on Musicians
“every song that is not accompanied by a relatively better-articulated thesis renders the song only half sung when one considers that the potential of every inspirational song lies it is transmutation within other abstract(art, sculpting, etc) and non-abstract art forms(i.e. social science, philosophy, etc), and vice versa.
The statements of songs, I realised in my teens, are basically questions that beg answers.
Even if each line is not followed by a question mark, that does not mean that it does not leave much unanswered. Part of the reason why much of the world’s problems continues unabated is because inspiring songs are confused for clear-cut signposts. When one follows these ambiguous directives, one is left without an answer, and soon, a sturdy trudge forward, in tune to a top-100 humanitarian song, becomes weary and one returns from whence one came to a vicious state of affairs that is far more articulated in its directives than any song ever produced.
The truth is, all the ‘bonos’, ‘geldoffs’, hendrixs, dylans, ‘band-aids’ and ‘woodstocks’ in the world has never, and will never solve anything to a significant degree. Singers, most unfortunately, have gotten beyond themselves whilst intoxicated by the worship of ignorant billions and confused themselves for philosophical draughtspersons who would be in a better position to plot the path beyond the inspirational-turned-chimerical ‘signposts’ provided by musicians. Most unfortunate, but predictable given the mutation and regression of humans into ‘consumers’ and ‘professionals’ seeking vicarious significance, thoughtless entertainment, and whom are specifically-skilled but generically ignorant. The malady suffered by them is that which serves as the stage upon which the musician, amongst others, becomes the ‘celebrity’. They demand little thought from their audience, pander to their existing disabilities and thus, render it terminal. That is when the masses become like the mesmerised cobra, swaying to the movement of the artiste’s antics. After which profitable interlude, these masses are boxed in and led through the daily 9to9 schedule of work.
Vocational Musicians, however, are not without significance. They hold the potential of being the muse for the imagination of the most sturdy of stairways to the heavens - i acknowledge the work of musicians in inspiring me, but i know that every song that is not accompanied by a relatively detailed and articulated thesis renders The Song only half sung. But they will never be able to construct it themselves, nor inspire any amount of people to do so, simply because they are practitioners of an abstract art form. But, in its abstract state, music/art can delve deep down and stoke the fires that inspire, but the ingredients that go into the cauldron come from those practicing less abstract art forms whom are better able to meticulously detail 'Signposts' via more concrete directives. When the inspirational work of musicians is confused for the meticulous and measured plotting of philosophers and social scientists, that is when the valuable inspiration they provide becomes chimerical at best, and, in consequence, all that can be constructed, as it has been the case throughout history, is a stairway to heaven pieced together with a deck of cards.
And thus, global catastrophes continue. These are trying times indeed.
ed-infinitum
postscript, I do not expect much comments on this article, especially considering its analytical and challenging-accepted-norms value. Thus, if musicians think that changes are going to come from their songs due to mass support they receive, they ought to simultaneously ask their devout congregation if they had paid more attention to non-musical compositions. If not, they are simply reinforcing the evils they hope to confront by validating the perspectival status quo of their 'fans'. Let it be known that the 'fan' undoes the 'professional citizen' unless the inquisitive responsibilities of the latter vocation is taken more seriously than the former. It is in this that the contemporary 'musician' becomes an integral and indispensable part of The Problem. Both the contemporary musician and her/is fan play a significant role in not only underdeveloping each other, but through their concerted efforts underdeveloping the entirety of human civilisation.
Comments
Hello Ed,
I found this article most enlightening and challenging. The various aspects you have described such as
Both the contemporary musician and her/is fan play a significant role in not only underdeveloping each other, but through their concerted efforts underdeveloping the entirety of human civilisation:
This is so true and a challenging statement. I personally do not challenge it, I in fact applaud it and shout out loudly this is important to read and comprehend.
