Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemporary, Creative Works of Music? Literature? Art?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
 RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
You haven't written a critique, Professor, you've just issued a lot of bluster, territory-marking, and empty negativity. Alluding to your credentials (while ignoring the superior ones of the author) and throwing out some vague concepts with the claim "his premise is wrong" adds up to a whole lot of nothing. Then, like a cherry on top, the ad-hominem to runner. Bravo.
Yes I did, I said the premise is poor because it is based on a hypothesis that has been debated carefully and in depth since the book was published. Runner has not answered to this and continues to insist that if I read the book I will become "enlightened".
And my answer to him is Yes I read it and not it's not a great book. The ideas that Meyer pushes are that there are hierarchical points in the history of art and music that after climaxes and in between these climaxes there are periods of slack, that can last as long as ten generations, where no main ideas are being expressed in the arts. This is a bad idea because it is highly subjective and depends on who is selecting those points in history.
In the time since Meyer wrote the book the discussion on who makes the selections to determine the time sequences that are vital to establishing a timeline in Western art have come into question. This discourse which came after Meyers work renders large parts of Meyers work obsolete.
How can I be more clear?
Runner maintains a condescending stance that his book is not to be critically challenged, yet he won't take up any argument.
What more do you want? He's done this before with this book and l'm sick of it. Runner makes claims about why this book supports his view, but he won't defend the his conclusion in his own words, but continues to hide behind a book.
The POINT ! Is not the authors credentials. The POINT is that he is not beyond reproach just because he's a PROFESSOR.
Do you ever question anything you disagree with?
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 27 2015 22:51:05
 |
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
Stephen,
I haven't read the book and have no opinion as to its claims. I can see your being put off that you read his and he didn't read yours. It is unfortunate, although given the condescending tone (that is why I use the nickname "Professor" when you put on those airs), unsurprising that runner has chosen not to engage further in the discussion. Yes, you've made your opinion clear. It simply doesn't rise to the level of a critique. The internet defines that as "a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory."
How much detail do you need?
I'm actually quite happy to be teased and called professor, as long as Diaz is not included in the name.
Thank you for acknowledging that I made the effort to read something someone else recommended and that the other party did not extend the same courtesy. Which is part of why I am pissed off. The other part- my opinion that the book is overrated and out dated was shoved aside and I was told my opinion did not matter because I did not understand the book. Quite the opposite, I understand this book, and I don't care for it. For someone to tell me that I don't 'get it' is pernicious and insulting to me.
Can you understand why I am offended and simply mirrored back the disrespectful comments? Perhaps that is not the best way to handle an insult, but hey, no one is perfect.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 28 2015 9:38:48
|
|
runner
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
This episode began merely when I pointed out that somebody--Leonard Meyer by name, a very well-known and well-respected cultural historian and theorist; you can look him up easily on the Internet--had addressed the notion of cultural succession in what I found to be a fascinating book. Mind you, Meyer's thesis on the return of cultural stasis was only part of the book; he deals with a number of other issues as well, more specifically on musical meaning and esthetics. But his stasis thesis is clearly stated, and I hope I conveyed it accurately in my nutshell summary for Dudnote and anybody else interested. And so I thought that we could talk about Meyer's idea about stasis in a civilized, calm, measured way. Boy, was I wrong!!
Anyway, after being told that the book was "one of the worst critical theory books ever written", "a terrible book", "poorly written...full of bad ideas", and "crappy", I was instructed to read "something like" Dave Hickey's books, or Robert Hughes; John Berger's books, and that Ishmeal (sic) Reed, Anthony Appiah, Imiri (sic) Baraka, and bell hooks were also to be consulted. No names given to any of these books, nor any guarantee that any of them deal specifically with the issue at hand, which is Meyer's thesis of the onset of a new form of cultural stasis. This essentially directionless and inchoate mass of literature I was asked to digest came as chunks within a smelly matrix of verbal diarrhea discharged at me, as somebody's idea of what constitutes respectful dialogue. I say, "Include Me Out!"--The Professor can rave on as he chooses, but I repeat that my preference is that he does indeed ignore my posts on any subject where he senses that same reaction welling up within himself.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 28 2015 19:01:59
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
" Like molecules rushing about haphazardly in a Brownian movement, a culture bustling with activity and change may nevertheless be static. Indeed, insofar as an active, conscious search for new techniques, new forms and materials, and new modes of sensibility.....precludes the gradual accumulation of changes capable of producing a trend or a series of connected mutations, it tends to create a steady-state...."
