As 2023 is now in full swing I thought I would take the opportunity to look back on 2022 and reflect on what it has meant to me. The significant event of last year for me was me leaving a corporate job I was forced to take due to being made redundant during the pandemic. Whilst I did what I could to make the best of a bad situation the experience of working there was very negative. Firstly, because I felt I had been forced into taking the position merely out of economic necessity rather free choice. Secondly, the work itself was very tedious, mundane, and often could have been performed effectively by a twelve year old.
Underneath these feeling there was a further layer of resentment I felt because this situation had in part been caused the actions of the government making a vast swathe of activities illegal during the pandemic which meant my previous employer was unable to make any money. Further, once the furlough scheme was stopped (only to be hastily reinstated a few months later) loosing my job was inevitable. Also, if I had finally taken the leap and quit my job to focus on music full time this would have been equally disastrous. What happened to me and countless others is a example of the problems caused by the state managing society and the economy. For when a government expands to the point were it having to make decisions about what type of life is permitted under the guises of stopping the spread of one virus it is forced to decide whose livelihoods are to be permitted and whose are to be forbidden. In making such a decision it transgresses the bounds of just governance and condemns the victim of such measures to a life of servitude and handouts. Every administrative blunder and every bad decision suddenly does not merely affect the state apparatus itself but the lives of millions of people in drastic and irreversibly.
Further, such unjust interventions show the limitations of representational representative democracy. The emergency powers the government granted itself during the pandemic were as far as I am aware not ever allowed to be scrutinised by the general populace. Further the emergency measures were voted in at lightning speed so that even though they were to later reviewed and dismantled the damage had already been done. An emergency is always the harbinger of the erosion of liberty. Although, life has returned to more or less “normal” in the UK (which makes the lockdown restrictions seem ridiculous with hindsight) who knows when the emergency card will be played again. Although given the scandals surrounding the government breaking the very rules the enforced I don’t think they will be able to get away with the same lie again, they will have to invent some new pretext.
An alternative strategy to combat the virus, namely, shielding vulnerable people and allowing people to make up their own minds as to what to do was not considered for the simple reason that the government must been see to be doing something to justify its existence, no matter how stupid. As most other countries Europe were going into lockdown in harmony (intentionally or unintentionally) with the wishes Chinese Communist Party so the UK had to follow suit. The Corona virus fiasco is vivid demonstration of the problem with a paternalistic state which refuse to allow people to make their own decision about how to live their lives and instead resorts to the heavy-handed of law to enforce its wishes.
On a positive note, the pandemic showed me what was real in my life and what was fake. It showed me the importance of family, and taught me not to take what I have for granted. For the good things in life may be taken away from us at any moment,we must enjoy them whilst we have them. Further , the pandemic brought into to focus the triviality of the things I often worry about on a daily basis, such as: petty domestic disputes or whatever the latest piece of office drama is currently playing out in the trivial stage of nine to five. As someone who has been hospitalised due to respiratory issues there was a possibility I could have been made seriously ill by Covid-19. The thought of my own death brought home to me the transience of life. It is a truism that has been repeated to the point of cliché but it is worth restating: the present moment is all we have. In the present we can take action and change the course of the future, in the present we can examine ourselves and our desires honestly, and in the present we can find joy.
The pandemic took away much from me, my job, the hard won progress I had made in my music career, and my pride but through the stripping away of these external things I was brought closer, in spite of my unwillingness, to God. Catastrophe is not something to be glamorised or sought for its own sake. However, in spite of all the damage such events do to our lives, our banks accounts and our self esteem something of great value can be salvaged from the wreckage of our lives. The destruction of the cocoon that is our external identity allows the light of God to shine through.
I must temper with what I have said with a cautionary message: we speaking of the divine we must do so with humility and an awareness of our human frailty I meet many people who have been convinced they have a direct connection to God who have done terrible things to themselves and others. Whatever pronouncement us fallible human beings may make about God we must be vigilant that we do not turn him into a servant of our own culturally sanctioned whims and prejudices. All I can speak from is my own experience that has been had by many others throughout history but remains peculiarly my own for I can see through my personal set of cultural tropes and predilections. I say this not invalidate my spiritual experiences but rather to show we must handle such insights with care and humility.
There is a problem with looking back at the past and trying to make sense of it which is that our memory only presents us with an edited version of the past. There are many events, nuances, feeling and judgements that do not survive the caprices of memory. So when I look back on 2022 I am only looking back on what my memory has selected. The full reality of 2022 is inaccessible to me. From this realisation can come a certain sadness towards the inevitable process that is the passage of time, which erases so much and only leaves us with fragmentary remains in our memory. However, this inexorable process of forgetting is also a balm that can soothe the pain of the bad experiences of the past. Further, that even on a daily basis we must forget the miscellanea of the previous day when we sleep if we are to retain our sanity.
