Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

!"#$%&"''(%)&"%+$+(,,$-'"'($ ."%,'(/'$'0'&$-,'0##(%)1234($5$%*6(/0,06($

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rom Silence to Muteness Music and Philosophy in the 20th Century ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. D.C. van den Boom ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Aula der Universiteit op vrijdag 24 september 2010, te 13.00 uur door Jael Kraut geboren te Amsterdam Promotiecommissie: Promotores: prof. dr. R. de Groot en prof. dr. H. de Vries Overige leden: prof. dr. F. Dastur prof. dr. R. Kraut dr S.K. Lichtenstein prof. dr. J. Neubauer prof. dr. M.B. Pranger Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen - 5 - Contents I. INTRODUCTION: MUSIC, SILENCE AND MUTENESS ....8 II. PRELIMINARIES ON SILENCE IN RELATION TO MUSIC ...............................................................................................17 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................17 2. SILENCE IN NOISE........................................................................24 3. NOISE IN SILENCE........................................................................28 4. THE SILENCE OF THE SIRENS......................................................33 5. SILENCE MEANS NOT SPEAKING: MUSIC MEANS NOT SPEAKING 37 6. ETERNAL SOUND IS SILENCE ......................................................41 THE HARMONY OF THE SPHERES..........................................................41 SCHOPENHAUER...................................................................................43 NIETZSCHE...........................................................................................48 III. DEBUSSY – COMPOSER OF SILENCE ............................55 7. INTRODUCTION............................................................................55 8. DEBUSSIAN SILENCE AS INTERIOR MUSICALITY........................57 9. JANKÉLÉVITCH: DEBUSSY’S SILENT METAPHYSICS..................60 10. SILENCE AS NECESSARY FEATURE OF TEMPORALITY.............63 11. MATERNAL SILENCE .................................................................67 12. GEOTROPISM .............................................................................72 13. DECOMPOSITION AND GRAYNESS.............................................75 14. STILLNESS..................................................................................78 15. LEVINAS’ ETHICAL RHYTHM....................................................84 IV. PHENOMENOLOGY OF SILENCE ...................................89 V. JOHN CAGE AND THE MYSTIFICATION OF MUSICAL SILENCE.........................................................................................102 16. INTRODUCTION........................................................................102 - 6 - 17. SILENCING SOCIAL MUSIC......................................................104 18. CAGE’S TURN TO RELIGION....................................................108 19. THE AESTHETIC OF ABSENCE.................................................112 20. CONCLUSION............................................................................113 VI. TORU TAKEMITSU’S AESTHETICS: CONTRADICTIONS AND CONVERGENCES WITH WESTERN THOUGHT.................................................................117 21. INTRODUCTION........................................................................117 22. TAKEMITSU’S PHILOSOPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ON SILENCE 119 23. PROBLEMS REGARDING THE INTERPRETATION OF TAKEMITSU’S WRITINGS .................................................................124 24. GENERAL DIFFERENCES AND CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN THE AESTHETICS OF TAKEMITSU AND KANT ..................................128 25. THE PRIMACY OF NATURE......................................................131 26. KANT’S GENIUS .......................................................................139 27. SPIRITUALITY ..........................................................................143 28. A SINGLE SOUND .....................................................................147 29. SYNAESTHETICS.......................................................................150 30. CONCLUSION............................................................................152 VII. ADORNO AND MUSICAL MUTENESS .........................154 31. INTRODUCTION........................................................................154 32. THE SILENCE OF MUSIC..........................................................155 33. ART AND PHILOSOPHY ............................................................157 34. THE TRUTH OF MUSIC ............................................................160 35. CONCRETIZATIONS: CONCRETE REACTIONS.........................163 36. CONCRETIZATIONS: FOUR TYPES OF MUSICAL PRACTICES .167 SCHOENBERG AND HIS STUDENTS......................................................167 OBJECTIVISM .....................................................................................170 KURT WEILL......................................................................................174 COMMUNITY MUSIC...........................................................................175 37. CONCLUSION............................................................................177 VIII. INNER MUSICAL SILENCE...........................................181 - 7 - 38. INTRODUCTION........................................................................181 39. ABSENCE OF THE HUMAN........................................................183 40. THE IRRATIONALISM OF OBJECTIVISM..................................186 41. SERIALISM AND ALEATORY COMPOSITION: TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN .......................................................................................189 42. TRADITION...............................................................................190 43. THE WEAKENED SUBJECT AND ITS RELIEF............................192 44. TRANSCENDENTAL SUBJECTIVITY AS ALTERNATIVE TO ADORNO’S OBJECTIVIST NOTION OF SUBJECTIVITY IN HIS INFORMAL MUSIC.............................................................................195 VIII. NOISY SILENCE..................................................................207 45. INTRODUCTION........................................................................207 46. PHENOMENOLOGY AND THE QUESTION OF REALITY ............208 47. PARADOXES OF OBJECTIVISM.................................................212 48. TECHNOLOGY AS THE SCIENTIFIC TRANSFORMATION OF REALITY............................................................................................216 49. MUSIC IN THE TECHNOLOGICAL ERA ....................................221 50. THE HISTORICAL NECESSITY OF TECHNOLOGY....................224 