Any art form has to have a message carried within the art and the art-ist has to be willing to do this. Unfortnatly the response is usually as you pointed out previuosly
Singers, most unfortunately, have gotten beyond themselves whilst intoxicated by the worship of ignorant billions and confused themselves for philosophical draughtspersons
I have been there but not on the grand scale of billions though. As a singer for many years and recieving payments which were outragous I still carried on doing it. Never comfortable but weak enough to dismiss my instincts. Eventually I said no more. What was I giving up in this making descision?
Lots of money, adulation to some degree, sighning autographs...always made me uncomfortable, the opportunities to travel, an easy and well supported lifestyle and so on.
What did I gain form making this desicion?
Me.
I found myself again. The real me. I am human again.
I seem to remember you had a similiar experience in your 'former' life becuase it feels that way when this life changing desision is made.
I seem ot only come up with one answer as to the solution.............
my eyes are closing due to lack of sleep. I have unfinished words to write and when I wake will be here to finish.
Hi ed, I agree with you but it hurts. Not in the normal way (stretched synapses and a weary mind) but a raw, gaping, festering wound.
Why?
Well, I can only say what I say to my coworkers/friends/loved ones when they give me that shocked indignant look (because I've told them they're wrong about something or other, kind of suck at something or other, or gave them some brutally honest comment.) "The truth hurts." It still hurts even when it is delivered without malice.
You know that you are wrong (in this case, being specifically skilled but generically ignorant and revelling in it sometimes) and you want to deny it but you can't hide that hole in your chest that bleeds so profusely.
I agree with myself too, and yes, it hurts the subjective half of my personality as well as it (the subjective half) was most disturbed throughout. To be honest, I hated writing this article. But the objective half of my personality sometimes is tyrannous in its expectations.
Your candour and self-critical humility is exceedingly refreshing and heartening Nicole. Thank you Nicole.
Hi Dave,
It seems, Dave, that you are one amongst, not one of, the musicians. If i was a famous singer and had crowds of fans screaming for me, i would look askance at them, and then ask, if they paid as much enthusiasm to the philosophical diatribes of thinkers and writers. If not, i would hang my head in shame as i will realise that i have reinforced the idiocy that it takes to perpetuate the problems that i, with all good intentions, had hoped to address.
As i had stated, and i reiterate, musicians and music are crucial to the development of humanity, but only as its inspiration, not as a signpost - heat may be used to make the flour rise, but it cannot be eaten.
Thus, every musician who hoards the 'limelight' does great disservice to the potentials of humanity. But because of the power of the musician in these times - a power amplified by the increasing intellectual docility of the masses - the responsibility falls on the musician to act as a signpost to the signposts (social scientists, writers, etc) since they have the mesmerised attentions of the masses.
This is a most grave responsibility indeed, and a most tedious one, as musicians will have to avoid getting mesmerised themselves by the adulatory applause and screams of the swaying audience. If not, they will stand the risk of swaying along with them. It is then that they will mesmerise and stupefy each other.
You are the first musician I've ever encountered who has exhibited this degree of realisation and humility Dave. For that, I applaud you indeed!
Thank you Dave.
I see where you're coming from and agree mass entertainment is stripped of any critical edge - perhaps unlike in the late 60's when at least a portion of the musicians / songwriters felt they were part of a social revolution - albeit that they were part of the the 'industry' but using their positions to make social commentary etc. feeling this was a transition. The bubble burst in the 70's for various reasons. But there are aspects of current music concerned with that - maybe hip hop and rap - although some of the most popular are sanitized. To a degree I don't disagree with you but..(some random thoughts)
I did my degree in Humanities and a large share in History of Ideas / political economy etc. Some questions and some thoughts -
1. Pop may not have changed the world but what has centuries of philophical thought and treatises changed? Yes many changes but at the end of the day we still have wars, poverty, racism, sexism, global warming etc. Certainly aspects of philosphical and political thought have tried (and long before pop was a diversion) but why are still in this primative state of affairs? Pop can't be blamed in the past. This issue is not so simple methinks.