In closing, I have written this piece to see what I can learn from investigating the past, but ultimately but after every bad experience we must learn to also do the opposite; to look forward.
In this post I want to analyse some of the aesthetic and philosophical views expressed in Roger Scruton’s excellent book The Aesthetics of Music. There is much in his analysis I agree with but there a several claims he makes that I think are not justified, especially, his criticisms of popular music, and rock in particular that deserves closer scrutiny.
Here is a brief summary of Roger Scruton’s position with regards to the value of music: music is a morally important art form because those who listen to it enter a state of sympathy with the music. Music is at it’s best when in it is profound and original. There is no formula for how this is achieved but there are several qualities that many great works of music share, namely, an attempt to build on past achievements of the western musical tradition both through the use of tonality and a shifting rhythmic metre. Great pieces in the western classical tradition have all of these qualities.
Scruton thinks that rock music is essentially boiled down form of musical expression “The transition from the Viennese waltz, to ballroom dancing, to ragtime, to the Charleston and Tango, to swing, to rock, and to all the successors of rock, tells us much about the moral transformation of modernity 1 .” Scruton believes that is these transitions (or at least the final stages) represent a loosening and lowering of aesthetic and moral standards, with rock music representing a total degeneration. Scruton characterises it as “… the reduction of jazz and blues tradition to a set of repeatable melodic and harmonic formulae, held together by a continuous ‘beat’2.” The examples he points to in support this judgement are Loosing My Religion by REM and Dive by Nirvana.
He also refers to the genre of heavy metal, but no specific musical examples are offered for this genre; perhaps he feels none are needed. Whilst I think the judgements he makes are sound in relation to the particular musical examples he discusses his condemnation of entire genres based on a few examples is unfair. For there are many examples of rock music that are posses the valid musical harmony. For example, I’m Not In Love by 10cc.
Further, his criteria for what counts as good music are too narrow, music having a continuous beat does not exclude it from being a work of value. Many pieces of Irish folk music and jazz are accompanied by a continuous beat, presumably, he would endorse pieces as valid examples of musical expression? However, the fact that he uses scare quotes around the phrase “continuous beat” indicates perhaps that what beat there is in the music has no musical substance. Regardless, the mere labeling as certain formal qualities of music as aesthetically undesirable is intellectually lazy. Surely, what matters is not the presence or absence of a beat, but what is done with it? Take the Les McCann piece Burnin’ Coal or Kashmir by Led Zeppelin to take an example of from Scruton’s reviled genre of rock. Both pieces feature continuous beats but to dismiss their musical value for this reason is to ignore the interest they add the music. What is interesting is how these beats interact with the rest of the music at times joining in with the rhythm of the piece, at other times remaining independent of the other parts.
Further, what makes these beats exciting is just as much due to how the drummer plays the beat as opposed to what they play. Even the simplest and most rudimentary beat can in hands of great drummer become something exciting and musical. One of the problems with the method of musical analysis Scruton uses is that he focuses on for the majority of the book on what can be analysed through the study of a musical score. Using this method of study theoretical allows ideas concerning melody, harmony and rhythm to be explored in great depth. However, this method of analysis leaves out is what the performer can bring to the music and all the less tangible qualities of music such as the feel a player plays a piece with. Ignoring such harder to analyse elements does a great disservice to the richness of music.
In addition, it is how specific musical devices are used not just the mere presence or absence of them that makes a work of music good or bad. It is possible to conceive of a piece of music that contains an abundance of the “shifting accents” in the rhythm that Scruton cherishes that could be dull and tedious. On the other hand, the majority of Scruton’s analysis does rely on discussion specific musical examples of praiseworthy music so his position is protected from this objection. However, with the exception of the REM and Nirvana pieces I mentioned earlier discussion of musical value in relation to particular pieces remains heavily weighted towards works from the classical tradition. This unevenness makes the whole work somewhat biased. One my suspect that we are not reading about a philosophy of music but rather a philosophy of classical music.
In Scruton’s defense, perhaps he felt there were so many examples of bad pop/rock music in existence that he did not feel the need to waste space discussing a multitude of examples. On the other hand, what is true of rock music can also applied to classical music, for the examples he cites from the classical tradition as meritorious are the very best examples of the classical music tradition. Contrastingly, the examples he cites from rock are the very worst the genre has to offer, in other words, his comparison of genres is not fair, he is not comparing like with like.
