[Botschaft]

If it ain’t brown, take it down!

 

[KenOC]

The whole idea is silly. It's like saying that Chinese opera is inherently racist.

 

[hammeredklavier]

It's like saying that Chinese opera is inherently racist.

I'm suddenly reminded of this:

 

[KenOC]

Nah that's what they now call "cultural appropriation." Evil stuff!

Recently there was a near riot on the subject at a US college, where the cafeteria was serving sushi. You can't make this stuff up.

 

[Phil Classical Purist]

I see the article in the OP as extreme Leftist propaganda. There is a reason it is called "Western" Classical. And the music since the Renaissance was technically more advanced than in other cultures.

 

[Guest]

I see the article in the OP as extreme Leftist propaganda. There is a reason it is called "Western" Classical. And the music since the Renaissance was technically more advanced than in other cultures.

And this label helps us...how? It's as useful a statement as decrying CM for being racist.

A mildly interesting article which has a fair point to make, but which sets out on the wrong foot, IMO, by failing to distinguish between CM and CM culture. But then, where would the polemic be, if it didn't make controversial statements? Describing their relationship with CM as like being in a relationship with an abuser - and the reference to Stockholm Syndrome - is a clear signal that they want to attract our attention, make us read about their experience of music. They are entitled to their view. The way to deal with it is not to dismiss it as "propaganda", but engage with it and offer evidence to counter it.

 

[millionrainbows]

Javanese gamelon music is inherently racist, because it is strictly melodic, has no harmony, and uses a different tuning.

 

[MatthewWeflen]

Saying the views of the piece's writer represent the political left is about as cogent and accurate as saying that David Duke's views represent the political right.

 

[1996D]

I was thinking about this more and it simply will never make sense, because to write any new music of meaning you have to listen and study to what was written before. That musical culture will then forever be the founding blocks of what will come in the future, just like the Greek and Roman cultures are the base of Western civilization.

It's really a silly article written by a very confused man, and it holds no value or is even worth discussing.

 

[DeepR]

Yep. Everybody has a voice thanks to the internet.....
Now, I hope that this "queer Lebanese composer" (quoted from his profile!) will be able to forgive me that I'm going to bask in the sun in all my whiteness while listening to some inherently racist music.

 

[vtpoet]

It was tempted to leave a comment at the original link, but the article is less about music than the author's own profound racism. His viewpoint is a prime example of what Jordan Peterson would call "Cultural Marxism". By this, Peterson refers to a tendency among the "Left", by individuals self identified as such, to fit subjects into the "Marxist", as Peterson calls it, narrative of the oppressor and oppressed. This is a bad faith and destructive narrative in that anyone who disagrees with this premise is, by definition, the oppressor. In that sense, and you can see it in the comment section of the linked article, anyone who defends classical music, or disagrees with the OP, must be white, a racist, and/or benefiting from classical music's oppression. The argument is dangerous and insidious in that it's effectively a totalitarian argument. The only acceptable outcome, as the author makes clear, is the death of classical music. It's a zero sum game. If you define yourself as the oppressed and a given art form as oppressing you (and identify it with a given skin color), then there is no compromise. Again, the oppressor must die. So, to me, the article is less about classical music and more about an individual's rationalization for "benevolent" totalitarianism. It's about power.

Starting at 3:40, Peterson discusses what, I think, is directly applicable to the essay:

I know there are all kinds of arguments over Peterson's equation of post-modernism with cultural Marxism and whether Cultural Marxism is actually a thing, but insofar as Cultural Marxism is understood as referring to an argument that breaks down any given subject into the narrative of the oppressed and oppressor, and group identities, then it's a useful description.

 

[starthrower]

I see the article in the OP as extreme Leftist propaganda. There is a reason it is called "Western" Classical. And the music since the Renaissance was technically more advanced than in other cultures.

Extreme leftist propaganda? That's not what I take away from this article. As far as European musical tradition being more technically advanced? The statement alone is not a problem, but if you adopt the attitude that it is superior to the music of other peoples and cultures, that to my mind is a racist attitude.

