Popular vs. Classical Music : A Matter of Criteria

Originally written as a reflection on Start Making Sense! Musicology Wrestles with Rock by Dr. Susan McClary and Robert Walser.

 In this particular article, taken from a compilation of essays on popular music titled On Record: Rock, Pop, and the Written Word, the authors discuss the difficulties musicologists face when wishing to devote their time and energy to the analysis and interpretation of popular music, from rock to heavy metal to the blues.  Popular music is very often at a disadvantage due to the fact that it is traditionally seen as the enemy of classical music.  Musicologists who have a genuine interest and appreciation for rock and pop music typically are presented with a unique dilemma in that, since analysis of popular music according to the typical criteria used in classical music is typically far less insightful, they have to look at the music from a different perspective, drawing up their own criteria. the understanding in traditional musicology of the superiority of Beethoven, Strauss, Mozart, Bach, etc. to popular music has largely been due to the attempts to judge popular music according to the rules and practices of classical music.  For example, classical music is typically analyzed according to tools such as pitch centers, a method which falls flat when applied to most popular music. This is decidedly unfair, calling to mind a quote from Albert Einstein which reads, “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” Similarly, if musicologists judge popular music according to its exploration of pitch centers and tonal goals, it’s going to be found wanting. Furthermore, an analysis according to pitch centers is only one way to discuss the content and the value of music.  Popular musical styles can be just as meaningful and complex as Beethoven, Strauss, and Stravinsky, but in different ways.  Musicologists cannot deny the attraction and the emotional impact that this music is able to evoke, whether it is Frank Sinatra, Michael Jackson, the Beatles, Coldplay, or heavy metal.

Down the Abbey Road, The Beatles

McClary and Walser say that this is one of the central aspects of popular music : its ability to move the passions in ways that cannot entirely be explained or controlled, a source of frustration and perhaps even fear for musicologists.  However, just because they are afraid of what they don’t understand doesn’t mean they should avoid engaging it or discussing it.  I find it intriguing that, while both classical music and popular music have the power to illicit an emotional response from its listeners, these emotional responses can come in a variety of forms.  Pianist James Rhodes said that he was emotionally knocked to the floor when he first heard Beethoven’s Emperor Concerto at age seven; the second movement was the first piece of classical music that caused him to weep at its beauty. Then we have historical documents of more violent emotional responses: the premiere of Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring elicited such a violent emotional response that it caused riots in the theater.  Similar violent responses also occur in popular music : moshing has become a common response to live performances of hardcore punk and most styles of metal.

Apollo Belvedere/Pythian Apollo

It is obvious that music has this ability to create this emotional response, but are all emotional responses equal? Are all styles of music equal?  If we cannot judge them according to the traditional criteria used in discussing classical music, then what criteria should we use?  To answer this question, I think one must return to the musical discussions of the Greeks.  In his writings, Plato categorizes music according to two genres which he names Dionysian and Apollonian.  Apollo was typically identified as the god of truth and knowledge, whereas Dionysus was the god of wine, ecstasy, and merry making. Plato describes Dionysian music as a style in which reason is forsaken in a type of emotional intoxication. It advocates a type of anarchy, almost animalistic in its reckless abandonment of the intellect for the sake of revelry in one’s own passions. By contrast, reason remains primary in Apollonian music, ordering our emotional response towards a higher end.  This should not to be misinterpreted as a controlled environment in which emotional responses are allowed to occur. Rather, Apollonian music is a genre which engages man’s intellectual, sensual, and emotional faculties in their proper hierarchy. In the words of playwright Robert Bolt, “God made the angels to show Him splendor, as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But Man He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of his mind.” (Taken from Bolt's play A Man for All Seasons)

Paul Scofield as St. Thomas More, 1966.

It seems to me that, while all forms of music may have their time and place and are certainly worthy of study and appreciation on multiple levels, not all musical genres are created equal or have the same value.  The highest forms are those which engage the human person on rational, sensual, and emotional levels as these levels were intended.  In C.S. Lewis’ book The Abolition of Man, he describes the image of a man with three faculties : the chest, the stomach, and the head.  The chest represents the heart, the stomach the appetites, and the head the power of reason.  Man fully alive uses all three of these faculties together in their proper ordering.  He states that while it is a gross poverty to raise men “without chests,”  -- meaning they have been figuratively castrated of emotional responses -- it is equally wrong for them to allow their emotions or their passions to rule their actions.  He adds, “No emotion is, in itself, a judgement; in that sense all emotions and sentiments are alogical. But they can be reasonable or unreasonable as they conform to Reason or fail to conform. The heart never takes the place of the head: but it can, and should, obey it.”  Just as man fully alive is made possible through the integration of the head, the heart, and the appetites, so great art and great music is created through the integration of the rational, the sensual, and the spiritual.

