This is my eclectic analysis of the song Aqueous Transmission by Incubus. As practiced in class, I have chosen to do the open listening before the historical background. I felt this was necessary especially because I had never heard the song before and I wanted to approach it from a completely fresh and unbiased angle. I listened to the song openly a number of times before proceeding with the analysis. The song is from the album "Morning View," which I downloaded on i-tunes. This analysis is of the song as it appears on the album, however there are a number of versions on youtube including live performances by Incubus as well as other people's videos and video mash-ups set to this song. Before reading this analysis, I recommend listening to the song as it appears on the album, but if you don't own it yet, here is a link to one of the youtube videos that plays the song and just shows the album cover.
1) Open Listening
The first thing I thought when I heard this pieces for the first time was, "This is the most beautiful song ever written." It captivated me with the first five notes. An instrument that sounds kind of like sitar plays an ostinato, the line ascends melodically, pauses, then descends. The ostinato is consistent throughout the piece up until the beginning of the last minute. The strings enter with a glissando, reminiscent of something one may hear in an Asian song. A breathy wood flute enters with a freely flowing solo that utilizes a large range of the instrument. Bells begin to keep the beat, as in Native American dance. A basic scratch on turntables usher in a drum beat comes that gives a slow simple beat also reminiscent of the Native American traditional music. The beat is simple and heartbeat-like. The flute solo is very lyrical, telling a story about beautiful and natural things and emotions. The strings fade in with harmonics, creating an atmosphere that evokes the serenity of untouched nature. The flute and strings drop out and a single male voice comes in over the ostinato and drum beat. His voice is very easy and soft. The first words are, "I'm floating down a river." The first verse ends with "I marvel at the stars and feel my heart overflow." After "overflow" is sung, the strings come in starting in unison then gradually some of the strings glissando up to build dissonance. The dissonance creates an emotional rush that leads into the first chorus. The chorus consists of the phrase, "Further down the river," repeated four times. On the second and fourth repetitions, the word "river" is colored with glissandi that emulate the motion of a wave. In the second verse, the voice sings "I'm in this boat alone," which is followed by a short solo flute response, suggesting that the flute symbolizes the man. Later in that verse, the voice revers to the river, singing, "floating down a river named Emotion," suggesting that emotion, like a river, is windy, constantly in motion, and alternates between being predictable and unpredictable. The verse ends with, "Will I make it back to shore or drift into the unknown," which is followed by a break in the ostinato where a cello enters with a pedal tone and we hear bird calls. The last verse begins with "I'm building an antenna," and sounds of indecipherable words, like a transmission, can be heard in the background amongst the natural atmospheric sounds created by the high string harmonics, the low string pedal tones, the ostinato, and the drum beat. The last phrase of the verse is, "Maybe we can meet again further down the river to see what we both discovered and revel in the view." After "revel in the view," plucked strings in octaves and unisons take over the ostinato, a cello pedal tone enters after the antecedent phrase, the consequent phrase is altered to form a second antecedent phrase, which is then answered by a contrasting arco consequent which produces an even stronger emotional rush that leads into the final chorus. After the chorus, the phrase "I'm floating down a river" reappears, echoing the first line of the song. This phrase is repeated a number of times and eventually fades out as the strings overlap increasingly more layers and seamlessly replaces the vocals. The string layers interact with one another like ripples and waves and turns in the river. On top of this rippling string texture, one flute comes in with a melody in the same simple and free-flowing style as the other intermittent flute solos, then second flute joins in in the same style, like the two are "meeting again further down the river." The two flutes play off of one another and add to the full texture of the strings, ostinato, drum, and bells. This full texture lasts briefly, then the many voices gradually drop out. The string voices drop out one-by-one, revealing less and less complicated phrases. Eventually all of the strings drop out, and finally the ostinato drops out. We are left with the two flutes weaving in and out of each other over the drum beat and bells. Then the two flutes become one flute, the bells drop out, the drum beat stops, and the flute makes a last small gesture that ends with a relax in pitch as the sound of many frogs chirping fades in. The frog chirping lasts for a full minute and fades out.
2) Historical Background
Incubus is comprised of Brandon Boyd (vocals, guitar, percussion), Mike Einziger (guitar, backup vocals, piano), Jose Pasillas II (drums, percussion), Chris Kilmore (turntables, keyboards, samples, decks), and Ben Kenny (bass, backup vocals). Chris Kilmore replaced the original DJ, Gavin Koppell, in 1998, and Ben Kenney replaced the original bassist, Dirk Lance, in 2003. The band was started by Boyd, Einziger, and Pasillas when the three were in high school in Calabasas, California.
3) Syntax
4) Sound-in-Time
5) Textual Representation
Instead of looking up the lyrics and copying them into my analysis, I transcribed them first and then verified them. In addition, I tried to capture Brandon Boyd's sung rhetoric in my transcription so as not to lose meaning which may only make itself known through this rhetoric. I accounted for breaths in phrases with a hung indent, such as in "Lying face-up on the floor of my vessel." I tried to articulate his embellishment on the word "river" in the choruses as well. There is one unsolved discrepancy in the second line of the first verse. I originally heard the word "homes," but most other sources claim that it is "holes." A few sources posit "holds." I was unable to locate the official lyrics. I will discuss this discrepancy later in my meta-critique. Without further ado, here are the words:
I'm floating down a river Oars freed from their homes/holes/holds long ago Lying face-up on the floor of my vessel I marvel at the stars and feel my heart overflow Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah Two weeks without my lover I'm in this boat alone Floating down a river named Emotion Will I make it back to shore or drift into the unknown Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah I'm building an antenna Transmissions will be sent when I am through Maybe we can meet again Further down the river 'n' share what we both discovered and revel in the view Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah Further down the river Further down the riveaaaaah I'm floating down a river I'm floating down a river I'm floating down a river I'm floating down a river I'm floating down a river i'm floating down a river i'm floating down a river
And here is my literal translation of this metaphorical scenario:
I am letting life take me where it will
I have stopped trying to influence and control the natural course of things
I am observing the world outside of my own ego, and the realization that I am a small part of the magnificent universe causes me to feel innumerable emotions simultaneously. The combination of emotions is so intense and powerful that I experience them viscerally.
