipops which might bring a good reaction from a
guitar audience, and might even give pleasure to general public audiences. Many
main line musicians do the same. Thus you get a cellist like Yo-Yo Ma playing
Piazolla. But we must observe that main line musicians do cross-over,
in addition to their
normal serious repertoire. Guitarists do it instead.
[italics original, bold added]
I have observed that in the last few
decades the guitarists who made it to the top of the profession quickly, were
those who came on the scene with a totally new repertoire, entirely avoiding
the standards, the old and the new. There is a lesson to be learned here, and
it is this: the main question the guitarist should place before himself is not
what to play. It, what NOT to play. Think about it.
…
It has been just a few years since Matanya Ophee died and I have
considered his ideas formatively influential.
I have spent decades writing chamber sonatas for the guitar in which it
is paired up with woodwinds, bowed strings, plucked strings, piano, and
brass. I aimed to write a cycle of
chamber sonatas using the guitar the way Paul Hindemith wrote chamber sonatas
around piano accompaniment. It turned
out while I was tackling this compositional project over the last two and a
half decades, inspired by Ophee’s “Repertoire Issues” that the Austrian
composer (and pianist) Ferdinand Rebay had created a big cycle of sonatas for
guitar with woodwinds and strings decades before I was born. This was a happy
discovery at multiple levels, first of all because I have found I generally
actually enjoy Rebay’s sonatas, and because it is a sign that Rebay, forgotten
as he was in the last half century since his passing, has created a substantial
body of work that merits further performance and study.
Yet Rebay’s legacy highlights
all the more Matanya Ophee’s observation that the great composers, or
first-rate composers never wrote chamber music that included the guitar. Sure, this could be a place to voice
exception. Don’t the Four Songs of
Stravinsky include a guitar part? They
do and they are a blast but the point can still remain. There could be an objection that Toru
Takemitsu’s Toward The Sea for alto flute and guitar is a significant work for that pairing much
the same way Astor Piazzolla’s Histoire du Tango for flute and guitar is a significant work. But you don’t hear those works at festivals,
do you? Ophee’s point has remained without substantial counter-examples and
counter-arguments.
Let’s say for the sake of
discussion the six-stringed classical guitar that was refined in Spain is only
about 250 years old. That means that the instrument has been around for
centuries and no works written for the guitar by guitarist composers have made
it into the mainstream canon of concert music, often known as classical
music. The most significant canonical
works for the guitar were either written for the instrument by non-guitarists
(whether Rodrigo or Britten or Martin or Castelnuovo-Tedesco or Ponce or
whomever) or were transcriptions of non-guitar music made by guitarists (Johann
Sebastian Bach and Isaac Albeniz).
For there to be no canonical
works in chamber music or solo guitar in the classical music mainstream after
no less than 250 years should force those of us who are guitarists to ask what
it would take for a guitar work to gain canonical status in chamber
repertoire. If we decide the five-course
guitar that anticipated the modern guitar counts as the guitar, too, then the
history of the guitar can go back five centuries and this makes the situation
worse rather than better. If the guitar
is half a millennium old and in all that time not a single work for the
instrument and its variants has been regarded as worthy enough to become a
canonical work of music theorists and historians consider important enough that
non-guitarists have to know them the way singers and guitarists in music survey
courses have to know who Mozart and Beethoven were, well, what are the odds the
guitar and guitarist composers will ever buck the centuries long trend? Ophee advised that we do not have an
inferiority complex about our instrument and its repertoire and I do, frankly,
agree. At the same time, a case could be
made that Ophee’s observation about the bias against the guitar as the
companion of any Spaniard opens up the question of ethnic and racial biases
within musicology and it’s not for nothing this was the topic of a recent book
about the history of music theory and music history.