The Calling of St. Matthew by Caravaggio

The Calling of St. Matthew, Caravaggio. 1599-1600.

This is one of my favorite pieces of art by the Italian Baroque painter, Caravaggio (1571-1610). It is from the Baroque period as part of the reaction in the Catholic culture to the Protestant Reformation. The painting depicts the scene from the Gospels where Our Lord sees the future St. Matthew with his fellow tax collectors and commands him, "Come, follow me." It is located in a beautiful side chapel in the church of St. Louis of France in Rome, alongside two other Caravaggio paintings from the life of St. Matthew. 

First, allow me tell you a little bit about the painter. Caravaggio was a rather controversial artist from Milan. He was born wealthy, but he was orphaned at the age of ten. Towards the end of the 1500s, he arrived in Rome as the typical starving artist; however, his painting The Calling of St. Matthew catapulted him into success. His style consisted of depicting the ignoble in art, making him a rather contentious figure. He had a violent temper, but he was also a follower of St. Philip Neri, a Catholic priest, a great preacher and a contemporary of his. St. Philip Neri had just founded his oratory, so it is possible that Caravaggio may have come to hear him preach.

Caravaggio introduced into his paintings the use of heavy contrast between light and dark to enhance the drama of the painting! While he was working, he would set up lanterns as spot-lights on his work to help exaggerate the shadows and the light in his paintings. This technique may be contrasted with the style of Michelangelo's use of light and shadows, which is not as intense. The use of light and shadow is a useful tool to help date pre-- and post-- Caravaggio artists. The style of Caravaggio is also in the same spirit of the Italian artist Giotto, who painted the beautiful frescos of the life of St. Francis for the Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi. Giotto used modeling and gestures to help tell the story of the painting.

Now, to discuss the painting itself. If you looks closely, the light is not coming from the window -- in short, it is not from the natural world! The hand of Christ is modeled after the hand of Michelangelo's The Creation of Man, one of the most famous frescoes adorning the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Which hand Caravaggio is imitating (God the Father's or Adam's) is debatable. St. Peter is in front of Christ, and is portrayed often in Baroque religious art because this art is proclaiming the primacy of Peter and Catholicism as the true faith.  

Another intriguing element of the painting is the mode of dress of the two parties.  Christ and St. Peter are clad in their traditional garb, while Matthew and his fellow tax collectors are wearing the garb of the day, thus relating the viewer to the scene in the painting. One tax collector is using his fingers to stack the coins, while another is adjusting his spectacles. Each has a different reaction  to Christ. Matthew has heard and is pointing to himself as if to say, "Me, Lord?" The light is cast on his face, drawing the viewer's eye to him as the focal point. The two figures on the left are unaware of Christ's call. As for the two figures on the right: one is unsure and is ready to draw his sword. The other, looking askance, appears curious and casual as he leans on St. Matthew. One gets the impression that he may do whatever Matthew does. Caravaggio brings you into the scene, and forces us to ask the questions, "To what is Jesus calling me, and what is my response?"

I think part of the reason why this painting is so meaningful to me is because of the different reactions of the men in the scene.  It reminds me of the line from the poem "Aurora Leigh" by Elizabeth Barrett Browning (1806-1861):

"Earth's crammed with heaven,

And every common bush afire with God;

But only he who sees, takes off his shoes,

The rest sit round it and pluck blackberries..."

St. Matthew was not only willing to see in this scene, but he was also given the grace to see. The other tax collectors are partially or completely oblivious to the call of Christ. St. Matthew has seen and is about to take off his shoes. The beauty of God is all around us : in nature, the people we meet, beautiful artwork and music.  It is up to us to awaken ourselves to His presence. To paraphrase G.K. Chesterton, The world will never suffer for lack of wonders, but for lack of wonder!

Reading With a Critical Eye: Manipulation of History and What's Trending

This was originally written as a reflection for my 20th C. Music class on Howard Zinn’s Declarations of Independence: Cross-Examining American Ideology, Chapter IV : The Use and Abuse of History. I expanded and modified it a little.