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
I've been without my lover for two weeks.
This is the natural course that my life alone has taken.
Being on this natural course alone causes me to experience many different, conflicting, and constantly changing emotions.
There is so much uncertainty. I don't know if this course and these emotional experiences will help me to better understand the implications of my existence in the world or if it will just lead me to more existential questions.
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
I'm trying to use the things I am learning about myself and the world on this natural course to understand what my particular role in the world is.
Eventually, I will have an affinity with the world that will be reflected in everything I do and will allow me to continue to follow my natural course and answer my natural callings with less internal struggle.
Maybe, when this happens, your (my lover) natural course will lead you back to me. Maybe, if I can figure out my own life, I can be your natural calling and we will be together again. We can share with each other these essential things we've discovered about ourselves and the world and revel in the beauty that is Life.
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
Later on in life
I am letting life take me where it will
I am letting life take me where it will
I am letting life take me where it will
I am letting life take me where it will
I am letting life take me where it will
i am letting life take me where it will
i am letting life take me where it will
6) Virtual Feeling
7) Onto-Historical World
8) Open Listening
9) Performance Guide
10) Meta-Critique
Monday, May 12, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
An Eclectic Method for Sound, Form, and Reference (Ferrara, Ch. 7)
Summary:
In this chapter, Ferrara presents the 10 steps of the Eclectic Method of analysis. He states that the underlying directive of the method is that the listener must maintain openness to any level of musical significance in order to account for the fact that the structures of any method significantly impacts the data that can be collected. One is to suspend prejudgments. Since it is not possible to suspend prejudgments completely, one must allow them to be subject to change. There must be a clear direction in any set of questions, whether toward sound, form, or reference, or the interactions among them. The eclectic method must support moving between asking direct questions of the work and the response of the analyst to questions pose by the work. Distinctions between explanation of form, description of sound-in-time, and interpretation of reference must be sustained. Ferrara states that the "inherent rules and logic of each system remain intact, retaining integrity, unity, and autonomy." One must not question the underlying presuppositions of individual methods, but also must include a meta-critique to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the methods and their impact on the analysis.
The steps of the Eclectic Analysis are as follows:
1) Historical Analysis: The analyst collects data about the dates of the composer, the style period, important historical events, the significance of the composer in his time, other prominent art movements or styles, and the socio-political climate. After this step, there should be no comparisons to other works or composers in the analysis.
2) Open Listening: The listener becomes oriented to the overall sound, structure,and message of the pieces and reports insights into the sound, syntax, and reference.
3) Syntax: This is a literal and direct analysis of the piece.
4) Phenomenology: This is an analysis of sound-in-time based on Husserl's theories. It is a the transition to increased use of metaphorical language. One looks at the "temporal units" which cohere and a result of the temporal direction of the passage and combine to the larger "temporal structure."
5) Textual meaning: If one is analyzing programmatic music, they would analyze the program in this step. It also includes an analysis of any text.
6) Reference to human feeling: This is based on hermeneutic phenomenology and the theories of Langer, Kivy, and Coker discussed in previous posts. One analyzes the virtual feeling of the piece, keeping in mind that music can be expressive of feeling rather than actually expressing feeling. This stage must be rooted in syntax and sound-in-time, not just ordinary emotional release. Instead of suspending them, one must review earlier insights of sound-in-time and syntax in order to insure that reference is congruent with the work's intrinsic dimensions of significance. This provides some degree of empirical adequacy.
7) Onto-historical World of the Composer: This is another referential, hermeneutic stage of analysis that uses interpretive language that discloses the referential context of the musical sounds and form. It is also grounded in sound-in-time and syntax.
8) Second Open Listening: In this second listening, the analyst can discuss any level of significance and should show that the different levels combine, as Ferrara describes it, a "dynamic and polyphonic tapestry...Each stratum remains perceptibly discreet yet there's an inner connective organicity that weaves them together in a dynamic state." The return to open listening shows that the method is circular. In the first open listening, one hears the work as an unfinished whole. In the second, the "full force of the work can begin to be experienced and reported through the interplay of various strata that constitute musical significance." This exemplifies Heidegger's strife between earth and world, or "rift-design."
9) Performance Guide: the analyst provides a performance guide to aid performers in their overall understanding of the piece and in making interpretive decisions for performance. This can include the need for crescendo or the overall message of the work. It may include technical or physical approaches to the work as well.
10) Meta-critique: This stage discusses the impact of the strengths and weaknesses of each of the methods employed. It "necessitates the examination of one's theoretical presuppositions in order to improve and extend [the analyst's] theory base." It facilitates the ongoing development of the eclectic method.