What I take away from this article is that composers and artists of color don't have to subject themselves to the politics and business structures of the mainstream classical music world. They need to create their own avenues of expression through the entrepreneurial spirit of building up their own communities, creating their own record companies, managing local venues, and presenting their music in a way that represents their own vision and cultural milieu for the people of their community. Some of the leading composers and artists are already doing this whether it be a Jewish musician and entrepreneur such as John Zorn, or an African American composer/musician such as Steve Coleman. Pretty much anyone who desires to compose, perform and present new and innovative music is going to have to go this route. And of course there are still hurdles in American society to be overcome for these artists in the effort to secure loans or funding to make their ideas a reality. Institutional racism is still a problem.

 

[1996D]

Yep. Everybody has a voice thanks to the internet.....
Now, I hope that this "queer Lebanese composer" (quoted from his profile!) will be able to forgive me that I'm going to bask in the sun in all my whiteness while listening to some inherently racist music.

I can see though why he's so confused because Middle Easterners are considered White in the US, yet he can kind of see through the lies of the social engineering, but can't quite point it out, so he lashes out in the most hilarious way.

But this is how it's supposed to be, if you haven't the wit to understand then you're in your rightful stratum in society.

 

[millionrainbows]

Why are we even talking about this? We're letting Gustav Dudamel be a conductor.

 

[starthrower]

Why are we even talking about this? We're letting Gustav Dudamel be a conductor.

Whatever the author was attempting to convey in that essay, it certainly wasn't what you're sarcastically implying here.

 

[MatthewWeflen]

Without resorting to straw men, I take the thesis of the piece to be that not only is there 1. entrenched racism/tokenism within the moneyed halls of classical music institutions; but there is also 2. something inherently racist about the music itself, whether that is expressed through the cultural appropriation of the composers or by the themes within the music that are taken up by white supremacists as rallying cries for their cultural superiority.

Number 1 is probably true? I mean, as true as it is of any institution in Europe or the US with lots of money. But Number 2 is difficult for me to wrap my head around. Wagner, for instance, was a notorious anti-Semite, and his music was loved by the Nazis, but I still don't see how an individual listener, regardless of their background, would be prohibited from taking some other message or feeling from the music. Because music is so abstract and accesses our limbic systems so directly, I don't see why any political stance is "inherent" to it. Like, I can listen to Dvorak without giving two figs about Czech independence, or Beethoven without pausing to consider Napoleon's grasping for European empire. As far as cultural appropriation, I find it very hard to be offended as long as it's not a racialized caricature. Everybody appropriates everything. The wheel, the stone axe, a drum beat, three point perspective, Facebook. Yawn.

Side issue: What I do not understand in the piece is the idea that "whiteness" represents a cultural nullity. I could certainly see that "whiteness" is a pastiche of contributing cultures. I fail to see how it necessarily negates its contributing cultures, though.

 

[Haydn70]

It was tempted to leave a comment at the original link, but the article is less about music than the author's own profound racism. His viewpoint is a prime example of what Jordan Peterson would call "Cultural Marxism". By this, Peterson refers to a tendency among the "Left", by individuals self identified as such, to fit subjects into the "Marxist", as Peterson calls it, narrative of the oppressor and oppressed. This is a bad faith and destructive narrative in that anyone who disagrees with this premise is, by definition, the oppressor. In that sense, and you can see it in the comment section of the linked article, anyone who defends classical music, or disagrees with the OP, must be white, a racist, and/or benefiting from classical music's oppression. The argument is dangerous and insidious in that it's effectively a totalitarian argument. The only acceptable outcome, as the author makes clear, is the death of classical music. It's a zero sum game. If you define yourself as the oppressed and a given art form as oppressing you (and identify it with a given skin color), then there is no compromise. Again, the oppressor must die. So, to me, the article is less about classical music and more about an individual's rationalization for "benevolent" totalitarianism. It's about power.

Starting at 3:40, Peterson discusses what, I think, is directly applicable to the essay:

I know there are all kinds of arguments over Peterson's equation of post-modernism with cultural Marxism and whether Cultural Marxism is actually a thing, but insofar as Cultural Marxism is understood as referring to an argument that breaks down any given subject into the narrative of the oppressed and oppressor, and group identities, then it's a useful description.

An outstanding post, vtpoet!

 

[vtpoet]

An outstanding post, vtpoet!

Thanks Haydn. Mind you, I'm a card carrying Social Democrat who believes in European style regulated Capitalism.

 

[MatthewWeflen]

Saying a political group is after power is somewhat like saying that people like ice cream or cute puppies.

 

[vtpoet]

Right. But what's at issue is how they go about obtaining it. That's not always so benign.