 In Chapter 4 of his book Declarations if Independence, Howard Zinn claims that it is impossible to write an unbiased account of historical persons and events due to the unconscious influences of preexisting goals, purposes, agendas, and beliefs. This lack of historical objectivity does not occur through deliberate lying but through occurs the omission or de-emphasis of significant data.  Zinn uses several examples from American history to demonstrate his point, including the omission of the Ludlow Massacre from most American history textbooks.  The Ludlow Massacre was the tragic climax of the Colorado coal strike of 1913-1914 against the Rockefeller-owned Colorado Fuel and Iron Company.  The massacre -- a fourteen hour face off between a tent colony of coal miners and their families vs. the state malitia during which the colony was pelted with machine gun fire and eventually torched -- resulted in the suffocation of two women and eleven children.

Ludlow Monument erected by UMWA.

Zinn also cites the one-sided historical account of Christopher Columbus told in most American education systems.  This account typically omits that the discoverer was also responsible for the mutilation, enslavement, and murder of the Indians on a genocide scale.  One is reminded of the line from the song "Wonderful" sung by the Wizard of Oz in the Broadway musical Wicked :

"Is one a crusader or ruthless invader? It's all in which label is able to persist! ... There are precious few at ease with moral ambiguities, so we act as though they don't exist!"

Zinn believes that these omissions are due to their in-congruence with the image of America that education systems wish to portray to its citizens: a government by the people for the people, a land of equal opportunity for the common man, where its leaders and founders are models to be emulated for their justice and encourage.

Similarly biased depictions are also found in the portrayal of the history of Western Music.  During the Romantic period, various strains of nationalism were appearing all over Europe. In Beethoven's day, this nationalism was part of an attempt to unite the German-speaking nations against the Napoleonic Empire.  During and after Beethoven's life, this German nationalist trend  led to the promotion of his music as well as the music of his German predecessors and successors as the model of Western music.  The focus of the average classical music education on the music of Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, and Wagner is in part due to the work of German music historians of the Romantic period who wished to create a context for the development of German music and the emergence of Beethoven.  This trend has and continues to be passed on to future classical musicians in many universities and conservatories, although it may not be consciously done.  While the music of these composers is indeed worthy of study, it is necessary to remember that the belief that their music is "the best" is due to this German nationalist trend, and must therefore be taken with a grain of salt.

Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827)


 A more important lesson to take away from these examples is the need to receive historical data with a critical eye. Just as German nationalism influenced the reception and promotion of Beethoven during the Romantic Period, one should be suspicious of modern trends that influence current perspectives on the composers of the past.  For example, it seems to be an amusing past-time for musicologists and historians to create caricatures of men such as Beethoven and Schubert by pushing our current sexual-cultural fixations upon them.  For example, it has been proposed that the ringing in Beethoven’s ears, known as tinnitus, was caused by syphilis. However, tinnitus is also a symptom of typhus and auto-immune disorders.  Another example : it has also been proposed by certain musicologists that there are homosexual undercurrents in Schubert's 'Unfinished' Ninth Symphony. Schubert's Unfinished Symphony is an example of absolute music -- music that is not based on or inspired by an outside source, story, poem, or theme (as opposed to Mendelssohn's Scottish Symphony, which is based on Mendelssohn's travels to Scotland and is an example of the opposite genre known as programmatic music). Because there is no preexisting theme, it is relatively easy for writers, musicologists, musicians, and even political groups to read too much into a piece of absolute music and interpret it to promote their own ends, even if they are interpreted in contradictory ways!  For example, both Nazis and socialists adopted Beethoven's Ninth Symphony and interpreted it to suit their own agendas. However, in the words of a a friend and mentor, "Such allegations tend to be more revealing of the author than about the subject at hand!"