Reaction:
The most important and useful part of the eclectic analysis is arguably the fact that it doesn't claim to provide one definitive answer about a work's significants. Instead, it provides the analyst with a number of avenues to approach the piece from in order to gain insights on its many different characteristics. I am a firm believer that everything is less complicated than we can even imagine or comprehend. Because we're so "advanced," it is only possible for us to truly understand the most complicated concepts that answer the questions "how does this happen," or "how does this work." This is because we are only able to speak literally about issues of "how." We are only able to speak metaphorically about issues of "why." I think this is because we are by nature overly abstract, but I will address this at another times. The eclectic method enables us to momentarily side-step the "why" by asking "how" on 10 different levels. One collects data on how the piece came to be, how it is structured, how it is referential, how it sounds, how it can best be performed, and how the methods succeeded in providing insight and how they failed. The answers to "how" provide material to contemplate post-analysis, which point toward but never really reach an answer to "why." I think that this is excellent because I don't think we need to--or should, for that matter--know "why." If we knew, or were able to empirically discern "why," the meaning of meaning would be lost. We tend to appreciate the things we can't fully explain and take for granted the things that we are able to explain. Instead of killing the work in order to open it up and examine it cold, the eclectic analysis allows us to examine the work as it exists in life through time.
In this chapter, Ferrara presents the 10 steps of the Eclectic Method of analysis. He states that the underlying directive of the method is that the listener must maintain openness to any level of musical significance in order to account for the fact that the structures of any method significantly impacts the data that can be collected. One is to suspend prejudgments. Since it is not possible to suspend prejudgments completely, one must allow them to be subject to change. There must be a clear direction in any set of questions, whether toward sound, form, or reference, or the interactions among them. The eclectic method must support moving between asking direct questions of the work and the response of the analyst to questions pose by the work. Distinctions between explanation of form, description of sound-in-time, and interpretation of reference must be sustained. Ferrara states that the "inherent rules and logic of each system remain intact, retaining integrity, unity, and autonomy." One must not question the underlying presuppositions of individual methods, but also must include a meta-critique to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the methods and their impact on the analysis.
The steps of the Eclectic Analysis are as follows:
1) Historical Analysis: The analyst collects data about the dates of the composer, the style period, important historical events, the significance of the composer in his time, other prominent art movements or styles, and the socio-political climate. After this step, there should be no comparisons to other works or composers in the analysis.
2) Open Listening: The listener becomes oriented to the overall sound, structure,and message of the pieces and reports insights into the sound, syntax, and reference.
3) Syntax: This is a literal and direct analysis of the piece.
4) Phenomenology: This is an analysis of sound-in-time based on Husserl's theories. It is a the transition to increased use of metaphorical language. One looks at the "temporal units" which cohere and a result of the temporal direction of the passage and combine to the larger "temporal structure."
5) Textual meaning: If one is analyzing programmatic music, they would analyze the program in this step. It also includes an analysis of any text.
6) Reference to human feeling: This is based on hermeneutic phenomenology and the theories of Langer, Kivy, and Coker discussed in previous posts. One analyzes the virtual feeling of the piece, keeping in mind that music can be expressive of feeling rather than actually expressing feeling. This stage must be rooted in syntax and sound-in-time, not just ordinary emotional release. Instead of suspending them, one must review earlier insights of sound-in-time and syntax in order to insure that reference is congruent with the work's intrinsic dimensions of significance. This provides some degree of empirical adequacy.
7) Onto-historical World of the Composer: This is another referential, hermeneutic stage of analysis that uses interpretive language that discloses the referential context of the musical sounds and form. It is also grounded in sound-in-time and syntax.
8) Second Open Listening: In this second listening, the analyst can discuss any level of significance and should show that the different levels combine, as Ferrara describes it, a "dynamic and polyphonic tapestry...Each stratum remains perceptibly discreet yet there's an inner connective organicity that weaves them together in a dynamic state." The return to open listening shows that the method is circular. In the first open listening, one hears the work as an unfinished whole. In the second, the "full force of the work can begin to be experienced and reported through the interplay of various strata that constitute musical significance." This exemplifies Heidegger's strife between earth and world, or "rift-design."
9) Performance Guide: the analyst provides a performance guide to aid performers in their overall understanding of the piece and in making interpretive decisions for performance. This can include the need for crescendo or the overall message of the work. It may include technical or physical approaches to the work as well.
10) Meta-critique: This stage discusses the impact of the strengths and weaknesses of each of the methods employed. It "necessitates the examination of one's theoretical presuppositions in order to improve and extend [the analyst's] theory base." It facilitates the ongoing development of the eclectic method.
Reaction:
The most important and useful part of the eclectic analysis is arguably the fact that it doesn't claim to provide one definitive answer about a work's significants. Instead, it provides the analyst with a number of avenues to approach the piece from in order to gain insights on its many different characteristics. I am a firm believer that everything is less complicated than we can even imagine or comprehend. Because we're so "advanced," it is only possible for us to truly understand the most complicated concepts that answer the questions "how does this happen," or "how does this work." This is because we are only able to speak literally about issues of "how." We are only able to speak metaphorically about issues of "why." I think this is because we are by nature overly abstract, but I will address this at another times. The eclectic method enables us to momentarily side-step the "why" by asking "how" on 10 different levels. One collects data on how the piece came to be, how it is structured, how it is referential, how it sounds, how it can best be performed, and how the methods succeeded in providing insight and how they failed. The answers to "how" provide material to contemplate post-analysis, which point toward but never really reach an answer to "why." I think that this is excellent because I don't think we need to--or should, for that matter--know "why." If we knew, or were able to empirically discern "why," the meaning of meaning would be lost. We tend to appreciate the things we can't fully explain and take for granted the things that we are able to explain. Instead of killing the work in order to open it up and examine it cold, the eclectic analysis allows us to examine the work as it exists in life through time.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Heidegger's Philosophy of Art (Ferrara, Ch. 5)
Summary:
In this chapter,Ferrara
I found this chapter to be extremely interesting, insightful, and logical. I strongly appreciate Heidegger’s move toward meditative thinking because it puts a person into the world in order to move toward understanding, whereas traditional thinking removes a person from the world in order to attempt to understand it by observing it from afar. This gets back to the early class discussions we had about experiencing art beyond the visual realm. I think Heidegger’s philosophy proves that it is impossible to experience a work of art – or anything, really – using only one sense.