Leaving our discussion of beat behind turn let us next to an aspect of music that Scruton does not discuss which is the role of composition and improvisation in music making. Typically in classical music the performance of a piece is comprised of the composers score being brought to life by a conductor and an ensemble. The conductor is able bring personal taste to how the piece is to realised by controlling the tempo and phrasing of the ensemble, however, the conductor in most cases is only ever operating within the parameters that are set by the score. Further, the players of piece are even more limited in terms of what they can bring to a performance as they are must be faithful to the score and the conductor’s wishes concerning how the piece is to be interpreted. The exception to these norms are smaller ensembles where there is often no conductor at all and the players can therefore enjoy more freedom or a soloist performing a concerto or some other piece for their instrument. The soloist enjoys the ability to shape the how the music is played more directly through their particular interpretation of a piece and in some cases is able to improvise.
Contrastingly, in the case of rock music improvisation is often a core element of all performances, some bands like Led Zeppelin making large part of their concerts semi-improvised or totally improvised. As usually each band member writes their own parts the band has a whole have a far more personal relationship to the music they perform than is typically the cases in classical music. In addition, each band member has more power to change the direction or interpretation of a performance. This allows the performer more freedom and the ability to make creative choices and take chances in the moment. Whilst in the case of classical music the player’s parts are predetermined as they are specified with the exactitude of a written score. I am not arguing that one approach is better or worse than the other, rather, I am making the point that Scruton’s analysis by ignoring these factors does a great disservice to rock music. In classical music the will of the composer is more dominantly and singularly expressed. In rock music typically all of the players take a more active role in shaping the music both in terms of composing and performance. What the greater presence of improvisation adds to rock music is the feeling that you may never see the same performance twice and that the uniqueness of each rendition of a song is therefore heightened.
In reply to what I have just said Scruton might say that none of this matters as the harmonic and melodic vocabulary of rock music is so impoverished that what improvisation that does occur can only happens within the confines of diminished musical landscape. Whilst this criticism of my argument is valid it is not universally applicable, as it only applies to the instances of rock music where a simple harmonic and melodic structure are employed, not all rock music has these characteristics. My feeling of the situation is what rock music may occasionally loose in harmony and melody it gains in rhythmic excitement. The use of percussion in classical music is often very rudimentary and acts as a mere embellishment of rhythms already being played by the rest of of the orchestra. By contrast in “popular” styles of music the drums are central part of the music.
Scruton’s criticism of rock music goes beyond that of the quality of the music itself. He thinks that inferior music also encourages inferior morals:
“Music is a companion, and an object of sympathy. It invites us into its orbit, so as to share in its manners and outlook , and to ‘join in’ a particular form of life. That description is of course metaphorical. But it is a natural record of something that we all know, and of which Plato had an inkling in his impetuous desire to ban from the ideal republic all but the sober and virtuous modes of music 3.” He elaborates this point later on: “If therefore, our response to absolute music is a kind of latent dancing , it is surely unproblematically true that taste in music matters, and that the search for objective musical values is one part of our search for the right way to live4.” Rock music is bad because of mores it encourages those who dance to it to engage in an immoral experience. “Then listen to a track by Nirvana, and imagine the mores of people who dance to that 5.”
The problem with this view is two-fold: firstly, who decides what is “sober and virtuous”? I cannot help but feel there is an element of snobbery hidden in such judgements, that Scruton may view himself superior to “people who dance to that”. Secondly, making the judgements of the music rest on some purpose whether that be idealogical, social or spiritual makes music something subservient to some other purpose. The problem with doing this if we are not careful whilst in this mode of thought we can loose sight of the purely musical aspects of music and instead become more interested in peripheral phenomena. To be fair, as Scruton rightly points out we can only experience music in some concrete social context or other but this does not help us understand music as music. Rather, it helps us understand how music is used rather than what it is. Of course, music originates in specific cultural context but this can change. Great parts of the classical cannon are probably more widely know for their use in advertisements than they as independent pieces of music.
In addition, if we for the sake of argument accept Scruton’s value judgements about rock music there is a logical problem with his analysis throughout The Aesthetics of Music he sets up false dichotomy that one can either enjoy the “noble” musical genres (classical, jazz and folk) or the moral deficient ones (rock, metal etc). Is not possible for one to enjoy both? Would the occasional indulgence in something less sophisticated be morally harmful? I am not certain what Scruton would say in response to such a question but surely the idea that only on group of genres can be appreciated by single person is a narrow approach to a more complex issue. In different moods a person might want to experience music of different types. For example, I might be in a certain mood and the idea of hearing music making that is of a less controlled nature (by the will of the composer and conductor) might feel liberating. Of course, this is possible without stepping outside of the genres Scruton sanctions, but I think my point still stands.