Sounds like a lot of sense to me.
And the very point about culture, culture of cognition anyway, would be exactly that: sense.
Quality can be debatable on a same intellectual level, but it will consequently be taking place within a certain frame. Not to the extend that all and everything could be special or demanding.
Much of the avantgarde lives of the premise of change however regardless. If it just be "new". The more unseen the better, again regardless.
Ignoring characteristics that it takes to actually perform something special. Proficiency, demanding effect and before all the mother of art: Conveyance.
Mere "new" really means nothing.
Certainly not in respect of something that´s supposed to be special, lesser even of admirable skills that could make it worth of a dedicated term like "art". After all art stands for outstanding product.
Or was Fat Boy arts too? After all it was new.
And writing music indeed, to me appears as the most challenging of the arts in so far, as its options for something creative and demanding (structure, harmony, ... the deliberate ingredients that make it different from a woodpeckers hammering or a howler monkeys song) are way more limited by its means (12 notes) and history (almost all musical inventions made), with little left to be hypothetically composed and still meet named demands of originality.
Evaluating in the arts is not really more mystically demanding than in most other special fields. Apart of occasional preferences bound to cultural / ethnical customs the main string which pulls away from worldly criteria that traditionally separates art from practically aimed disciplines is pseudo intellectualism.
The gladly picking up of originally politically introduced strategies of randomness in the field of art, dismissing skill and definition and replacing them by attribute of unconventionality as a goal, has been a hunt for intellectual dressing as apparent sign of individuality.
Now, looking around and seeing what kind of mind typically seek for individuality and lalaland, it often times are the bore, or at least who felt themselves as colorless such (in youth). Not seldomly and accordingly also employing signaling accessories like say colorful glasses, showy shoes ... or that classic ridiculous scarf of the contemporary trendy "creative".
Actually, individualists and creatives on the other hand very seldomly deliberately engage flashy accessories. Some times not even aiming at putting out their art product -for anything PR of their individuality and avantgarde being.
Michelangelo for instance is a prominent example for an artist whose vast of works and projects having remained unfinished. There was no need nor engagement for personal image, and I would be surprised if he had worn any pointy accessories to give him appearance of uniqueness.
Beauty for the distinguishing sense can be what may seem like ugly or squared on first sight, but the other way round, having monotone, cacophonic, clumsy or just trashy product as insignia of intellect is bound to matters outside from art.
And I agree, western music stands for the most harmonically rich, varied, colorful and demanding overall source, paralleled only in places, like for instance by traditional African choirs.
I think to have seen this circumstance merely doubted by listeners who have grown up under monotonous conditions and who could not develop perception of complexity.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 28 2015 19:58:29
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
This episode began merely when I pointed out that somebody--Leonard Meyer by name, a very well-known and well-respected cultural historian and theorist; you can look him up easily on the Internet--had addressed the notion of cultural succession in what I found to be a fascinating book. Mind you, Meyer's thesis on the return of cultural stasis was only part of the book; he deals with a number of other issues as well, more specifically on musical meaning and esthetics. But his stasis thesis is clearly stated, and I hope I conveyed it accurately in my nutshell summary for Dudnote and anybody else interested. And so I thought that we could talk about Meyer's idea about stasis in a civilized, calm, measured way. Boy, was I wrong!!
Anyway, after being told that the book was "one of the worst critical theory books ever written", "a terrible book", "poorly written...full of bad ideas", and "crappy", I was instructed to read "something like" Dave Hickey's books, or Robert Hughes; John Berger's books, and that Ishmeal (sic) Reed, Anthony Appiah, Imiri (sic) Baraka, and bell hooks were also to be consulted. No names given to any of these books, nor any guarantee that any of them deal specifically with the issue at hand, which is Meyer's thesis of the onset of a new form of cultural stasis. This essentially directionless and inchoate mass of literature I was asked to digest came as chunks within a smelly matrix of verbal diarrhea discharged at me, as somebody's idea of what constitutes respectful dialogue. I say, "Include Me Out!"--The Professor can rave on as he chooses, but I repeat that my preference is that he does indeed ignore my posts on any subject where he senses that same reaction welling up within himself.
This episode is the continuation of your obsession with this idea and this author. I did a search on 'Leonard Meyer' in the Off Topic section search function.