In this chapter,
Heidegger emphasizes the difference between waiting for something to reveal itself, which is subjective and applies to human wants, and waiting upon something, which releases the will and allows for responsiveness to the thing (what is referred to as apprehension and collection). It is important to note that waiting upon something is not passive, or indifferent and neglectful of things. In on the Origin of the Work of Art, Heidegger concludes that the artist is the origin of the work of art, and that the work of art is the origin of the artist because it is what defines him as an artist. Therefore, both the artist and the work require a third thing, which is art. Art is more than a category of real things. It is a higher reality, and it is present in art works and guides the artist. In Being and Time, Heidegger states that there are three types of beings: ready-to-hand (equipment), presnt-to-hand (mere things), and Dasein. In On the Origin of the Work of Art, he concludes that art cannot fit into any of these categories. Through studying a Van Gough painting of shoes, he comes the conclusion that equipment is in true being when in actual use, and furthermore, that art reveals the being of equipment. He calls this unconcealedness “aletheia,” which is a word used by the ancient Greeks to mean “truth.”
An essential part of Heidegger’s theory is that nothing is static, everything is dynamic, including earth, world, and works of art. He states that truth “happens” in art. He goes on to state that truth happens in art as a function of the art bringing itself into the rift-design, or Gestalt, through the strife of earth and world. Therefore, according to Heidegger, there are three functional and fundamental elements in a work of art: earth (materials), rift-design (syntax), and world (reference). Heidegger also states that for art to happen in a work of art, it must be appreciated, and that truth only happens in a work of art if an inspired person allows it to happen. Finally, he states that art is poetry because it is a language, and language is the original projection into Being that is originally generated from Being itself, and emphasizes the importance of history, or the artist’s ontological world, by stating that history is not a simple product of the study of man but rather is an eruption of man’s significance through time. Therefore, art provides a glimpse of Being as the overall and fundamental process of human understanding.
I found this chapter to be extremely interesting, insightful, and logical. I strongly appreciate Heidegger’s move toward meditative thinking because it puts a person into the world in order to move toward understanding, whereas traditional thinking removes a person from the world in order to attempt to understand it by observing it from afar. This gets back to the early class discussions we had about experiencing art beyond the visual realm. I think Heidegger’s philosophy proves that it is impossible to experience a work of art – or anything, really – using only one sense.
I am also intrigued by the emphasis on contradiction and struggle as and essential characteristic of truth. I have been studying Taoism for a while and this idea is also a fundamental principle of that school of thought. I think that in many cases, artistic and otherwise, people get too caught up in decisiveness. There always has to be a right answer, one absolute truth. A person on the fence is considered wishy-washy. I believe that Heidegger is correct in taking into account the fact that everything is in constant motion and therefore promoting and working with the idea of a dynamic truth.
The most exciting part of this chapter for me was
Husserl's Phenomenology (Ferrara, Ch. 3)
Summary:
Edmund Husserl sough to create a new phenomenological foundation to provide philosophy and science with a methodology based on absolutely verifiable foundations of immediate conscious experience. He believed that systematic descriptions "purify" the object engaged by consciousness of all constructive interpretations. He asserted that one must suspend belief in theories, concepts, and symbols in order to perceive what is directly given. By bracketing out biases and focusing solely on an object's essential elements rather than trying to analyze an object by trying to fit it in with pre-conceptions, we move back to the things themselves and will be better able to understand them or discern meaning, or as Ferrara puts it, "solves the problem of the disjunction between realism and idealism." Ferrara explains that consciousness is constituted through the form of inner flow of time. We experience things through time by using retention and protention. Husserl believes that all past and future stems from the present, and that objects have consistent self-identity because they inhere physical consistency and protentions are continuously being consummated in consciousness that are in agreement with past retentions. Ferrara compares retentions and protentions in music to watching a comet. One can see where the comet has been by observing the vector of it's tail, and based on that progression (retention), one can predict where it will move next (protention), but all of this stems from the conscious perception of where the comet itself is now. Miller confirms this by stating that one tones in succession but aways in the context of the whole melody. Husserl claims that perception is the ultimate empirical tool and that the immediacy of perception is the ultimate foundation of knowledge.
Husserl's phenomenology consists of a two-part reduction. The first stage is transcendental reduction, which involves a shift from ordinary perception to phenomenological perception. This means that one suspends his "natural attitude," or mode of orientation grounded in pre-dispositions to things, and turns inward toward consciousness. One examines his own consciousness and thereby is able to see the object as it is in consciousness. This mode of consciousness is called the transcendental ego. The second stage is eidetic reduction, which moves toward the object's essence. Transcendental reduction reveals the object's structures and eidetic reduction reveals which of those structures are essential and which can be suspended without destroying the object. This is accomplished by imagining the object without some of it's properties. Those characteristics that do not change when consciousness changes are essential.
