A Plato Postlude: Remastered

I was really interested by our class discussion on Thursday about the ideological power of music and poetry in regards to Plato, Pericles, and Pussy Riot. Plato's hope to instill patriotism through music and to censor all music that was 'unhelpful' or 'useless' to the state didn't quite sit right with me. And, while I'm not sure I buy into the idea that Pussy Riot is merely an inversion of the same ideological force, the idea that ideology in music could only be combated with more ideology in music was likewise unappealing.

In his film, The Pervert's Guide to Ideology, Slavoj Žižek provides an alternative solution to fighting ideological fire with fire. In the somewhat-brief clip below he presents a reading of the "Ode to Joy" movement of Beethoven's 9th symphony.

Žižek's argument is that Beethoven provides an example of how a critique of ideology can be made in the medium of music itself. Žižek divides the last movement into two parts: the first part is the sort of blank-slate ideological symbol of universal 'brotherhood', while the second part uses a low-brow, 'carnivalesque' sound to depict those who are quietly left out of the brotherhood of the first section. It is the same idea behind saying "Black lives matter" instead of "All lives matter." Judith Butler explained it in her New York Times interview about a year ago, saying:

When some people rejoin with “All Lives Matter” they misunderstand the problem, but not because their message is untrue. It is true that all lives matter, but it is equally true that not all lives are understood to matter which is precisely why it is most important to name the lives that have not mattered, and are struggling to matter in the way they deserve. The first part of Ode to Joy presents an image of "all people in unity" (a sort of variation on an "all lives matter" statement) which is then questioned by the second part (effectively similar to "black lives matter").

Lastly, I'll leave you with some of the lyrics of the Ode, translated from Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller's original German poem so that you can see how the poem itself suggests the incompleteness of the supposedly universal brotherhood:

All men become brothers,Under the sway of thy gentle wings.Whoever has createdAn abiding friendship,Or has wonA true and loving wife,All who can call at least one soul theirs,Join our song of praise;But those who cannot must creep tearfullyAway from our circle.

(Saturday, February 13th, 2016)

                                                                                                                                       

My reasons for coming back to this post are two-fold: 1) I really like talking about Žižek because he’s hilarious, and 2) I think returning to this point of optimism in musical philosophy would do me some good after going through Adorno’s thoughts on the matter.

One of my biggest problems with Adorno is his two-dimensional approach to music interpretation. It reeks of the conflation of illocutionary intention and perlocutionary impact. Adorno often talks about his ideal music being the type of music that evokes contemplation in the listener, rather than satisfying desires and needs that the music industry itself has formed in the listener. He talks about even ‘spontaneity’ being contaminated because it arises out of the structures and conventions of a capitalist system. The most aggravating part of this (and really my only legitimate complaint) is that pop-music (including classical, jazz, and other sub-genres) cannot lead to contemplative listening.

Brief interlude: I’m not even sure that this point matters much to Adorno’s theory. I think it is merely a necessary adjustment that needs to be made if his theory is to become palatable. Adorno’s critique is valuable in many ways – it is merely hampered in a serious setting by his bombastic generalizations and broad reproaches.

My point is simply that one can approach, even enjoy, popular music without being ‘manipulated.’ It is not as simple as saying: ‘the listener’s desires are manufactured by the capitalist music industry; the sense of pleasure gained from the fulfillment of these desires manipulates the listener.’ I think the critical element missing from Adorno’s critique is the capacity for self-reflection and awareness. There is the possibility of approaching popular music while maintaining an ‘ironic distance’ from it. I think it is possible to enjoy popular, capitalistic, structured, apologetic music without being ‘manipulated’ by it. Or, to put it more clearly, a listener can be conscious of the capitalist structures and processes of indoctrination without succumbing to it. Both Nietzsche and Žižek are likely to argue that the only real way to move beyond the capitalist system is feel the fabricated pleasures, but to at the same see how those pleasures are installed in you. To be sure there is the post-hipster problem of figuring out when an ironic enjoyment slips back into regular old enjoyment (or, perhaps, a new form of enjoyment but subject to the same capitalist manipulation as before (one can imagine selling ‘hipsterism’)). However, I think acknowledging the capacity of reflection is necessary for Adorno’s theory to move forward.

(Wednesday, May 4th, 2016)