His name comes up several times in several threads. Mentioned by Runner who always says about the same thing. It's a running theme, pun intended, and this is not the first time the idea of stasis is being presented, but it seems like the only idea being presented.
The option of "include me out" is fine if you don't challenge others to read your selections. But if you say to someone you need to read a certain text and then call the person insufficiently informed if they don't like it, that's offensive. If you post about the validity of a text and don't stand behind your claims why bother posting it at all?
Your approach to dialog is one sided, you expect others to read your books, but you don't care to be challenged by books recommended to you.
The incohate mass argument of books thrown at you does not wash, it's easy enough to ask which books address which ideas, and also easy to google search an author and have an overview of their works in seconds.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
This was written in 1969- by Michel Foucault 'What is an Author'
It's an essay which is 15 pages long, it's dense and it makes references to books and historical events that are specific to Foucault's body of writing. Sometimes it is difficult to get a bigger picture of why he chooses these examples, but it fits within his strategies of looking at interior and exterior motives. There are blog posts and websites that offer help in reading Foucault by giving background or notes that fill the new reader in on his way of seeing, without making the reader jump through to many hoops ( no pain no gain)
I bring up 'What is an Author' because it is appropriate to understanding a deeper meaning of an authors credentials and qualifications. I've been challenged on this level personally and asked why my opinion matters critically and how I can justify making a critique on a particular author. To answer back, I bring this essay as one idea of why it is valid to question authors who are vested with peer respect and considered 'experts' on a specific subject.
Foucault in 15 pages looks at the author or idea of an author as a construction of values and explains why and how these values are relevant or not relevant. Common sense tells us that if a writer has been vetted by his peers and there is consensus among a group that a certain person has credibility as a writer his or her work stands good chance of carrying much validity. Foucault takes this evaluation much farther and says the concept of authorship has deep roots in histories of cultural, social and political power; a great deal of Foucault work in general deals with the exercise of power dynamic and relationships in society.
http://www.movementresearch.org/classesworkshops/melt/Foucault_WhatIsAnAuthor.pdf
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 0:50:12
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
You haven't written a critique, Professor, you've just issued a lot of bluster, territory-marking, and empty negativity. Alluding to your credentials (while ignoring the superior ones of the author) and throwing out some vague concepts with the claim "his premise is wrong" adds up to a whole lot of nothing. Then, like a cherry on top, the ad-hominem to runner. Bravo.
Double post, but here is my answer to your claim that I ignored the credentials of Meyer. I did not ignore his credentials, I spoke in my own mind and my own words as a I have a right do to.
I don't discount a person as a credible source simply because they are more qualified academically than I am. That would be, well, stupid. I do think we can call into question the ideas of "credentialed" writers. And in this case I cite Foucault's famous work, 'What is an Author', because he sticks up for the little guy, who is me.
When you cite someones credentials you enact a power relationship>This person X has credentials that are peer vetted, assured, safe, commonly accepted. But what can be behind that is an unseen power structure that an individual, 'the small guy', the outsider, the unvetted, or the group with a valid opinion that can't break through in the eyes of those who hold more stock in the unseen power.
Let's take the concept of credentials out much farther and look at it. Foucault gives us that chance.
In my own words, without internet cribbing, I give an introduction to this essay, and point to it as a way of thinking about credentialing and vetting authors for yourself, or for whomsoever may take an interest.
_____________________
This was written in 1969- by Michel Foucault 'What is an Author'
It's an essay which is 15 pages long, it's dense and it makes references to books and historical events that are specific to Foucault's body of writing. Sometimes it is difficult to get a bigger picture of why he chooses these examples, but it fits within his strategies of looking at interior and exterior motives. There are blog posts and websites that offer help in reading Foucault by giving background or notes that fill the new reader in on his way of seeing, without making the reader jump through too many hoops ( no pain no gain)
I bring up 'What is an Author' because it is appropriate to understanding a deeper meaning of an authors credentials and qualifications. I've been challenged on this level personally and asked why my opinion matters critically and how I can justify making a critique on a particular author. To answer back, I bring this essay as one idea of why it is valid to question authors who are vested with peer respect and considered 'experts' on a specific subject.