Husserl's phenomenology was rejected by many because of its apparent solipsism. Because his later theories became more and more focused on the consciousness of the analyst, there were problems when trying to account for "the Other," or other egos. To rebut the accusation of solipsism, Husserl introduced the concept of Lebenswelt, defined by Ferrara as "an intersubjective community of 'my' and 'other' egos." In one of his later works In Crisis, Husserl explains that the achievements of individuals in a community are collectivized by the culture to shape the Lebenswelt, or life-world and the life-world informs the individuals. He claims that the life-world prior to science, and therefore immediate perception in phenomenology is the basis for scientific objectivity.
Ultimately, Ferrara concludes, Husserl fails to construct a rigorous science of phenomenology because bracketing out the ego forces one to lose the sense of being in the world. This is because a) the idea of the transcendental ego is God-like, and b) language is too biased to articulate his real point.
Reaction:
I think that Husserl's phenomenology does fail as a rigorous science, but I don't agree with Ferrara's reasons for this. I think that the transcendental ego is not God-like but rather humble. The only thing that would make it God-like would be if the analyst were imposing his or her biases on the object, which is precisely what the transcendental ego is avoiding. Furthermore, the idea of Lebenswelt should silence any remaining arguments of solipsism. As was discussed in the previous chapter, "man can only understand from the standpoint of his time and cultural place," which can and should be extended to mean that an individual can only understand from his own individual standpoint. Because he is part of his life-world, he is able to draw on the collective knowledge and achievements of "other egos" of his life-world and does so automatically by virtue of his humanity.
I also disagree with Ferrara's assertion that language is too biased to articulate his real point. I think that his point is extremely clear. I think that people are too biased to allow language to articulate his real point. This is a problem that can be solved by simply using the phenomenology. One has to let go of his pre-conceived notions about what certain words such as "transcendental" and "ego" connotate and perceive them as they appear temporally in consciousness in the context of the whole theory.
Edmund Husserl sough to create a new phenomenological foundation to provide philosophy and science with a methodology based on absolutely verifiable foundations of immediate conscious experience. He believed that systematic descriptions "purify" the object engaged by consciousness of all constructive interpretations. He asserted that one must suspend belief in theories, concepts, and symbols in order to perceive what is directly given. By bracketing out biases and focusing solely on an object's essential elements rather than trying to analyze an object by trying to fit it in with pre-conceptions, we move back to the things themselves and will be better able to understand them or discern meaning, or as Ferrara puts it, "solves the problem of the disjunction between realism and idealism." Ferrara explains that consciousness is constituted through the form of inner flow of time. We experience things through time by using retention and protention. Husserl believes that all past and future stems from the present, and that objects have consistent self-identity because they inhere physical consistency and protentions are continuously being consummated in consciousness that are in agreement with past retentions. Ferrara compares retentions and protentions in music to watching a comet. One can see where the comet has been by observing the vector of it's tail, and based on that progression (retention), one can predict where it will move next (protention), but all of this stems from the conscious perception of where the comet itself is now. Miller confirms this by stating that one tones in succession but aways in the context of the whole melody. Husserl claims that perception is the ultimate empirical tool and that the immediacy of perception is the ultimate foundation of knowledge.
Husserl's phenomenology consists of a two-part reduction. The first stage is transcendental reduction, which involves a shift from ordinary perception to phenomenological perception. This means that one suspends his "natural attitude," or mode of orientation grounded in pre-dispositions to things, and turns inward toward consciousness. One examines his own consciousness and thereby is able to see the object as it is in consciousness. This mode of consciousness is called the transcendental ego. The second stage is eidetic reduction, which moves toward the object's essence. Transcendental reduction reveals the object's structures and eidetic reduction reveals which of those structures are essential and which can be suspended without destroying the object. This is accomplished by imagining the object without some of it's properties. Those characteristics that do not change when consciousness changes are essential.
Husserl's phenomenology was rejected by many because of its apparent solipsism. Because his later theories became more and more focused on the consciousness of the analyst, there were problems when trying to account for "the Other," or other egos. To rebut the accusation of solipsism, Husserl introduced the concept of Lebenswelt, defined by Ferrara as "an intersubjective community of 'my' and 'other' egos." In one of his later works In Crisis, Husserl explains that the achievements of individuals in a community are collectivized by the culture to shape the Lebenswelt, or life-world and the life-world informs the individuals. He claims that the life-world prior to science, and therefore immediate perception in phenomenology is the basis for scientific objectivity.
Ultimately, Ferrara concludes, Husserl fails to construct a rigorous science of phenomenology because bracketing out the ego forces one to lose the sense of being in the world. This is because a) the idea of the transcendental ego is God-like, and b) language is too biased to articulate his real point.
Reaction:
I think that Husserl's phenomenology does fail as a rigorous science, but I don't agree with Ferrara's reasons for this. I think that the transcendental ego is not God-like but rather humble. The only thing that would make it God-like would be if the analyst were imposing his or her biases on the object, which is precisely what the transcendental ego is avoiding. Furthermore, the idea of Lebenswelt should silence any remaining arguments of solipsism. As was discussed in the previous chapter, "man can only understand from the standpoint of his time and cultural place," which can and should be extended to mean that an individual can only understand from his own individual standpoint. Because he is part of his life-world, he is able to draw on the collective knowledge and achievements of "other egos" of his life-world and does so automatically by virtue of his humanity.
