[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: The idea that our categories are created



Hi Daniel and Larry,

Interesting points.  So an idea that has been rolling around my head lately.  Did the printing press kill story telling - we keep celebrating the printing press as this great thing that made knowledge available to everyone, but did it also stultify it.

Music isn't forced into this, or maybe it is I don't know enough, but to me it seems more alive.  I really liked Daniel's metaphor of blueprints in playing and I think writing music.  You work from them to build, to extend, to create something to meet your needs, but in the end you recognize and acknowledge the role the blue prints played. I wonder if the phrase musical hypertext might be closer to what Daniel is after than musical hermeneutics.

When Ted Nelson introduced the concept of hypertext he suggested that it is the original type of human communication pre-dating the printing press.  Human used to sit around fires telling stories, never written down, changing with each telling, changing with each generation, changing with each move.  There is no ownership - or it belongs to the community with each telling.  The Socratic dialogue is as much about being in the world at the moment as it is about questions and answers - always a variation on a theme.

What did we lose by allowing people to claim ownership to these things, to claim that they created them, to claim they know what the original author means.  To forget that we recreate an idea every time we utter it.  But to also maintain connections to those blue prints, recognizing that the utterances are variations on a theme.

Well, apologies for the staccato, stream of consciousness structure of this message.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Larry Purss
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 10:56 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The idea that our categories are created

Daniel,
Thank you for such insightful pondering on this theme. What ever is happening in this event as "ex=change" where "meaning" and "sense" are rising and falling within a theme [and changing aspects of the theme while remaining within the theme]] are happening THROUGH our shared expression and THIS aspect or THAT aspect of the theme being "disclosed/revealed" [not merely created as novel and new, but also not merely repeating a traditional theme] THIS process of revealing and concealing moving to the foreground, receding to the background] seems to be the mystery wirhin what you mentioned as "musical hermeneutics"

As I "read" this revealing/concealing process it is not a tension of OPPOSITES [each side have an independent existence PRIOR TO BEING REVEALED and then next becoming synthesized.  It seems more like an enveloping movement of "text and context" that arise and fall , move to the fore or back SIMULTENEOUSLY within a "third space" that is more encompassing extending to INCLUDE the fore AND the aft.

When the message Brahms sent was sent was it only his OWN MESSAGE?

