The next part of my 25 RECORDS OF THE YEAR will appear soon; here's a distraction:
Trickling
Music
It’s probable that innovations in
the musical avant-garde ‘trickle down’ into more popular forms.
This notion appears to provide an
easy justification for the often technocratic and rarefied explorations of
‘difficult’ composers and sound artists.
“They
make waves, and slowly inspire more popular artists that actually have a direct
impact on mass sonic culture”.
In a real avant-garde, activities
are (ideally) unfettered by the need
to function and can be truly autonomous, allowing the sort of genuinely innovative
developments that would otherwise be filtered out. These innovations don’t just
stay floating around in the world of musical academia however; there exists a
sort of musical hierarchy of mass appeal, through which ideas can be passed.
The need to see these avant-garde
experiments as having a real ‘impact’ or ‘effect’ completely undermines the
very notion of a rarefied culture of innovation that isn’t smothered by the
crippling demands of utility. In
seeking justification for avant-garde art, we succumb to an implicit capitalist
ideology, wherein nothing has inherent value beyond its power to generate
further value (defined abstractly).
We shouldn’t view this web of
inspiration as a justification of the initial act, but as an inevitable process
of cultural digestion.
Do avant-garde artists feel
vindicated by their displaced notoriety? What happens to these ideas once they
are adopted in other forms? Are they bastardised or simply utilised? If we
layer a William Basinski loop over a drum-track, is it even the same thing at
all? What’s carried over into the new form, if anything?
I have a feeling that, in the main,
avant-garde composers are imbuing their work with a fair amount of conceptual
content that cannot possibly be carried, in
toto, into other forms.
But, this amounts to saying that
two pieces of art are different, having different inceptions and different
meanings. A Cageian would say that two different performances of Beethoven’s 9th
have two different meanings and effectively constitute two different artworks.
When sonic tropes from
the underground (e.g. early dubstep) are imported into other cultures (e.g.
brostep), we are simply witnessing different attempts to realise the objective potential
of aural materials.
We must be careful in conflating the
morphological similarity of sounds with an ideological or functional proximity.
No comments:
Post a Comment