51. MUSICAL MODELS...................................................................234 52. THE MUSICAL CULT................................................................237 IX. TOWARDS A PHENOMENOLOGY OF MUSIC ............247 53. INTRODUCTION........................................................................247 54. THE NECESSITY OF THE WORK OF ART .................................248 55. THE CONDITION OF THE SELF-EVIDENCE OF SENSE..............255 CONCLUSION................................................................................265 SUMMARY .....................................................................................267 SAMENVATTING VAN DE DISSERTATIE: VAN STILTE TOT VERSTOMMING: MUZIEK EN FILOSOFIE IN DE 20E EEUW. ...........................................................................................................270 BIBLIOGRAPHY...........................................................................274 - 8 - I. Introduction: Music, Silence and Muteness The subject of this dissertation is music and silence. On a primary level the thesis is a historical one. This is because, until the twentieth century, silence had barely been a theme in the aesthetics of music. Not that silence held no value for music. Taken as a whole, one can straightforwardly assert that music emerges from silence to return to it again. Moreover, in contrast to the other arts, music has a symbol for silence – which traces back to twelfth-century square notation. Other traditional relations between music and silence can be discerned in the interruptions between the movements of cyclic compositions, and in the occurrence of silences in individual movements as pauses. Apart from silence understood as pauses, one finds several ideas describing music’s relation to silence in the history of music aesthetics, such as the late Middle Ages and Baroque distinction between “silent instruments” (such as strings) and “loud instruments” (wind), and the romanticists’ quest for ways to stress the transition from silence to music or music to silence. There are certainly many other pre-twentieth century uses and ideas of silence in the realm of music, but a radical valuation of silence belongs to the three dominating aesthetic avenues from the beginning of the twentieth century until recent times: modernism, avant-garde, and post- modernism. Why artists began to engage in silence so intensively is difficult to tell. An initial answer is that the expressive achievements of the past weigh on the aesthetic possibilities of the present to the extent that these possibilities are all exhausted. This answer presupposes the – rather apocalyptic – assertion that every artistic means has already been explored, that artists of the twentieth century can copy and develop only the existing initiatives or turn to negative aesthetics such as silence. In other words, since artists feel intimidated by the (in)genious productions of the past, at some point in the history of art a positive renewal would no longer have been possible, and, therefore, silence would have been the only remaining option for critical artists. - 9 - One might object to this answer by pointing out that since there have been countless new artistic inventions, one glimpse at the last century proves the contrary. But this observation does not mean that art has not become problematic. When Hegel announced “the end of art”, he was not simply telling a story, as some post-modern theorists would like us to believe. Varying on Hegel’s claim, several aesthetic theorists link the stress on silence in the arts to the advent of anti-art as a necessary result of the autonomy of art, and to the absoluteness of the artist’s activity. Susan Sontag, for instance, argues: “As the activity of the mystic must end in a via negativa, a theology of God’s absence, a craving for the cloud of unknowing beyond knowledge and for the silence beyond speech, so art must tend toward anti-art, the elimination of the ‘subject’ (…), the substitution of chance for intention, and the pursuit of silence.”1 Art, which according to her, is a “form of mystification”, is unmasked as gratuitous and a trap because the spirit, “seeking embodiment in art, clashed with the material character of art itself,”2 and had to be abolished. Silence, then, is identified with one of the most extreme techniques for the obliteration of art, and is the outcome of a dialectic process in the history of the arts. Like for Sontag, though in a less Hegelian sense, the aesthetics of silence are often connected to inhuman historical situations of the twentieth century, often directly to Auschwitz. This is the second possible explanation for the artist’s engagement into silence. George Steiner, Paul Virilio, and, to a certain extent, Theodor W. Adorno, all ascribe the impossibility of artistic expression to, as Steiner writes, “the political inhumanity of the twentieth century and certain elements in the technological mass-society.”3 “No poetry after Auschwitz,”4 said Adorno. This might also apply to music. The stress on silence, however, can also be considered in a more positive manner. In music, a possible explanation is that the disintegration of musical forms – from the nineteenth century onwards – motivated musicians to turn increasingly to former extra-musical 1 Susan Sontag, Styles of Radical Will, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York, 1969, p. 5. 2 Ibid. 3 George Steiner, Language and Silence: Essays on Language, Literature, and the Inhuman, Atheneum, New York, 1967, p. 69. 4 Adorno writes : “Nach Auschwitz ein Gedicht schreiben, ist barbarisch.” In Prismen: Kulturkritik und Gesellschaft, Gesammelte Schriften 1, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a/M, 1970, p. 26. - 10 - sources in order to realize their art. The moment that all elements of sound are at their disposal, a consideration of silence as the extreme of the realm of acoustics is only one step further. As for any historical process, it is difficult to pinpoint when the disintegration of musical forms precisely began. One of the strongest original incentives toward new principles of music comes from Liszt, whose initiative bore fruit in Debussy’s music, whom some authors considered the “hinge” between two centuries and others the “master of the new music of the twentieth century.” Subsequently, the process of disintegration was to end in atonality, epitomized in the Second Viennese School, and radicalised in the avant-garde movement. It is striking that this process ran parallel to an increasing (re)valuation of silence, roughly from Liszt to Debussy, from Webern to Cage, and from Cage to the so- called post-modernist new spiritual composers. According to this explanation, then, breaking uploads/Litterature/ from-silence-to-muteness.pdf