Foucault in 15 pages looks at the author or idea of an author as a construction of values and explains why and how these values are relevant or not relevant. Common sense tells us that if a writer has been vetted by his peers and there is consensus among a group that a certain person has credibility as a writer his or her work stands good chance of carrying much validity. Foucault takes this evaluation much farther and says the concept of authorship has deep roots in histories of cultural, social and political power; a great deal of Foucault's work in general deals with the exercise of power dynamics and relationships in society.
http://www.movementresearch.org/classesworkshops/melt/Foucault_WhatIsAnAuthor.pdf
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 1:41:13
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
A great deal of Foucault's work in general deals with the exercise of power dynamics and relationships in society.
As does the work of Antonio Gramsci. Both Foucault and Gramsci examined the sources and exercise of power relationships in society. To Foucault, power is everywhere, He developed his concept of "disciplinary power," which consists of mechanisms such as the regulation and organisation of space, of time, and behavior. To Foucault, these mechanisms are reinforced with the aid of complex systems of surveillance. Gramsci, on the other hand, had a view of power that was less overtly coercive than that of Foucault. Gramsci's "hegemony" assumes that the norms established by society's elites are accepted by the vast majority within that society. Thus, elites establish hegemony (and therefore exercise power) within society with the acquiescence of the majority.
I wonder how (or if) Leonard Meyer would apply Foucault's and Gramsci's differing concepts of power relationships in society to his ideas regarding music and art? Or would he think their concepts irrelevant to his ideas?
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 2:32:47
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Getting a bit more off-topic, I have always been intrigued by how different the Western concept of power is from that found in traditional Javanese culture. In Western culture power is abstract. Strictly speaking, it does not "exist." Power is a word to describe certain relationships where some people appear to obey the wishes of others. The sources of power are heterogeneous: wealth, status, organization, weapons, etc., and the accumulation of power has no inherent limits. Finally, in Western culture power is morally ambiguous. Gallons of ink are spilled trying to determine what constitutes a "legitimate" exercise of power vs. an "illegitimate" exercise of power.
The traditional concept of power in Javanese culture differs 180 degrees from that in Western culture. The primary, central premise of Javanese belief is that power is concrete. Power exists, independent of those who would use it. As Benedict O.G. Anderson has written, power in Javanese political thought "is not a theoretical postulate but an existential reality." Javanese believe that power is homogeneous. All power is of the same type and has the same source. The quantum of power in the universe is constant. In the Javanese view the universe is neither contracting nor expanding, and the total amount of power remains constant and fixed. In Javanese political theory, this concept has the important corollary that concentration of power in one place or person requires a proportional diminution elsewhere. Finally, power does not raise the question of legitimacy. All power derives from a single, homogeneous source. To quote Anderson once again, "Power itself antecedes questions of good and evil."
Although Indonesian politics have taken a more democratic turn since the fall of Suharto in 1998, there is still a strong undercurrent of the traditional Javanese concept of power within society. And it was evident in spades in the rule of both Sukarno and Suharto. Both ruled as traditional Javanese kings, and both believed in the traditional Javanese concept of power. Foucault and Gramsci would be rendered irrelevant when describing the Javanese concept of power.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 3:37:58
|
|
Miguel de Maria
Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
I don't have time to read the essay and comment on Stephen and Bill's posts at the moment, but I am fascinated by this turn in the conversation. I am going to have to follow up on these two authors. "Power" as a concept is something that has been tugging at me lately, ever since I went through a phase of watching, well, that literary apex called the K-drama. For those who have not ascended to the level of culture required to comprehend these works, they are, essentially Western-style soap operas enacted by Korean actors, often set in some Korean historical setting with the requisite props and (low-budget) costumes. The thing that stood out perhaps the most in watching several of these series was their bald obsession with _power_. They talk about power like we talk about the economy. By comparison, we treat power as the Victorians seemed to have treated sex--hidden behind veils and pantaloons and corsets and oblique, programmed, formal language. It seems that as a culture, power is something we don't really like to talk about too much, almost as if it were dirty or dangerous. We don't talk about power, it could cause problems.
Now, Stephen, before I turn in, I don't think you are being entirely fair playing the earnest, meritocratic student of art history. It seemed clear to me that you were lording _your_ credentials over runner (and perhaps the forum) and out of the other side of your mouth, summarily dismissing those of Meyer.
Okay, to be cont.
_____________________________
Connect with me on Facebook, all the cool kids are doing it.
https://www.facebook.com/migueldemariaZ
Arizona Wedding Music Guitar
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 5:31:49
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to Miguel de Maria)
|
|
|
quote:
Now, Stephen, before I turn in, I don't think you are being entirely fair playing the earnest, meritocratic student of art history. It seemed clear to me that you were lording _your_ credentials over runner (and perhaps the forum) and out of the other side of your mouth, summarily dismissing those of Meyer.
