Music Lessons
In my survey class recently, we were reading some of the great Romantic poems ("Ode to a Nightingale," "To Autumn," "The Eolian Harp," etc.) and reflecting on the fact that music is so often figured as the path to insight for the major Romantic poets. This reminded me of a quote by the composer/musician Daniel Barenboim that I've always particularly liked: "Music provides the possibility, on the one hand, to escape from life and, on the other hand, to understand it much better than in many other disciplines." Do you agree with that latter claim, especially, I wonder? It's easy to buy into the part about escape (how many of us turn to the ipods when our airplane hits some turbulence, for example, or when we need to unwind after a taxing day, or when we need to keep ourselves motivated during a workout, etc.), but in what sense do you think music helps us to understand life better? Somehow answering that question might help us to anticipate how Jackie Kay's particular emphases in Trumpet help us situate the novel's argument in the broader scope of this class. Does listening to music (or playing music), for example, make us more ethical (and if so, how does that work)?
posted by Eric at 1:28 PM
6 Comments:
Art's an interesting phenomenon, in that a lack of specificity seems to allow the reader (listener, viewer, etc.) to impose more of himself onto the subject. I've often felt like a poem, a novel, or a song became an impetus for my thinking about a particular topic, or a feeling, or a vexing situation. The less the piece directs my thoughts and feelings, the more free I feel to apply the 'core' message to my life, my situation, my dilemma. I think we can apply Barenboim's comment to as easily to poetry as to music, at least music of the lyrical variety. Perhaps more so to non-lyrical music, like jazz, where we don't even have to consider what the artist is 'saying'. Perhaps, in the case of Joss, creating music is a way to create identity: to constantly reify a performance as something stable and immutable (I'm kinda going back to Butler here). I'm not a musician in any sense, but I know that when I write poetry or prose, I'll often come to a realization at some point in the process that I didn't have when I started writing, and often didn't even know I was looking for.
As for the question of ethics, I'm not sure if we can say for certain whether participation in the artistic process makes us better people. Certainly, the converse argument has been made against heavy metal and rap. However, I do believe that there's something intrinsically beneficial about self-examination and critical inquiry, and I'd like to believe that individuals who constantly take the opportunity to evaluate themselves are probably better off than those who don't. It's over-quoted, but Socrates "the unexamined life is not worth living" would seem to apply. Does using art/music/writing as a springboard for personal inquiry automatically imply 'right' action? I doubt it, but it's probably better than enforced ignorance.
Jim
Something came to me in class today, when we were talking about the power of music and the one song that each of us has that we get completely lost in, especially at one specific point in the song.... As soon as Eric said that, I was instantly conjuring up two songs in my head that fit the bill- Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Porcelain" and Crosby Stills Nash "Guinevere." This made me wonder- what are the songs that have this effect on the people sitting around me???
Oh, thanks, Molly, these kinds of questions kill my brain (and yet I love them)! For me it would be U2's "One" (one of the most perfectly constructed rock songs ever, I think; someone once aptly described it as a wounded gospel song) and probably Jeff Buckley's cover of "Hallelujah." Right up there, too, though, would be Springsteen's "The River," Dylan's "Blind Willie McTell," the Indigo Girls's "Kid Fears," Whiskeytown's/Ryan Adams's "Houses on the Hill," and maybe, just maybe, the New Pornographers' "Bleeding Heart Show."
In his Critique of Judgement, Kant discusses Beauty as the „expression of aesthetical Ideas” and beautiful Art as the same Idea “occasioned by a concept of the Object”. In the context of Jackie Kay’s Trumpet, this object assumes the form of Music, specifically Jazz. As a lyrical art form, the potential Beuty in a piece of Music is perceived through the auditory senses. Here, Kant distinguishes between the truly Beautiful and that which simply pleases. Considering the “velocity of the vibrations […] of air, which probably surpasses all faculty of judging immediately the time interval between them, the effect of these vibrations on the elastic parts of the body takes precedent over any notion of comprehension. However, when considering the “mathematical element, which allows for the perception of these minute oscillations in music” it becomes possible to judge the piece as beautiful or not. Jazz music is very much a category of pleasant music. Although this style of music may be performed by an ensemble, the score itself resists any sense of mathematical harmony. The time signiture, key signiture, even the notes themselves may be distorted or manipulated beyond the conventional taste. Joss embodies, to a certain extent, this inherent conflict between the pleasant and the beautiful. After Joss’ death, the characters of the novel are afforded the opportunity to realize his physical and spacial existence…and it makes no sense. The funeral director can not seem to reconcile Joss’ female form with the expected and perceived masculinity. Joss’ hidden sexuality and associated deception strikes a particularly discordant note in the emerging Jazz community however, his musical creativity and legacy have an undoubtedly pleasant effect on those who listen. By Kant’s standards, neither Joss nor Jazz could be considered Beautiful however, both achieve an effect on the surrounding people that makes the Jazz tradition so popular.
The Kant material is very interesting. I wonder if relegating jazz to the "category of pleasant music," merely, is to write off its potential participation in the beautiful (i.e., if a great jazz work like A Love Supreme, for example, helps us better to understand time and "the other," as I think it can, and thereby makes our souls at least a little more graceful (if I can nearly quote Plato), then does jazz not partake of the "Beautiful"?). I guess Roy's "by Kant's standards" may be the crucial qualifier, here, as this would raise questions regarding how to define "the Beautiful" when it comes to music. Is it truly dependent on "mathematical harmony"?
"The greatest moments of the human spirit may be deduced from the greatest moments in music"
--Aaron Copland
This quote appeared in my day planner (of all things) for this week. I've been pondering this question ever since it was raised in class, and I still don't really have an answer. I agree with Jim's idea of imposing the self onto an art form, especially with music and poetry. But I think that one of the things that draws people to music is its mystery. When Joss played, he didn't know where the music was going to go, and it stripped him down to his own 'essence' as it went there. When (jumping ahead) Gibreel and Saladin are falling from the plane, they are in the air, almost becoming air themselves, only the essence of themselves. The identities they had created had vanished literally into thin air. It was not until then that Saladin told him to start singing, and Gibreel was filled with a song he didn't know. In both these cases, when the characters let themselves be stripped of their created identities, that the music thrives; it becomes so much more beautiful. The mystery of music, the way it helps us feel and seem to become something else is what, I think, draws us in.
Post a Comment
<< Home