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> Michael, Daniel,
>
> As I was reading this thread I was asking the same question about the 
> theme of "progressions" as deep pattern perceptions across modalities.
> Michael wrote:
>
> "Yet for whatever reasons there don't seem to be attempts made to 
> maintain these connections, recognize that these are variations on a 
> theme - that perhaps are made richer by understanding the relationships between Lewin's
> "progressions" and Cobb's "progressions."   It is the Internet that helped
> me tie these things together - but when does the ability to tie ideas 
> together lead to a cancophany of sound that overwhelms rather than 
> supports our mission"
>
> This general question of "themes" that run through deep pattern 
> perceptions [as background that recedes towards invisibility] but is 
> NECESSARY for the various "progressions" to proceed.
>
> Daniel's answer that carries forward the conversation was thought
> provoking:
>
> "So we navigate connections between works by seeing likeness and 
> meaning in them. People will listen for such meanings, just as we see 
> faces in clouds and constellations in the night sky - our minds seek 
> them out even when there is no original formative intent. As a 
> musician I feel that people with musical training, sensibility, and 
> feeling should have something to do with making meaningful connections happen"
>
> I want to highlight [bring to the fore] the comment "our minds seek 
> them [likeness AND meaning] OUT even when there is no formative 
> INTENT"  The question I play with is the relation of "intent" residing 
> invisible AS A THEME [in the way Michael used this term] with multiple 
> "progressions" but with the "moves" constrained and CONTAINED within this THEME.
>
> Now "intent" also may be perceived as the individual "listening for 
> such meanings" [progressions on a THEME] just as we see "faces in clouds"
> [imaginal presences] that are NOT REALLY THERE and are "fictive" and 
> "created".
>
> The question of the link between "intent" that resides in the 
> individual imaginal realm AND the link that resides in deep pattern 
> perceptions that "run through" THEMES.
>
> "thinking" and "thought" as "intent" seems to have this PRO-found "link"
> that has an imaginal ASPECT [creative, imaginal, phenomenological] and 
> also thinking and thought has this deep pattern recognition that 
> "progresses" WITHIN THEMES.
>
> I will pause here but I hear the same question in David's recent post 
> on "chess" and movement  of the pieces constrained and contained by 
> NECESSITY within THE "progressions" on a "theme".  This question of 
> temporality and duration [deep pattern time AND phenomenological in 
> the MOMENT event time that are LINKED.
>
> Daniel, I agree that people with musical training sense-ability and 
> feeling [for moods]  should have something to do [and say] with making 
> meaning connections happen.
>
> I would add a question exploring  "progressions" as having various 
> qualities of expression as they are EX-pressed with "intent".
>
> Progressions may include BOTH  spatial connections and temporal 
> connections at different "scales" [double meaning].: For example -
>
> * narrative dynamics expressing INTENT [as progression in dimensional 
> time and space which is the more common sense experience of 
> "progressions" THIS expression may include the "themes" that are 
> invisible in the background while the progressions are expressed in 
> the foregoround
>
>  AND
>
> *  "event" dynamics that may have a different "quality" or "character" 
> or "value" within our expressions. in contrast to "narrative dynamics" 
> Expressions such as the event of "faces in the clouds" that "show up" 
> and have a quality of being immediate AND."im-pressionistic 
> expressions happening in the "moment".
>
> WHAT is the "link" and HOW do we understand the "intent" of these 
> various pro-gressions [in time and space]?
>
> I hope this stream of reflections is a "progression" on this theme and 
> not mere cacophony.
>
> Larry
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Daniel Hyman 
> <daniel.a.hyman.0@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Michael -
>>
>> Now that I've read the Times Spotify article and re-read your posts, 
>> I think I'm a little closer to grasping your point.
>>
>> Classical musicians as I am and as I know them, often see parallels 
>> between music and wine. A work is not just a series of sounds - it's 
>> an experience, hopefully highly pleasurable, conveying character, 
>> origin, context, skill, refinement. Rarity and effort are not 
>> disadvantages but badges of value.
>> And the "label" and atmosphere, terroir if you like, are key to 
>> understanding and enjoyment.
>>
>> The Spotify article seems (to me) not so much about music as about 
>> the music distribution industry. And that they are trying to go well 
>> beyond the idea of disintermediation. Can you picture millions of 
>> bottles of wine, of all different origins and levels of quality, 
>> hooked to the same industrial network of pipes? The consumer opens a 
>> tap (one for red and one for white, I guess) and has no idea what 
>> comes out. At first I felt that Spotify's concept of using common 
>> threads of mood could only be good for classical music, which is 
>> normally so underrepresented. But I didn't see any classical examples 
>> named in the article, so perhaps not.
>>
>> That said, Schubert and Mahler happily used Ländler (country waltzes) 
>> in their instrumental works, Bach adapted Palestrina's "stile antico" 