I also disagree with Ferrara's assertion that language is too biased to articulate his real point. I think that his point is extremely clear. I think that people are too biased to allow language to articulate his real point. This is a problem that can be solved by simply using the phenomenology. One has to let go of his pre-conceived notions about what certain words such as "transcendental" and "ego" connotate and perceive them as they appear temporally in consciousness in the context of the whole theory.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Should the Method Define the Task (Ferrara, Ch. 2)
Summary:
Ferrara states, "Conventional methods of music analysis define their own tasks and scope of inquiry largely based on the evolution of inherent strengths and weaknesses of each method." For this reason, methods always yield success. A different way to evaluate the adequacy of a method is to examine its responsiveness to musical sound-in-time, form and relevance. Ferrara maintains that the dynamic interplay of a work's multiple levels of significance should demarcate the scope and define the nature of the tasks required of the method. For this reason, an eclectic method, where the strengths of each method are used, is needed.
Ferrara notes that "all analyses are marked by structures of pre-understanding," which means that pure listening and pure understanding is impossible. He then discusses Hans-Georg Gadamer's philosophy that biases and prejudices, or tradition, provide the initial stance for any understanding of history and historical objects, including music. Ferarra summarizes one of Gadamer's points that, "Man doesn't posess understanding. Understanding is a fundamental way in which man engages and exists in the world...without prejudice, experiences would be incoherent and buoyless." He asserts that a person can only understand something from the viewpoint of his own time, location, and culture. He observes that the time and place in which an analyses is done impacts what the work can mean and states that the analyst must balance his own ontological world with that of the artist's. This doesn't restore the old world. Instead, it synthesizes the original meaning with what the work can mean now.
The eclectic analysis requires the listener to hear music as an aesthetic object rather than an art object. Ferarra discusses this idea in conjunction with the philosophy that an abject becomes an aesthetic object when an aesthetic attitude is directed toward it. He gives the example of a millionaire viewing a Rembrandt as a beautiful painting (aesthetic attitude) as opposed to viewing it as a financial investment. He then presents the two phenomenologies used in the eclectic analysis. Husserl's descriptive phenomenology (known in the book as "phenomenology") is based on the image of a monadic, private consciousness that is cut off from the world. Heideggar's interpretive phenomenology (or "hermeneutic") attempts to uncover referential meaning in the work. Gadamer believes that phenomenological and hermeneutic analysis can reverse the subject-object relationship because the music become the subject and poses questions to the analyst, who becomes the object and responds to the work.
Ferarra concludes that "to be objective is to save the object from dominance." Traditional methods don't do this becuase they are a vehicle for the subject's dominance. Real objectivity is not possible because of the nature of the data that conventional systems seek. Conventional analysis is therefore necessarily subjective. He states that the most attainable degree of objectivity "occurs when analytical tasks support freedom of music to show itself multi-dimensionally."
Reaction:
My favorite concept in this chapter is that "Man doesn't posses understanding. Understanding is a fundamental way in which man engages and exists in the world." I spent a while thinking about that and interpreted it to essentially mean that understanding is just one of the tools we can use as humans to interact with the world around us. Other tools could include just noticing the world around us, or using materials from the world. It's a very organic concept, and I think that even contemplating it takes a person a lot closer to understanding many things about the world. It in effect brings a person into the world which they are trying to understand, whereas the traditional view that humans posses understanding closes man off from the world. Rather than man using understanding as a knife to cut the world open, this concept suggests that understanding is more of a game the world and man plays together. When we search for it in the correct ways, the world reveals itself to us.
Ferrara states, "Conventional methods of music analysis define their own tasks and scope of inquiry largely based on the evolution of inherent strengths and weaknesses of each method." For this reason, methods always yield success. A different way to evaluate the adequacy of a method is to examine its responsiveness to musical sound-in-time, form and relevance. Ferrara maintains that the dynamic interplay of a work's multiple levels of significance should demarcate the scope and define the nature of the tasks required of the method. For this reason, an eclectic method, where the strengths of each method are used, is needed.
Ferrara notes that "all analyses are marked by structures of pre-understanding," which means that pure listening and pure understanding is impossible. He then discusses Hans-Georg Gadamer's philosophy that biases and prejudices, or tradition, provide the initial stance for any understanding of history and historical objects, including music. Ferarra summarizes one of Gadamer's points that, "Man doesn't posess understanding. Understanding is a fundamental way in which man engages and exists in the world...without prejudice, experiences would be incoherent and buoyless." He asserts that a person can only understand something from the viewpoint of his own time, location, and culture. He observes that the time and place in which an analyses is done impacts what the work can mean and states that the analyst must balance his own ontological world with that of the artist's. This doesn't restore the old world. Instead, it synthesizes the original meaning with what the work can mean now.
The eclectic analysis requires the listener to hear music as an aesthetic object rather than an art object. Ferarra discusses this idea in conjunction with the philosophy that an abject becomes an aesthetic object when an aesthetic attitude is directed toward it. He gives the example of a millionaire viewing a Rembrandt as a beautiful painting (aesthetic attitude) as opposed to viewing it as a financial investment. He then presents the two phenomenologies used in the eclectic analysis. Husserl's descriptive phenomenology (known in the book as "phenomenology") is based on the image of a monadic, private consciousness that is cut off from the world. Heideggar's interpretive phenomenology (or "hermeneutic") attempts to uncover referential meaning in the work. Gadamer believes that phenomenological and hermeneutic analysis can reverse the subject-object relationship because the music become the subject and poses questions to the analyst, who becomes the object and responds to the work.