Okay, to be cont.
No, I don't think was I lording anything over anyone. Not from my perspective. Quite the opposite, I was pissed off at the dismissive attitude of Runner, after having gone to the trouble of reading his book.
Let's look at at it this way, if someone were to say to Richard Jernigan, for example, I have a book that explains the way that radar technology effected politics during the Cold War. Richard reads the book, disagrees with central idea of the author and the person who recommended the book tells Richard, Ok you don't understand the book read it again. Richard says well I'm a radar professional. I am educated and have worked in that field for many years, I think I know my subject. The person insists he reread the book because he does not understand it.
That scenario would likely not happen, and if it did I would probably make popcorn and gleefully read as Richard deconstructs the book. The reason is that the sciences and subjects based in empirical thought don't suffer the lack of respect that the subjective disciplines have to put up with. Art, literature, poetry, music, dance, etc. and specialists and creators of arts in general serve at the favor of the public and are subject to a publics value system. The public views the arts from an outside position, and because the cultivation of a knowledge and love for the arts is part of viewership, readership, listenership, many in the art loving public can lose sight of the fact that artists have likes and dislikes and spend the better part of their lives cultivating who they are as creators.
A person who cultivates a knowledge of arts is qualified to pass value judgements on the arts they seek out. However it's always important to bear in mind that artists, musicians, writers are not just performers seen on a stage or that have been published. Creatives are people who's every day life and existence is steeped it the art they practice.
When I want to understand something about flamenco dance I go to one of my dancer friends, and I say teach me something, or I have a question. I respect the lives they live and go to them as sources, experts on the subject. Often times I see viewers treat performers as one dimensional beings, they may not understand that a dancer has a whole history of dance in their mind, and a depth of knowledge, much of which is non verbal, which far surpasses that of a viewer.
I see artists being disrespected occasionally, it's part of the job to take it and deal with it yourself. But when I, we, as artists spend our lives, our student loan money, our dance lesson money, guitar lesson money, travel to museums, spend long solitary hours writing, when we do these things we should be valued for the experience and knowledge we gain from solitary time spend reading and practicing our arts.
Am I lording this over anyone, no. Am I pissed off that I got the brush off after having made an effort to read someones book. Yes, somewhat pissed off. Why? Because why should I take that? Why should any artist take that crap after we spend our lives training hard to do what we do? Breaking a few viewers, or readers, or pissing people off is an occupational hazard when you are an artist. If you get pushed, usually you absorb it and move on, but sometimes it's better to push back and not put up with disrespect.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 15:50:09
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
quote:
As does the work of Antonio Gramsci. Both Foucault and Gramsci examined the sources and exercise of power relationships in society. To Foucault, power is everywhere, He developed his concept of "disciplinary power," which consists of mechanisms such as the regulation and organisation of space, of time, and behavior. To Foucault, these mechanisms are reinforced with the aid of complex systems of surveillance. Gramsci, on the other hand, had a view of power that was less overtly coercive than that of Foucault. Gramsci's "hegemony" assumes that the norms established by society's elites are accepted by the vast majority within that society. Thus, elites establish hegemony (and therefore exercise power) within society with the acquiescence of the majority.
I wonder how (or if) Leonard Meyer would apply Foucault's and Gramsci's differing concepts of power relationships in society to his ideas regarding music and art? Or would he think their concepts irrelevant to his ideas?
Bill
I was going to go with Gramsci, also, but one power theorist at a time. I 'm sure Meyer must have known about Gramsci, but Foucault was French and the US did not really embrace that line of French thinking until it was over with. ( My joke. )
Foucault's look at power structures are dealt with on other essays and books, what I am interested in with the What is an Author is the way he breaks open old ways of classifying authors. Although his conclusion, in my reading of it, a paradox. I get that he is saying, "What does it matter who is speaking" and he means it both ways. It matters that an author is a legitimate concept, but we can't buy into it without understanding the nature of what it is and how history constructed it. Reader beware, know that authorship is constructed out of all kinds of criteria, and has value and meaning, but don't just trust it at face value. It's more complex in the reading, but if I had to one sentence gist it out it, I'd go with that for a start.