Since I’m writing in 2024 and in
the United States (citizen born and raised) I probably don’t need to even name
the author and title. But I liked the
book, honestly, and I think guitarists should take Philip Ewell’s often
polemical On
Music Theory, and Making Music More Welcoming For Everyone very
seriously. It is possible for
traditionalists and defenders of The Great Tradition version of classical music
to just say that Ewell has a chip on his shoulder or that when he remarked on
the functional erasure of Spanish and Spanish-language derived music from
classical music theory and history that this is part of some sour grapes
campaign. For guitarists, however, the
prospect of functionally expunging Spanish and Latin American music from any
consideration pre-emptively wipes out even the slightest chance that many of
the most beloved works of the guitar literature will ever be taken
seriously. How high and low do you have
to look for a truly detailed analysis of the formal, rhythmic, melodic and
harmonic materials of Five Preludes by Heitor Villa-Lobos that could compare to an analysis of Beethoven’s
Hammerklavier?
Even if Ewell is wrong about
many things he doesn’t seem to be wrong about how marginal Spanish music (and
its adjacents) have often been in music theory and music history. Why discuss the harmonic language of Albeniz
if he’s consigned to having accomplished pianistic feats of post-Lisztian
virtuosity, as a Grove entry put it decades ago? That Britten’s Nocturnal after
John Dowland is a fine piece of music doesn’t
mean that either Britten’s work for guitar or Dowland’s lute music has been
discussed very much in mainstream classical music theory and history. I can’t recall seeing a single extensive
study of Takemitsu’s magnificent suite for solo guitar All in Twilight in the last thirty years.
Discussions of guitarists and their approaches to sonata form have
largely revolved around Sor and Giuliani and, understandably, Ponce. There is room for more work to be done and
that work is being done but what seems unlikely to happen is for a guitarist to
have composed a piece of music so significant to mainstream classical music
theory and education as to merit that nebulous but sought-after status of
canonization. There’s no chamber work
written by a guitarist composer that has canonical status unless we’re going to
go out on a limb and remind people that Hector Berlioz played the guitar. But how has the status of Berlioz’ music held
up in the last century?
So when Ophee said that mainstream
classical musicians establish themselves in the standards like Yo-yo Ma on the
cello and embrace cross-over in addition to the standards, and guitarists
did cross-over instead, that seems to be true, but it also reveals a
possible double-bind at the core of Ophee’s questions and concerns. If the guitar has never made it into the
classical canon over the course of centuries why would it now? If in the wake of 250 to 500 years of guitars
being around literally nothing has been written that fits into the chamber
repertoire of music festivals is the problem with the guitar or with the
chamber music festivals? Is it possible
that the aesthetics and norms of the long 19th century, often
thought of as being the span between 1780 to about 1920, constitutes a set of
standards the guitar could not possibly measure up to?
After so many centuries maybe
the wiser thing for guitarists to keep doing is to cross over instead.
Don’t even bother with seeking mainstream acceptance within classical music in
chamber festival settings. It’s not that
I didn’t hear guitarists at the Ice Breaker festivals in Seattle over the
decades, I did hear chamber music featuring the guitar and I liked the pieces I
heard, but the Ice Breaker festivals show that the guitar has some compelling
music from the Baltic states but you have to search high and low for it. There are niches within niches in classical
music, which is itself a niche.
There may be a case to be made
that crossing over instead is a more rewarding path for classical guitarists.
You and I who play the guitar may have more in common with Blind Willie
Johnson, Luigi Legnani, Heitor Villa-Lobos, Tampa Red, Lonnie Johnson, Bukka
White, Lightning Hopkins, Fernando Sor, Wenzel Matiegka, Napoleon Coste, Nikita
Koshkin, Dusan Bogdanovic, Angelo Gilardino, Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Leo
Brouwer, Elizabeth Cotton, Joni Mitchell, Ida Presti, Nadia Borislova, Annette
Kruisbrink, Rosetta Tharpe, and Bonnie Rait than we will have with Mozart,
Haydn, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Mahler, Webern, Handel, Buxtehude,
Bach, Schutz, Albeniz, Schubert, Liszt, Brahms, Prokofiev, Shostakovich,
Medtner and Scriabin. We guitarists have
more in common with each other that we all play the guitar than we may ever
have with the canonized composers of classical music.