Ferarra concludes that "to be objective is to save the object from dominance." Traditional methods don't do this becuase they are a vehicle for the subject's dominance. Real objectivity is not possible because of the nature of the data that conventional systems seek. Conventional analysis is therefore necessarily subjective. He states that the most attainable degree of objectivity "occurs when analytical tasks support freedom of music to show itself multi-dimensionally."
Reaction:
My favorite concept in this chapter is that "Man doesn't posses understanding. Understanding is a fundamental way in which man engages and exists in the world." I spent a while thinking about that and interpreted it to essentially mean that understanding is just one of the tools we can use as humans to interact with the world around us. Other tools could include just noticing the world around us, or using materials from the world. It's a very organic concept, and I think that even contemplating it takes a person a lot closer to understanding many things about the world. It in effect brings a person into the world which they are trying to understand, whereas the traditional view that humans posses understanding closes man off from the world. Rather than man using understanding as a knife to cut the world open, this concept suggests that understanding is more of a game the world and man plays together. When we search for it in the correct ways, the world reveals itself to us.
Referential Meaning in Music (Ferrara, Ch. 1)
Summary:
In this chapter, Ferrara adresses the question, "What does music mean?" He identifies two approaches to this question. The first approach is limited to musical syntax, and the second engages referential meaning. The second approach, therefore, changes the question from what does music mean to what can music mean.
The formalist approach as presented by Hanslick and Gurney defines music as temporally organized pattern and structure of sound. This applies to "absolute music," or music in abstract forms such as the sonata, not program music. They claim that this kind of music is "devoid of referential and emotive meaning." Therefore, with this view, emotional responses and extrinsic meaning can't be objectively analyzed. Extended formalists, such as Leonard Meyer, believe that emotional responses to music are grounded in syntax. In this view, absolute meaning can be discerned by analyzing the syntax, but referential meaning is grounded in the extramusical and therefore still can't be objectively analyzed. Absolute Expressionists believe that emotions produced from music are the result of intrinsic syntactical aspects of the music. John Dewey's Theory of Emotion states that emotion is aroused when the tendency to respond is arrested or inhibited. Building on this theory, Meyer contends that the tension and release or expectations of chordal or melodic progressions in music triggers emotion. He goes on to conclude that musical meaning is a product of intrinsic references which result in expectations.
The main argument supporting syntactical analysis is that it is objective and verifiable whereas referential symbolic analysis is subjective and is not verifiable because there is no method, which in theory could lead to chaos. As Ferrara states, however, the problem is that "the implicit goal of scientific methods is technical control over nature." This produces a human bias, which proves that objectivity in the sense that the researcher is detached, value-free, and neutral is a myth.
A supporter of referential analysis, Susan K. Langer states that "man's evolutionary achievement is transforming experience to language." In her book Philosophy in a New Key, Langer asserts that music is a symbol system with its own principles and inherent rules that has its rationalty that can't be fully understood or evaluated based on rules of ordinary language. According to Langer, music is a non-discursive language, or a language based on logic and intuition, as opposed to discursive languages, such as spoken languages, which move from premises to conclusion in logical steps. She states that music doesn't represent actual feeling, but rather the composer's knowledge of form and concept of feeling, and that music is a metaphorical image of life. Wilson Coker states that referential meaning emerges when the analyst responds to musical gestures and notes that music provides sign complexes that ordinary language can't signify. Put another way, Carrol C. Pratt said, "Music sounds the way emotions feel."
Peter Kivy attempts to reconcile the objectivity of formalism with the accountability of expression provided by referential approaches in The Corded Shell. He asserts that expressive qualities are genuine objective qualities of music and that there are objective criteria for applying expressive terms. First he states that there are 4 styles of critique in order of ascending respectability: biography, autobiography, emotive description, and objective scientific description of music. He then states that music cannot express but rather can be expressive of. The third criterion is that one recognizes emotions as features of music but does not necessarily feel them. He concludes that music criticism need not be inhuman to be respectable. Kivy goes further in his second book, positing that music is representational of a content that lies outside of syntax. He identifies 3 categories of musical representation: perceptual, structural, or expressive. He maintains that if music has a verbally expressive subject, it is representational.
Monroe Beardsley rebuts the argument for referential analysis of music on the grounds that no rules that govern musical reference or expressiveness had been provided. He emphasizes the fact that there is a difference between a work having qualities analogous to human qualities and stating that a work refers to those qualities and maintains that one must distinguish the idea of referring to emotion from possessing a quality that might be described metaphorically by an emotion word. Ferrara concludes, however, that "one's understanding of emotion in music is based to some extent on the concept of the nature of the emotion outside music. How else can someone experience and dexcribe this quality in music without referring to this extra-musical concept?"
Reaction:
Attempting to explain the relationship between human emotion and music is an extremely existential endeavor. At the heart of this issue are the questions what is emotion, and why and how do we feel emotions. As with anything existential, the deeper we probe into these questions, the closer we get to articulating an answer, but at what cost? As we delve deeper, the questions multiply, complicate, and confuse. The closer we get to knowing, the farther we get from understanding. For this reason, I think it is very important to keep Langer's idea that music is a non-discursive language based on intuition in mind. I believe that the most fruitful theory on this topic would be a combination of Langer's view, Meyer's position that musical reference is grounded in syntax, and Kivy's assertion that music criticism doesn't have to be inhuman to be respectable. Musical syntax is important to the language of music in the same rhetorical sense that syntax is important to discursive languages; and humans are the ones who create music as well as analyze and critique it, it should follow that there are human elements, such as reference to human emotion, in our analses and critiques. Honestly, I believe that formalists who deny that the expressive and referential qualities of music are not in fact intrinsic properties of music itself are not being honest with themselves.