The reason it is useful to me in the context of Meyer is because it begins to break up the canard that history is a fixed set of points of hierarchically ordered events. Meyer states implicitly that he is basing his theory on event hierarchy. This is 50 years ago in 1967, by 1975 that notion has been turned over and roasted alive. Foucault was one of the main chefs doing the roasting. That's not to say the hierarchy event model can't co exist with other models of history.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 16:12:22
|
|
runner
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Having read the Foucault essay referenced by Stephen, I was struck by the degree, especially in the final three paragraphs, and culminating in the last paragraph, to which Foucault's thinking is enclosed within Meyer's thesis--not only as a parallel expression of Meyer's notion of a new kind of stasis, but as an example of that stasis actually coming into being in the minds of his contemporaries. Meyer would, I think, have been delighted if he could have had access to Foucault's essay in the years leading up to the 1967 publication of his book-- it would have provided him with additional documentation.
I certainly plead Guilty! to charges, if that is the preferred term, of being obsessed with Meyer's book--I did state that I risked boring people again when I thus earlier invoked Meyer on the subject you began this thread with, so Stephen's revelation that I was returning like a dog to its vomit when I (yet again) suggested Music, the Arts, and Ideas held many interesting insights into cultural evolution, could not have actually come as a revelation. I was impressed, though, by Stephen's heartfelt expression of stress over the disrespect with which he feels artists are being treated in society today. I was reminded of the Who, Live at Leeds, singing Young Man Blues with such fierce energy.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 29 2015 19:59:54
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
Having read the Foucault essay referenced by Stephen, I was struck by the degree, especially in the final three paragraphs, and culminating in the last paragraph, to which Foucault's thinking is enclosed within Meyer's thesis--not only as a parallel expression of Meyer's notion of a new kind of stasis, but as an example of that stasis actually coming into being in the minds of his contemporaries. Meyer would, I think, have been delighted if he could have had access to Foucault's essay in the years leading up to the 1967 publication of his book-- it would have provided him with additional documentation.
Well then you get out of it again without providing any examples. Which I was chastised about.
Meyers idea is about 180 degrees opposite of Foucault. They are saying in many ways, opposite things.
Meyer is embracing the historical as a set of events, he goes to great length to say he's not interested any other way of viewing the set up for his thesis. He gives examples of other views and rejects them. He argues that entropy and stasis are in place and in the end his conclusion is that there is a kind of aesthetic apathy in culture.
What Foucault spent his time working on is that this tunnel vision is only one way to view history. Meyer in the time is fundamentally accepting tunnel vision to formulate his argument and Foucault is drilling holes in the cave roof to let light in.
The arguments in a greater sense lead to the idea that we don't live in a time, and never did, where one artistic movement progresses to the next in logical order. This idea stuck with uswell into the time of Modernism until it finally lost breath and everyone looked around a realized there was no such thing as an avant garde front.
We live in a time of and always have of aesthetic diversity. In the time Meyer was writing he says verbatim in chapter 6: *We live in a time where two generations of stasis are happening*
He is dead wrong. He is looking at history with a non functioning vision. In 1967 the curture of art was not in any state of stasis, it simply diversified into forms Meyer does not recognize as vital or active, because he uses a closed system to determine what is of aesthetic value. He is saying something very different than Foucault.
In the 1960's Feminist art, post colonial writing, art rooted in the Civil Right movement, Jazz, and many other forms were developing out of art forms that were already in place and active. Concurrently, the traditional forms were always being practiced and continued, Flamenco Ballet, the Novel, traditional forms of craft. Meyer does not recognize these as simultaneous activities and forms. There was never any stasis in Meyers way of explaining it.
Forward to the internet and the superposition of Meyer framework over the diversity of knowledge and activity being disseminated via internet. Also not stasis, or aesthetic entropy, but a whole sale warehouse of pluralist aesthetic activity.
Cultural and art values are a pluralist venture and they always were. Only it took the Foucaults of philosophy to finally say enough is enough of this concept of linear order of events determining the importance of cultures and which will be noted in history as most progressive.
The reason Flamenco history was not written down before the 20th century is because of the fixation on the Western paradigm as the apex of "high culture". Had this not been the linear equation that history was evaluated with we might have had flamenco scholars as far back as the 18th century.
The defense rests.
Any value in Meyers work to me must be recognized through the view that he set limits on the scope of how he wanted to argue. He set up an insulated world to construct an ideal argument within. A form of 'art writing'. I can accept that, but the real world is a much more complex organism. In my view his insular, arty model does not transition well into the real world.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 2:06:18
|
|
runner
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
Sorry, but you still don't get it.
