[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] miles of styles of philosophes



stephen, your thinking is, as usual, very dense and
quite interesting to me. and i know you have given
time to the questions of improvisation, so if you can
indulge a sense of immediacy, can i not also say that
we indulge the structures of society with a similar
shrug of suspicion? one of the reasons i have chosen
to work outside the frameworks of institutions is of
course to address them with the important reference to
something they have displaced themselves upon. this is
done perhaps with a sense of naivety that i find
implicit in the structures themselves. as i have been
working on themes of medieval mystics, i am reading a
book, in italian, but i believe it is written in
english, called la santa anoressia, by a man named
bell. in this context, the religious experience is
recast, in the analysis of interpreting the psychology
of the eating habits of some of these woman saints, as
a struggle for personal autonomy. here i see perfect
accordance with your theories of the dependancy of the
existing social and political context driving a kind
of behaviour pattern towards a personal compromise
with the repressive powers that allows one a freedom
to influence the world. the case of catherine of siena
as best example. but the plane on which these things
were done is very different from our own. in her case
she developed her behaviours with the support of
institutionalized mystical experience which, owing to
the perceptions of heresy, were nevertheless very
dangerous. but perhaps the sense of danger is the one
that is most important to refer to in terms of the
institutions. for what a great work is going to
achieve is going to be pushing the way we think to
extremes that must seem dangerous. (think in the
modern context of berg's wozzeck and the fragmets of
buechner they are based upon, listen to what this work
says about the world, poverty etc.) the danger is that
we create something that is incoherent and it will not
be recieved by society. the despair that accompanies
it is that one has not "done anything". whereas, there
is another level of personal reception where one can
feel the work transmits what is neccessary through
those few people who are capable of recieving it. most
artists will work only in this way the whole of their
lives. you will probably never hear my music. but my
music has had an effect on people. there are too many
people and in the end too many structures in the world
for an artist to be bound by and in the end one has to
deal with only those that prevent the work from going
on. often i have the feeling of a big truth: the
institutions are not aware of the reality of
obscurity. this obsucrity and anonymity are the
primary conditions of humanity. a great work must take
them into consideration.

best, jeff gburek
  
--- Stephen Hastings-King <roachboy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> projections involve responses shaped by
> (social-historical) rule sets (or
> institutions).
> these rules range from genre outward to quite broad
> social matters.
> any response to any cultural object involves rules.
> questions concerning the origin, nature,
> institutional enframedness,
> legitimacy and binding nature of these rules are all
> political.
> so it follows that the most useful ways to stage
> these questions may well be
> found in political philosophy--or in philosophy more
> generally---and not in
> discussions too narrowly focused on directly musical
> questions--or on
> aesthetic philosophy.  aesthetics is a subset of
> larger-scale normative
> frameworks.  it is not a free-floating area of
> thought.  aesthetic
> philosophy is among the densest type of ideological
> thinking: existing
> social norms are most thoroughly in force around
> definitions of that which
> transcends them.  transcendence needs to be
> controlled, quarantined, placed
> socially and politically in authorized spaces.  the
> business of
> transcendence is one undertaken by authorized
> specialists in transcendence
> production.  there are special buildings around
> where you can go to look at
> or listen to outputs generated by authorized
> specialists in transcendence
> production.  while you are visiting, you can have a
> Moment during which you
> loose yourself.  this sense of loss of oneself is
> not one of freedom from
> instituted social norms: it is a total projection
> through those norms: you
> presuppose them in the act of forgetting about them.
> 
> while i think that the only coherent relation to the
> marxist tradition at
> this point has to be predicated on closure (in the
> decon/heidegger/nietzsche
> sense, in the "closure of western metaphysics"
> sense)--anything that enables
> folk to relativize their social position and by
> extension to relativise
> their responses is a good thing.  because it is only
> in relativizing your
> responses that you can start to see the structures
> that shape those
> responses.  these structures are indices of what
> binds you to what exists,
> of the extent to which you reproduce it, the extent
> to which you are it.
> it is good, i think, to be suspicous of immediacy. 
> it is also good not to
> loose the ability to indulge immediacy.  but it is
> good to be suspicious of
> it.
> 
> stephen
> 
> On 1/30/07, Ian Reddy <dr144@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > >one thing about certain kinds of sound, when they
> hit
> > >you, when you are alone, for example, this
> perosnal
> > >experience, when you hear something cool, that
> you
> > >dont hear any hype about beforehand, and it
> creates
> > >this separation from alienation, this curiously
> > >numinous bubble, albeit momentary, until someone
> else
> > >says, oh, you're listening to that, didnt you
> hear the
> > >really great first album, or someone say its crap
> and
> > >you no longer feel intimate with it even if you
> dont
> > >care what someone else thinks. what the blogger
> guy
> > >says makes sense in terms of emotional range
> only. is
> > >all digital music in a sense governed by an irony
> > >(related to a high level of self-consciousness)
> that
> > >doesnt allow for the feelings such as joni
> mitchell
> > >might sing about? does the full range of human
> emotion
> > >demand words or demand the discarding of words?
> > >anyway, its about your own fantasy formations,
> your
> > >wildest imaginations, isnt it. what you desire.
> >
> > I think that in art, emotion is something either
> projected
> > onto the work or it is something acted out by the
> performer.
> > No work of art is a raw emotional outburst -
> that's impossible
> > as art and music are obviously mediated through
> the intellect
> > and already existing cultural forms.  I suggest
> that Joni Mitchel is
> > performing her emotions through song.  Also
> certain sounds are
> > culturally constructed as being connected to
> certain emotions (such as the
> > connection of low droning sounds to feelings of
> gloom) and the artist
> > often exploits these connections or we simply
> project them onto a
> > work.  So....in brief I do think that art can
> provoke an emotional
> > response BUT I also think the emotion we
> experience is drastically
> > different from the emotion we speak of as being
> present in art, and
> > probably not the same thing at all.
> >
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > website: http://www.microsound.org
> >
> >
> 


j.ff gbk

http://www.futurevessel.com/orphansound/

http://www.mattin.org/desetxea.html

http://www.djalma.com


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
The fish are biting. 
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org