2. Sometimes a pop / rock writers can say in a few words what others might take twenty pages to say. 'We don't need no thought control' repeated everytime we hear the song says it - ok we can go to read the reasons or issues but the essential point is raised and it makes you think / ask questions. ' Imagine their's no country, nothing to live or die for' again one sentence. Some use poetric images. One could write a 20 page treatise on the tendacy of snakes to lie in circles. A poet might instead create a word picture that says the same 'a coil of pythons' which you can see and bring your own experiences into play. It is memorable where as paragraphs of dense text are not.
3. A of philosophers and sociologists are far more abstract than any poet or songwriter in my experience. Sociologist P. Berger pointed out that socialogists (and other theroists) often alianate the masses with writing - constructing dense sentences with a string of 7 syllable abstract concept words (that strain your brain to visualise them even if you have a degree in the subject!). Sometimes they do it purely because they are writing for other sociologists / philosophers - it's a kind an elitist approach. Other times they may be brilliant theorist but lack the skill to give their writing clarity. Many of the music fans don't have degrees in these subjects or the time to struggle with the abstract intellectual concepts they deal with and so are unlikely to spend time reading them. Theorists could learn something from poets and songwriters. One exception, was Marx - Marx apparently was a poet before becoming the political economist and revolutionary he's known for. He often used his literary skills to make an abstract point much clearer - often with humour.
4. Ok so songs like Imagine don't present answers - Just raise questions, inspire thought. Surely this is the first stage for those who haven't thought about these issues. Also what are the answers? Whose answers? All the various socialist and Christian groups and sects for instance seem to have different takes on the answers. Are their answers still pertinent to the modern world?
5.Are some of these 'solutions' in themselves patronising, patriarchal and involve violence and if followed through require an oppressive state to prevent its overthrow?
6. The world does need some answers that will bring it together, end war and violence, bring about mutual respect for different cultures and people and the sexes, empower people to be creative and fulfill themselves and be co-operative and look after the envioronment etc. As contributary as they are, can the old philosophies deliver that without relpicating the old ways in a new guise? Maybe we need a new modern philosophy that maybe has elements of the od but has the power to inspire almost everyone to see the 'light'. But who to invent it and how would it be different? How could you inspire the people with control and wealth to see a better way. Imagine if we could!
Ok some things to think about Ed!! Take care.
Hi Trev,
My, my! What a considered challenge! (i've got 20 minutes before i have to rush out. I know that your thoughts deserve more than that, but you have whet my appetite Trev. That's a challenge indeed! Ok, here goes.....*starts reading*)
1. I would say that since philosophy and political philosophy, amongst other sciences, were appreciated within the systemic context of a class-based system, it were only those aspects that augured well with the elite that were applied. This would, in part, account for the continuing existence of wars, bigotries, etc, which are logical corollaries of class-based systems thriving within a nationalist state of affairs. Pop, currently, plays the role of the 'church' of the past in serving as the opiate of the masses, monopolising and misdirecting disaffection.
2. I agree with you Trev. I am not discounting the power of some statements made by musicians. I am, however, taking issue with their confounding their lyrics with treatises. Whilst one inspires, the latter allows it to transpire. It takes more than a vision to construct skyscrapers. That's where the philosophical, social scientists, etc, 'draughtspersons' come in.
3. Again, i agree with you on academic elites writing for academic elites. This had bothered my ever since i did sociology about a decade ago. However, i realised over time, that the problem was exacerbated by the existence of the 'fan', amongst others, who having been trained to understand simple lyrics, found much that later found to be quite simple to understand, difficult. The problem lies on both sides. On the academic side, academics ought to consider the increasing docility of the populace when communicating. This can be done. However, an increasingly docile 'fan'/'professional'/'consumer' populace is not going to think that they ought to improve anything other than their bank balances, keep up with billboard-led trends, etc. Thus, if academics were to really 'come down to earth' and simplify what they have to say, it would become as useful in the long-run as the lyrics of a lennon or a dylan. It is not simply an issue of language, but also that of concepts, logic, etc, that the masses find difficult to appreciate because of their prior and current underdevelopment by the system.