"Forward to the Internet and the superposition of Meyer's framework over the diversity of knowledge and activity being disseminated via Internet. Also not stasis, or aesthetic entropy, but a wholesale warehouse of pluralistic aesthetic activity."
The wholesale warehouse of pluralistic aesthetic activity is, in fact, the Brownian motion, the snow on the TV (or computer) screen, the very stasis, the aesthetic entropy, that Meyer wrote about in 1967.
Meyer didn't ever say that the new stasis was evil or unhealthy or destructive; in fact, in the book as you will recall, he says that the new stasis will allow for opportunities for greater individual expression for greater numbers of people. But it is what it is.
I cannot make it any clearer.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 2:46:03
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
The suppression of serious music today has nothing to do with past icons preventing the birth of the new. Rather, it is a matter of demographics, economics, and technology. Technology, first, because the attention span of the population as a whole has been and continues to be rapidly eroded by a growing addiction to instant but so very brief stimuli. Economics and demographics combine to indicate that the paying audience for serious/classical music is constantly shrinking as the aging population of its enthusiasts literally dies away. Orchestras all over the U.S.-- not every one, but many--teeter on the edge of bankruptcy, and need to get paying customers into seats. Roll over Beethoven, and tell Tchaikovsky the new
Listen to this:
http://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/news/ep-97-summer-music-aspen-edition-robert-mcduffie-on-21st-century-classical-music-careers/
quote:
The wholesale warehouse of pluralistic aesthetic activity is, in fact, the Brownian motion, the snow on the TV (or computer) screen, the very stasis, the aesthetic entropy, that Meyer wrote about in 1967.
There is no entropy, there is no stasis. There just is culture, there just is art. A guy in a suit in an university decided to call what he thinks is inactivity and disorder stasis and entropy.
Stasis and entropy are by the every nature of the words pejorative. However I can back your idea that the the masters of music have little to do with preventing art from being made. Quite the contrary, the internet makes it possible to have a world of culture and art to study at your finger tips.
I live in a remote area and use the internet to experience art and culture on a daily basis, thank God for the internet. I have an external drive that holds a hella giga crap load of videos. I ripped master classes from Paul Tortelier, Casals, Segovia, discussions about Richard Diebenkorn and de Kooning and a whole bunch of other stuff from the internet. I use the ISMLP library online. I have discovered a half dozen young artists who make drawings I never would have heard of without the internet/
Why the fixation the internet as a bad influence? It's marvelous, it opens vistsas into culture.
You can take my internet when you can pry it from my cold dead hand. And the internet does not dull the senses, people dull their own senses.
Now I am done practicing guitar with vidoes and music taken from the internet. So I am going to pour a long cool drink of shochu, open a bag of taco flavored Doritos, park my butt on my futon and try with all my might to watch Top Gear and find some state that resembles stasis.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 15:26:45
|
|
runner
Posts: 357
Joined: Dec. 5 2008
From: New Jersey USA
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
I listened to the McDuffie interview and found much in it to support almost everybody's views so far expressed in this entire thread: orchestral classical music is fading away; incoming musicians must and some are finding new ways to both practice their craft and earn a living by becoming entrepreneurial free agents; "classical" music that still is being created is finding itself increasingly bound to rock and pop collaboration in order to find a paying audience; and there is a constant buzz and hum of activity. Some call it stasis and entropy, which are not pejorative terms, like "terrible" and "crappy"--they are neutral terms unless one chooses to spin them; sometimes stasis can be wonderful indeed after a bout of almighty chaos. And, as my earlier direct quote from Meyer made crystal clear, Meyer asserts that,"a culture bustling with activity and change may nevertheless be static...(serving) to create a steady-state, though perhaps one that is both vigorous and variegated". And he later goes on to indicate the liberating aspects of the new stasis.
I agree completely with your appreciation of the Internet; it is difficult to picture life without it now. Almost every aspect of past and present life, art, history, science, whatever, is instantly available to everyone. Chairman Mao, The Great Helmsman, said, "Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom!" Well, now there can be seven, going on eleven, Billion flowers blooming simultaneously. Some will look at it and call it infinite flux of creativity, novelty, and change; others will call it a new era of stasis.
_____________________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 18:54:57
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
Chairman Mao, The Great Helmsman, said, "Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom!"