Does the type of music one enjoys define you as a person? Is it not more reasonable to suggest that the type of music one enjoys can be an expression of the mood or from of life a person has chosen to inhabit? Clearly, if someone exclusively listens to one genre or type of music this probably tells us something about them but what exactly it does is a more complicated question than Scruton believes. There are plenty of snobs who enjoy classical music, however, clearly listening to classical music does not make you a snob. Hitler and Stalin were both fans of classical music, the ennobling effects of the genre clearly did not work on them. Similarly, there are plenty of boring average people who are into heavy metal and every other conceivable kind of musical genre. What affect listening to a specific type of music can have on a person is far from obvious for the extent music has an effect on a person is in part due to how they participate in it and their attitudes to art and life in general.
For example, someone who does not take art or music very seriously will not be affected by music strongly in any way. Also, someone may engage with music a disinterested observer rather than an enthusiastic and active participant. To get to the heart of the matter let us discuss the ideal case of someone who is an enthusiastic participant and is fully taken by music both when listening at home and at a concert. In the same way the those who practice religion may not apply the practices and beliefs they are taught into their wider life so too a music lover may not take the spiritual experience of music into the rest of their life. Further, even if they do it is tricky sociological question to determine what aspect of their conduct has its genesis in the appreciation of music and what is simply the result of other influences. It a perpetual problem of all social science there are a plethora of variables that influence an individual that cannot be easily isolated.
One of the deficiencies of Scruton’s analysis of the moral effects of music is that he has provided no evidence that fans of Nirvana are morally deficient when compared to those of “virtuous” music. He merely assumes this a priori, this does not prove his judgements are false but rather that he has not provided sufficient evidence for them. Whether fans of some genre or other are better or worse people as result of their musical preferences is surely at least in part an empirical question.
I must now also challenge Scruton’s central idea that the moral influence of all rock music is negative, Scruton’s allegations as I have shown earlier is not take the whole of the genre into account but instead focus on a few cherry picked examples. In one part of The Aesthetics of Music Scruton mentions Schopenhauer’s philosophy of music but quickly dismisses it on technical grounds. Whilst his technical criticisms of his Schopenhauer are valid I feel there is more that can be learnt form Schopenhauer’s philosophy of music.. Schopenhauer’s philosophy of music is that music is a direct expression of undifferentiated The Will (or force) that underpins reality. Further, that whilst a subject is appreciating something beautiful the distinction between subject and object is reduced. When this happens the will (by which Schopenhauer means something like the ego) is silenced and the person caught up in the aesthetic experience is temporarily freed from its incessant demands.
Whatever the metaphysical problems are with this theory of the nature of music has it has the merit of drawing attention to the feeling of transcendence that is an essential to the experience of music. Applying this insight of Schopenhauer’s to Scruton’s theory it is clear that the spiritual aspect of the musical experience Scruton ignores. Further, that when considering the case of the merit of various musical genres we can in light of Schopenhauer’s insight approach the question from a different angle. If different types of music are able to help the listener achieve transcendence does the medium via which this achieved matter? I imagine Scruton would say this matters as the social and cultural context the music is a part of and occurs will still influence the moral outlook of the participants in the musical experience. I think that my earlier conjecture does not prove anything definitively but instead is a useful tool to caution us becoming too negative towards other types of music which we may not like by reminding us to someone else they may have value.
In conclusion, I think the Aesthetics of Music is wonderful and sophisticated analysis of the importance and meaning of music. In an era often characterised by an unthinking cultural relativism Scruton eloquently defends the validity of standards of taste and the importance of music to our moral character. However, his sweeping negative judgements of rock music are not supported with sufficient evidence and what examples he does provide are of very bad music which are not representative of an entire genre. The primary problem with his analysis is when he moves from very carefully justified arguments relating to concrete examples to very general judgements. Also, there is an element of snobbery in his blanket condemnation of large groups of people based on what type of music they enjoy. Such judgements are too easy and all-encompassing. Nonetheless, the criticisms I have voiced do not change my admiration for Scruton as a think nor the excellence of The Aesthetics of Music as a work of philosophy.