4. Yes, songs can be the first stage 'for those who haven't thought about these issues.' It was similar for myself as well. But where i went on to answer the myriad and multitude of questions that songs left unanswered, precious few did. That made me inquire after what caused it. Making Gods of lesser ones makes lesser of their followers. The question, 'are their answers still pertinent to the modern world" is a good one indeed. The question that ought to be considered in tandem with it is, 'is the modern world still pertinent to the answers forwarded?". Changing the world might not necessarily come with simultaneously pandering to the status quo as opposed to changing it. Thus, the pertinence of answers would be dependent on changing the world so that it could appreciate the pertinance of the answers. A most difficult task indeed!
5. Totalitarianism is actually a transitionary phase between a mindset habituated to one set of conditions as opposed to another and new state of affairs. It was totalitarianism that served as the midwife for the 'modern' wo/man. Thus habituated, perceived totalitarianism is internalised as the mind is habituated to the current state of affairs. The question to ask is what the new set of conditions are and if it brings about the maximal development of all humanity as opposed to only particular classes.
6. 'Psalms' 4 and 5 would be relevant here Trev;).
Thank you very much for the above challenging queries Trev. Things are much more clearer to myself now that i've considered them to some degree.
Thanks again Trev.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSO0fcZp5Ms
A fascinating post. I'll be certain to post my thoughts after they've had some time to percolate.
Thank you for the link mate.
ed
Hi Ed,
but treatises, while important, don't effect change in themselves either but also inspire, and maybe help direct or guide.
At the end of the day treatises, found in books, are also part of the commodity system and are sold for profit in the high street bookshops and on line stores like Amazon.
I'm not putting them or their role down but pointing out the similarity. People also buy posters and T Shirts of the top ten radical philosphers or whatever. There's a blockbuster film about Ghandi (I enjoyed it ) but it's similar to pop culture.
Protest is profitable in many forms - remember the Billboard article found by singer Songwriter Tom Paxton in the 60's that read "Folk + Protest = PROFITS"- it applies to the sale of books too. Das Kapital and other such treatises must be on the syllabus of a lot of university philosophy courses . Each year hundreds of students buy copies from bookshops.
How much do they make from sales of the Bible?
Just as commodification doesn't invalidate the content of the books nor does it invalidate the songs. But yes dominant culture otherwise does keep people "doped with religion, sex and TV" to quote Lennon!! A lot of pop is mindless and a distraction from thinking about how industry is ruining the planet with out a second thought, how part of the world enjoys wealth while the other half starves, the mindset of war and violence and intolerance is a horrible legacy for the world's children to inherit.
Hi Trev,
The premise of my argument is not based on the assumption that the commodification of the produce of contemporary musicians compromises its positive social value. I'm referring to its content, and the degree to which it, being an abstract art form, is able to articulate a 'blueprint' for social reconstruction. Your emphasis on 'commodification' of both treatises and music is, albeit interesting, quite irrelevant in this context.
"but treatises, while important, don't effect change in themselves either but also inspire, and maybe help direct or guide."
In this, perhaps, you are attempting to direct attention to both music and treaties being of quite equitable inspirational quality, and thus, to a significant degree, similar. This is, verifiably, untrue, when content is considered. I am not saying that treatises and music are not both inspiring, just that the former provides us a map defining pitfalls, landmarks, oases, etc, in relatively meticulous detail, whilst the latter is unable to do so due to the abstract nature of this art form.
That's a nice quote from Lennon. Too bad he was a part of the problem as he kept us focused on the problem in enough of an abstract sense with the rest of the good-intentioned 'hippie' popstars to detract us from the treatises that actually gave us a clear way out of it. In other words, it takes much more than us chanting together, 'give peace a chance' for it to have any semblance of a chance. He's yet another instance of a musician who mistook himself for a philosopher. Forgot his place in the intoxicating cacophony of mass worship by well-meaning ignoramuses.
-J