John Williams the guitarist has
to be differentiated from the John Williams who gave us soundtracks to the
films Jaws, Star Wars and Superman. A lot of people in the United States know who
John “Star Wars” Williams is even if they can’t stand his music whereas far few
people probably know John Williams as the guitarist who played Nikita Koshkin’s
Usher Waltz, one of those works Matanya
Ophee published and considered was in danger of being turned into a new
lollipop in the guitar literature.
Now I eagerly await the second
half of Koshkin’s 24 Preludes and Fugues for solo guitar getting a commercially available recording! I
have already written extensively about the first half of this formidable and outstanding
cycle of contrapuntal works for solo guitar written by a guitarist. To go by mainstream classical music theory and
history it can seem as though after a few centuries pianists and organists
regarded the usual suspects as having contributed all there ever was or is
needed for fugues and consigned the genre to the school exam room and the
dustbin of history. Even if Koshkin’s
work merits serious and continued study; even if his work is a substantial
contribution to the tradition of preludes and fugues; I have not seen his cycle
discussed very extensively in the realm of guitar scholarship, let alone in the
“mainstream” of classical music. Ewell
is a Russianist by specialization so I can hope, at least, that maybe one day
he could write about Nikita Koshkin’s cycle of preludes and fugues. If Ewell did that I would so buy that book!
Which is why, in a way, I agree
with Ewell but am ambivalent about aspects of his case. As a guitarist with a fondness for the music
of Wenzel Matiegka I know of literally no significant English-language writing
on his roughly twenty solo guitar sonatas even if I count the helpful essays in
the Stanley Yates edition. The guitar
has not only never been admitted into the musical mainstream it probably never
will be. This is why it may make sense
for guitarists to not only keep crossing over instead but to make that path the
new default moving into the future. We
have more to gain by taking seriously all the styles and forms and genres of
music our guitarist peers have made and are making and will make than to hope
after centuries that somehow one of us guitarists will write something that
gains the status of Beethoven’s Hammerklavier sonata or his late B flat major string quartet. Koshkin’s life and work may be instructive
precisely here since scholars who have discussed his music and work have
pointed out that he steeped himself in Stravinsky and Shostakovich but also
listened to Led Zeppelin. Crossing over
instead is probably what we guitarists have been consigned to having no choice
but to do within mainstream classical music history and theory. If that’s the case, let’s just keep doing
that.
If the last few centuries have shown us how seriously non-guitarists in classical music have taken the guitar we have nothing to gain and everything to lose attempting to create musical works that don’t take seriously all the musics written on and for our instrument by our fellow guitarists in the quest to write something that could ever appear alongside Haydn string quartets and Beethoven piano sonatas. By this I don’t mean to say “Don’t bother”, it’s more like Johann Gottfried Herder’s admonition to fellow Germans to trust in their own regional folk traditions for source materials rather than to continuously and continually make worse and worse knock-offs of the pinnacles of the arts in Greek and Roman antiquity.
We may
have a lot more to gain by taking all the music written on the guitar by and
for guitarists seriously across all styles and genres since the birth of the
modern guitar than we are likely to gain in the centuries that have elapsed
without a single solo or chamber work for classical guitar making any notable
appearance in any festival setting. It’s not that I wouldn’t love for chamber
works including the guitar become staples in the classical music mainstream, it’s
that Matanya Ophee died a few years ago and I read his lecture decades ago and
here we are, and the guitar and guitarists are no less marginal to classical
music’s mainstream than seemed to be the case back in the Reagan years. Maybe crossing over instead is the
only actual path forward we have not just due to anti-guitar prejudices but
also because a whole lot of those canonized works from the long 19th
century were running with Herderian ideas of being true to your people’s folk
roots as the basis for making Art.
Guitarists may need to do more of that and not less before we
collectively make something that “makes history”, and doing “more of that” may
entail taking a whole lot more seriously the kinds of musics that have
habitually been consigned to the influences that go into “cross-over”.
If guitarists, even classical
guitarists, take this approach, it will also be taking up one of the main
points of Ewell’s book and his aims, making music theory more welcoming to
everyone