That being said, it is quite possible that Beethoven may have had syphilis.  It was a common illness in the 19th c. due to the rather loose morals of the era.  It is also possible that Schubert was a suppressed homosexual who gave vent to his sexual orientation through an unfinished symphony.  If these allegations are true, they should not be blotted out from our knowledge of these men as they further inform us of the personality, character, and historical context of these composers.  However, it is misleading to push such allegations onto their characters when we advertise them as true when -- in actuality -- we lack significant facts or data to verify such an allegation!  Likewise, it is equally wrong to omit the faults and failings of businesses, persons, and nations in order to promote a specific agenda. The Ludlow Massacre and the life of Christopher Columbus are prime examples of the deliberate skewing of American history so as to to paint its leading figures and corporations in a positive light.  If Beethoven had syphilis or Schubert same-sex attraction, then it would be wrong to try to hide it. But we don't know that for certain, and emphasizing/advertising these allegations as fact seems more of a projection of our trendy sexual-objectification/hookup culture onto our heroes of Western Music than a search for the truth! It may not be possible to teach history from an objective point of view, but this is no excuse for dishonesty through partial truths, ignoring facts, or disregarding a lack of sufficient data.

The Whole Truth

 

This post is partially inspired by the below quote from Venerable Fulton Sheen and also by the article Why I Am Not A Heterosexual from Bad Catholic blogger Marc Barnes. I have been mulling over this issue has been in my mind for several months now, so I wager it's a good topic with which to resume blogging.

Venerable Fulton Sheen

 "There are two extremes to be avoided in discussing married love: one is the refusal to recognize sexual love, the other is the giving of primacy to sexual attraction. The first error was Victorian; the second is Freudian. To the Christian, sex is inseparable from the person, and to reduce the person to sex is as silly as to reduce personality to lungs or a thorax. Certain Victorians in their education practically denied sex as a function of personality; certain sexophiles of modern times deny personality and make a god of sex."

-- Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, Three to Get Married.

 If there's one thing I've learned over the past few months, it's the complicated matter of the reduction of a person to his or her sexual orientation.  This is not necessarily done on purpose.  It can be as simple as asking if your classmate or your favorite actor, writer, you-name-it person is gay or straight. But in the broader spectrum of the sexual revolution, I think we have been deceived.  By doing this, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that we're speaking about a person. When we're determining whether the person is gay or straight, homosexual or heterosexual, we are talking about ONE of the many aspects that make up a person: their sexual orientation. Granted, a person's sexual orientation plays an important role in influencing their personality in a variety of ways, but it's important to keep in mind that, "to reduce the person to [their sexual orientation] is as silly as to reduce personality to lungs or a thorax." This reduction operates under the same principle of pornography -- reducing a person to their sexual attributes. A person is far more complex than that!  Blessed John Paul II warns against this reduction in his book Love and Responsibility:

"Moreover, the sexual urge in man and woman is not fully defined as an orientation towards the psychological and physiological attributes of the other sex as such. These do not and cannot exist in the abstract, but only in a concrete human being, a concrete man or woman. Inevitably, then, the sexual urge in a human being is always in the natural course of things directed towards another human being–this is the normal form it takes. If it is directed towards the sexual attributes as such this must be recognized as an impoverishment or even a perversion of the urge."

To paraphrase Marc Barnes, labeling someone (or one's self) as gay, straight, homosexual, heterosexual can lead to diminishing the person to a particular type of sexuality relating to a particular "type" of object, when sexual attraction is meant to be oriented towards a PERSON, a unique him or her. A person communicates and is understood through their body, but this body also has an immortal soul. He/she has their own thoughts, beliefs, emotions, memories, experiences, skills, and talents. Regardless of one's beliefs, our understanding of sexuality must be rooted in the whole truth of the person, otherwise we do them and ourselves a great disservice.

The Hay Maker by W. A. Bouguereau

Hello, readers! I'm back! I did not abandon my blog for good! The past semester proved to be exceptionally difficult, between theory and music history classes, DMA applications, and recitals. But now the madness has temporarily subsided, I'm hoping to get a little blogging done in between preparing for DMA entrance exams, auditions, and learning the rest of my recital repertoire... hehehe... like all that's going to happen in one month... But at least I can try!

In the mean time, guess what I found? The Hay Maker by W. A. Bouguereau!  I saw this painting for the first time as a sophomore during a trip to the art museum in Pittsburgh and it has stayed with me ever since!She reminds me a little of Danielle from the film Ever After, somewhat in her looks but more so in her personality! I think her expression is fascinatingly complex as though she has an interesting story to tell!