In this chapter, Ferrara adresses the question, "What does music mean?" He identifies two approaches to this question. The first approach is limited to musical syntax, and the second engages referential meaning. The second approach, therefore, changes the question from what does music mean to what can music mean.
The formalist approach as presented by Hanslick and Gurney defines music as temporally organized pattern and structure of sound. This applies to "absolute music," or music in abstract forms such as the sonata, not program music. They claim that this kind of music is "devoid of referential and emotive meaning." Therefore, with this view, emotional responses and extrinsic meaning can't be objectively analyzed. Extended formalists, such as Leonard Meyer, believe that emotional responses to music are grounded in syntax. In this view, absolute meaning can be discerned by analyzing the syntax, but referential meaning is grounded in the extramusical and therefore still can't be objectively analyzed. Absolute Expressionists believe that emotions produced from music are the result of intrinsic syntactical aspects of the music. John Dewey's Theory of Emotion states that emotion is aroused when the tendency to respond is arrested or inhibited. Building on this theory, Meyer contends that the tension and release or expectations of chordal or melodic progressions in music triggers emotion. He goes on to conclude that musical meaning is a product of intrinsic references which result in expectations.
The main argument supporting syntactical analysis is that it is objective and verifiable whereas referential symbolic analysis is subjective and is not verifiable because there is no method, which in theory could lead to chaos. As Ferrara states, however, the problem is that "the implicit goal of scientific methods is technical control over nature." This produces a human bias, which proves that objectivity in the sense that the researcher is detached, value-free, and neutral is a myth.
A supporter of referential analysis, Susan K. Langer states that "man's evolutionary achievement is transforming experience to language." In her book Philosophy in a New Key, Langer asserts that music is a symbol system with its own principles and inherent rules that has its rationalty that can't be fully understood or evaluated based on rules of ordinary language. According to Langer, music is a non-discursive language, or a language based on logic and intuition, as opposed to discursive languages, such as spoken languages, which move from premises to conclusion in logical steps. She states that music doesn't represent actual feeling, but rather the composer's knowledge of form and concept of feeling, and that music is a metaphorical image of life. Wilson Coker states that referential meaning emerges when the analyst responds to musical gestures and notes that music provides sign complexes that ordinary language can't signify. Put another way, Carrol C. Pratt said, "Music sounds the way emotions feel."
Peter Kivy attempts to reconcile the objectivity of formalism with the accountability of expression provided by referential approaches in The Corded Shell. He asserts that expressive qualities are genuine objective qualities of music and that there are objective criteria for applying expressive terms. First he states that there are 4 styles of critique in order of ascending respectability: biography, autobiography, emotive description, and objective scientific description of music. He then states that music cannot express but rather can be expressive of. The third criterion is that one recognizes emotions as features of music but does not necessarily feel them. He concludes that music criticism need not be inhuman to be respectable. Kivy goes further in his second book, positing that music is representational of a content that lies outside of syntax. He identifies 3 categories of musical representation: perceptual, structural, or expressive. He maintains that if music has a verbally expressive subject, it is representational.
Monroe Beardsley rebuts the argument for referential analysis of music on the grounds that no rules that govern musical reference or expressiveness had been provided. He emphasizes the fact that there is a difference between a work having qualities analogous to human qualities and stating that a work refers to those qualities and maintains that one must distinguish the idea of referring to emotion from possessing a quality that might be described metaphorically by an emotion word. Ferrara concludes, however, that "one's understanding of emotion in music is based to some extent on the concept of the nature of the emotion outside music. How else can someone experience and dexcribe this quality in music without referring to this extra-musical concept?"
Reaction:
Attempting to explain the relationship between human emotion and music is an extremely existential endeavor. At the heart of this issue are the questions what is emotion, and why and how do we feel emotions. As with anything existential, the deeper we probe into these questions, the closer we get to articulating an answer, but at what cost? As we delve deeper, the questions multiply, complicate, and confuse. The closer we get to knowing, the farther we get from understanding. For this reason, I think it is very important to keep Langer's idea that music is a non-discursive language based on intuition in mind. I believe that the most fruitful theory on this topic would be a combination of Langer's view, Meyer's position that musical reference is grounded in syntax, and Kivy's assertion that music criticism doesn't have to be inhuman to be respectable. Musical syntax is important to the language of music in the same rhetorical sense that syntax is important to discursive languages; and humans are the ones who create music as well as analyze and critique it, it should follow that there are human elements, such as reference to human emotion, in our analses and critiques. Honestly, I believe that formalists who deny that the expressive and referential qualities of music are not in fact intrinsic properties of music itself are not being honest with themselves.
Philosophy and the Analysis of Music by Lawrence Ferrara
Summary:
In the introduction to his book,
-Significance in music includes but goes beyond form or syntax
-What caused the work to be made need not bear upon its significance
-Psychological consequences in musical experience do not necessarily bear upon musical significance
-Music understood as pleasure is a secondary issue. What is of import is that music can be expressive of the most powerful human concerts and can exemplify those concerns in ways which ordinary language cannot.
Reflection:
I am really interested in
Along this same vein, I found the section where
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)