Recently I have been exploring the music of Kate Bush, specifically, her album The Hounds of Love. I have heard isolated songs by her in past on the radio and in other places but I have never taken the time to listen to a whole album by her. I really enjoyed the album’s quirkiness it is hard to imagine a collection of music containing tracks as strange as Jig Of Life being a commercial success today. Femininity is one of the key themes of the album whether it being persecuted (Waking The Witch) or longing for the masculine (Cloudbusting). Further, the cover of the album and many of the songs have a sensuous feel to them. Very little of the strong themes in the album are stated explicitly, rather, Bush hints at them through oblique lyrically references and strange allusions to such obscura as “Orgonon” and the shoes she is discarding in Hounds of Love. The strangeness of the lyrics throughout the album is matched by a bizarre and interesting blend of different musical styles. Music heavily based on samples (Waking The Witch, Running Up That Hill) is paired with Celtic music (Jig Of Live). The whole album is wonderfully idiosyncratic and at time surreal. The Hounds Of Love is one of my new favorites.
I have also been listening to the equally strange album by Genesis: Selling England By The Pound. Genesis are another band that I have never taken the time to listen to closely. My expectation before listening to the album was that the music would be quite soft, I was surprised to hear how brash the music is sections and in particular how aggressive and forward Phil Collin’s drumming is. I wonder if it is albums like this that were part of creating the sub-genre that is inelegantly labelled as “progressive rock”. All the tropes that people associate with such music are present here: long solos, extended song forms, unconventional instrumentation and lyrics that are concerned with intricate narratives and grand conceptual themes. Whilst many of these devices may seem cliché I think it is Genesis who invented some of these tropes in the first place so they should be spared this particular criticism. My favourite track is Dancing with the Moonlight Knight, there is an interesting mix of archaic and new. The unexpected tempo changes and transitions between sections adds a excitement to the music.
The Battle of Epping Forest is needlessly long, section on after section is visited on the listener without a strong musical logic backing the compositional choices. However, in retrospect the song is a interesting study how a reputation of an area can change over time. I lived near Epping Forest a few years ago, at that time it was definitely not the sort of area that could have been visited with gang land violence; I imagine it must have been rougher in the 70s. Similar to The Hounds of Love there is a charming quirkiness present in much of the music, this is especially in evidence on the track I Know What I Like (In your Wardrobe) the lyrics are very opaque and I cannot decide for myself what the song in about. For the surrealist elements in the song (the protagonist describing himself as a lawn mower and lingering in a wardrobe for unknown reasons) mask whatever the more direct meaning, if any, that the song is meant to contain. Further, the use of sitar throughout the song adds to the songs dream like and strange quality especially when paired with other more conventional instruments. It taps into a particular feeling of suburban weirdness where strange routines are coloured by memories of gossip and a detached obliviousness. There is certainly more to investigate here.
I have also been listening to some of Peter Gabriel’s solo work, namely, In Your Eyes and Don’t Give Up. In Your Eyes is something of musical oddity the light feel of the instrumental elements of the song are in a sort benign conflict with the sadness expressed in the lyrics. By contrast Don’t Give Up is far more straightforward for me, the power of the song comes from Kate Bush’s excellent singing and the strong contrast between her chorus and Gabriel’s verses. The message of the song: embracing hope in the face of darkness is eternally relevant.
I have also being listening Muse’s new album The Will of The People. From what I have seen from the music videos the concept of the album is an Orwellian dystopia (a topic Muse have used before) . What differentiates this from previous release is that in this case the band style themselves in the role of the dictatorial rulers whose monumental statues are depicted on the album cover and some of the music videos. Their are interesting metaphorical implications of this depiction that are worth exploring. Showing the members of Muse as part of once powerful but now failing regime could be an oblique commentary on their own career and anxiety that they are no longer as important as a band as they used, this could also be construed as a reference to the collapse in popularity of rock music in general. My favourite track in compliance (the first letters of all the song titles are inexplicably lower case) which has some cool interaction between the drums and the rest of the band. Great rhythm section playing on this track has been missing from some Muse’s recent output. Thematically, perhaps unintentionally, the lyrics chime with the endless bureaucracy, and restriction of freedoms we have had to endure during the pandemic. Further, in the video medication is presented as the solution to all problems, an idea we are all too familiar with.
Overall, The Will Of The People represents something of a return to form for Muse. However, there are some tracks that should have been left out: the title track is driven by a simplistic and boring melody. In a few places the influence of Queen in once again present especially inliberation, it feels like a rip-off. Also, on this track and throughout the album the drums a very compressed to the point that it becomes unmusical. Another track deserving of censure is the totally stupid we are f-cking f-cked and the equally idiotic you make me feel like it’s hawolleen. Some judicious editing could have really benefited this album, for if the weaker tracks are culled the album it would be a far stronger musical statement.
I you have any thoughts on what I should listen to next please leave a comment.