The Hay Maker 1869, W. A. Bouguereau (1825-1905)

Breton Brother & Sister by W.A. Bouguereau

Detail of "Breton Brother & Sister" 1871 by William Adolphe Bouguereau

Understanding Brideshead Revisited

A friend of mine recently asked her contacts on facebook for a few recommendations of books to read over summer break. I recommended to her one of the best books I have read over the past year, British author Evelyn Waugh's novel Brideshead Revisited. Her boyfriend (a philosophy major) responded that, while he had also read this novel, its meaning had escaped him. I sympathized, as I did not really begin to understand it until the very end.


~SPOILERS~

 When I had picked up the book, I had been told it was the most Catholic novel of the 20th century. However, I had a difficult time understanding. Many of the characters are Catholic, but they are hardly models of holiness. None of them are excellent examples of their religion. Some are fallen away Catholics living as self professed semi-heathens, others are law-abiding albeit seemingly heartless, while others are perhaps overly compassionate, lacking integration of the intellect and will.

Diana Quick as Julia Flyte, Jeremy Irons as Charles Ryder

So what is the reader to make of all of this? It does not fully come clear until the end of the book, which contains the final conflicts. The first conflict: Julia Flyte and Charles Ryder are having an affair with the intent of eventually marrying once both have settled their divorces with their former partners. Julia is somewhat torn about the marriage due to her Catholic faith. Although she was able to boldly cast her beliefs aside when she married Rex Mortram, she has never been fully able to leave them behind. Guilt and regret continue to gnaw at the back of her mind, resulting in bouts of temper. For almost the entire novel she has been torn in two pieces: her knowledge of the faith and its teachings, and her ambition when she married Rex, which has given way to her love for Charles. She is trapped in the middle, uncertain of what she truly believes. This first conflict is tied up with the second.

The second conflict comes about through the failing health of Lord Marchmain, who has come to Brideshead to die. Lord Marchmain became Catholic when he married Julia's mother, but abandoned the faith when he left her to live abroad with his mistress. Lord Marchmain is slowly slipping away, but he is afraid of death, clinging on to life with an unspoken terror. Meanwhile the members of the family (Julia, Cordelia, Bridey -- his children) debate with Charles over whether or not they ought to send for a priest so that Lord Marchmain might receive the sacrament of last rites. If a priest is sent for, on the one hand, they fear it may frighten Lord Marchmain and worsen his condition; on the other hand, it may bring him considerable peace of mind, thus easing his passing. The problem is that since Lord Marchmain is largely unconscious, it is uncertain whether he desires reconciliation with the church. Charles doesn't want the man tricked into anything he wouldn't desire were he in his right mind. This debate is a source of tension between Charles and Julia, for there is more at stake here than what is readily apparent. It's really about whether or not Catholicism is true. If it isn't true, than sending for a priest and receiving the last rites is stupid, futile, pointless. If it is true, then Charles and Julia's future together is jeopardized. By acknowledging the truth of the faith in the situation of her father, Julia must confront the truth about her relationship with Charles. She must acknowledge the sinfulness of entering into a marriage with Charles, in spite of their love for each other.

The conflict within Julia, her desire to be faithful to her religion and her longing to be united with Charles, are similar to the conflict that occurs within each human person. Every person has a desire for the true, the good, and the beautiful, but he is divided against himself through concupiscence. He deceives himself into the desire for lesser goods, or is blinded by his passions, by avarice, pride, and selfishness. Yet, the beauty of this novel lies in the truth it displays about Catholicism. No matter how far one strays from the Catholic faith, the Mother Church is always waiting to welcome back her children. The Church hates the sin, not the sinner. Like the parable of the prodigal son, he is always welcome home regardless of how far he has strayed. This imagery can also be seen in the house after which the novel is named: Brideshead, home of Julia, Sebastian, Cordelia, and Lady Marchmain. Although the characters come and go, although they may stay away for years, they always return to Brideshead.

 There is a wonderful quote near the end of the story that beautifully sums up this theme:

“I've always been bad. Probably I shall be bad again, punished again. But the worse I am, the more I need God. I can't shut myself out from His mercy. ... Or it may be a private bargain between me and God, that if I give up this one thing I want so much, however bad I am, He won't quite despair of me in the end.”

I think that this quote is brilliant. It is difficult to not sound preachy when writing this kind of material. Yet Waugh pulls it off with honesty, authenticity, and elegance. 

This book is packed with themes about love, beauty, and the human soul, and there is so much more to uncover and discuss. However, I think this is one of the most significant points of the story: the lesson of sin and grace, the lesson of redemption.