That is not the best historical analogy if your aim is to encourage diversity, Runner. In 1956 Mao Zedong began the "Hundred Flowers Campaign" with the key phrase, "Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of thought contend...." Criticism poured in from academics, political thinkers, students, and others. They criticized everything from Mao's slavish following of the Soviet model to the sad state of public transport, from the banning of foreign literature to the low standard of living. What the critics did not know, and what they found out soon enough, was the "Hundred Flowers Campaign" was Mao's ruse to expose critics of his regime.
Mao himself wrote that the "Hundred Flowers Campaign" was meant to "entice the snakes from their lairs." Soon enough, the critics fell victim to Mao's subsequent "Anti-Rightist" campaign. It is estimated that between 300,000 and 500,000 intellectuals and academics were labelled "Rightists." The lucky ones simply lost their jobs. The less fortunate were forced into labor camps, and many were executed. Somehow, I don't think this is what you had in mind when you quoted Mao in support of diversity.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 21:45:50
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
quote:
When I quoted The Helmsman--it was done in a spirit of play all too rarely seen on this particular part of the Foro. My tongue was firmly in my cheek, but I'd better telegraph my all too subtle attempts at humor days in advance.
Runner, I think I am pretty good at detecting word-play, statements made tongue-in-cheeck, and subtle attempts at humor. I must admit, though, that if your attempt to use Mao's speech ("Let a hundred flowers bloom,...") as an analogy upon which to expand the idea of diversity, was in fact made tongue-in-check and as a subtle attempt at humor, it flew below my radar.
Your comment, "Chairman Mao, The Great Helmsman, said, "Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom!" Well, now there can be seven, going on eleven, Billion flowers blooming simultaneously." would qualify as a "too subtle attempt at humor" only if one were not aware of the true nature of what Mao meant. But then, that would take a level of ahistorcism that precludes subtlety.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 30 2015 23:43:56
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Do the Classics Suppress Contemp... (in reply to runner)
|
|
|
When I was in China the academics, teachers at the school I was attending, told us that the slogan let a hundred flowers bloom meant one thing to Mao and his gang and another to the intelligentsia. They said let a hundred flowers bloom meant that if you did not step into line with the Cultural Revolutionary walk that a bloody red flower would bloom out of the back of your skull as the bullet passed through your head.
I had another teacher who is Chinese and retired now. She was a professor of painting at a well known college and she's quite well known herself. She was in art school during the Cultural Revolution. As she retold stories about China at that time she always laughed, and kept a humorous distance from the past. In art school she made a body of work that she kept private because of it's socially transgressive subject matter, it was a Feminist take on Chinese social order in regards to the history of women in China. She did that work at night and kept is form the view of her professors, in part because some of them would be critical, which would put her at risk and in part because some would be sympathetic, which puts them at risk.
Eventually she graduated and her final show was of the appropriate social realism that was acceptable to the administration for a degree. But she kept the transgressive feminist work a secret an showed it to a few she trusted. Eventually she married and had a child and then through a series of events came to the United States and got a teaching job. But first she came to the US and began to show new works painted in the US that were a continuation of the work done in China that she hid in her studio.
In a world of artistic 'stasis' where all forces are equal and cancel each other out, individual voices will rise out of the 'entropy' and speak truth.
Said no one ever who was thinking clearly.
___________________________________
Stasis (from Greek στάσις "a standing still") may refer to:
A state of stability, in which all forces are equal and opposing, therefore they cancel out each other
Stasis (political history), as defined by Thucydides as a set of symptoms indicating an internal disturbance in both individuals and states
Stasis (biology), a block of little or no evolutionary change in a species, in the punctuated equilibrium model of evolutionary biology
Stasis (fiction) implies, especially in science-fiction, an artificial pause that stops all physical and chemical processes, including those of life; they resume as if uninterrupted as soon as the stasis is ended
Stasis (liturgy) a division of a Kathisma or other liturgical verses
Stasis (medicine), a state in which the normal flow of a body liquid stops, for example the flow of blood through vessels or of intestinal contents through the digestive tract
____________________________________________________
Definition of ENTROPY
1
: a measure of the unavailable energy in a closed thermodynamic system that is also usually considered to be a measure of the system's disorder, that is a property of the system's state, and that varies directly with any reversible change in heat in the system and inversely with the temperature of the system; broadly : the degree of disorder or uncertainty in a system
2
a : the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity
b : a process of degradation or running down or a trend to disorder
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 31 2015 0:54:05
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.140625 secs.
|
Printable Version