>> in his B Minor Mass, Stravinsky famously said that good composers 
>> borrow, while great composers steal, a very large part of the hip hop 
>> genre seems to consist of samples taken from earlier recordings, much 
>> of George Gershwin's "serious" work has flavors or styles of jazz, 
>> medieval French church composers overlaid popular tunes with 
>> liturgical words and learned counterpoint - music has been 
>> re-emerging in such ways for centuries if not millennia. But such 
>> expropriations have usually been taken as having meaning and purpose, 
>> drawing parallels in the manner of intentionally constructed similes 
>> and metaphors. I haven't been on Spotify lately to sample the 
>> connections described in the article. But these music distributors 
>> seem to be joining materials together in a way that seems pretty 
>> random, or at least superficial, to a musician.
>>
>> So we navigate connections between works by seeing likeness and 
>> meaning in them. People will listen for such meanings, just as we see 
>> faces in clouds and constellations in the night sky - our minds seek 
>> them out even when there is no original formative intent. As a 
>> musician I feel that people with musical training, sensibility, and 
>> feeling should have something to do with making meaningful 
>> connections happen.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Glassman, Michael 
>> <glassman.13@osu.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Daniel and Valerie and whoever else might be interesting,
>> >
>> > I guess my original point was only using the idea of breaking down 
>> > what are perhaps artificial barriers between music as a vehicle.  
>> > That often times differences between pieces of music, ideas, 
>> > concept, research methodologies (I'll get to that in a minute) are 
>> > variations on a
>> theme.  I
>> > know emergence is a big topic, but is it possible what we are 
>> > really talking about re-emergence, take a created artifact that 
>> > already exists
>> and
>> > applying it to a specific context, need, trajectory.  But by 
>> > allowing ourselves to maintain the ties to the earlier variations 
>> > of ideas they become richer and more easily manipulated in their 
>> > re-emergence.  If you are listening to a pop tune and are then able 
>> > to tie the chord
>> progression
>> > back to an earlier more complex jazz piece or classical piece it 
>> > makes
>> the
>> > experience (at least for me) much more enjoyable.  The few times I 
>> > have been able to do it, or more often had it pointed out to me, it 
>> > was thrilling.  It means giving up a certain amount of ownership 
>> > and/or tribalism.  And I have been wondering if the Internet will 
>> > break much of that down because differentiation can so easily be 
>> > put in the hands of
>> the
>> > user.  Or do we need these social categories to give our thinking 
>> > structure, to make sure it doesn't go flying in different directions.
>> How
>> > much is too much?  What is the right balance between the 
>> > centripetal
>> forces
>> > of social categorization and the centrifugal forces of the Internet 
>> > and
>> the
>> > choices it places directly in the hands of users.
>> >
>> > Anyway this perhaps is something I have been struggling with over 
>> > the
>> last
>> > few weeks.  For a number of reasons I have been looking into this 
>> > new
>> (or
>> > not so new) phenomenon of design experiments.  I think some people 
>> > on
>> this
>> > list may have more knowledge than me on it.  But for the life of me 
>> > I
>> can
>> > tell the difference between design experiment methodology and 
>> > Lewin's
>> et.
>> > al.'s early action research approach.  And reading Cobb's original 
>> > 2001 article it seems both can be traced back to Dewey's book on 
>> > Logic (I'm pretty certain action research can and Cobb's article 
>> > reads like a Cliff notes of Dewey's book).  Yet for whatever 
>> > reasons there don't seem to be attempts made to maintain these 
>> > connections, recognize that these are variations on a theme - that 
>> > perhaps are made richer by understanding
>> the
>> > relationships between Lewin's "progressions" and Cobb's "progressions."
>> >  It is the Internet that helped me tie these things together - but 
>> > when does the ability to tie ideas together lead to a cancophany of 
>> > sound
>> that
>> > overwhelms rather than supports our mission.
>> >
>> > So that is a long way of saying, how does this simple article on
>> Spottify
>> > makes us think about both the bood and bad of connections - the 
>> > thrill
>> of
>> > recognizing the connection, the danger of being caught in the web
>> (forgive
>> > the pun)?  How do we navigate it?
>> >
>> > Michael
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+mglassman=ehe.ohio-state.edu@mailman.ucsd.ed
>> > u]
>> On
>> > Behalf Of Daniel Hyman
>> > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 3:24 AM
>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The idea that our categories are created
>> >
>> > As a music educator and (mainly classical) musician, I'm delighted 
>> > to
>> see
>> > a musical topic here, even though I sense a web of somewhat misty
>> questions
>> > rather than one discrete one. Anyone's help in clarifying them or
>> parsing
>> > them out would be much appreciated.
>> >
>> > Most Aprils (Jazz Appreciation Month in US schools) I have taught 
>> > from a
>> > 2000 PBS video, Preservation Hall: A Night In New Orleans. It
>> intersperses
>> > various early jazz genres, e.g. 12-bar blues, ragtime, marches, 
>> > gospel, with brief bios and interviews of the band members. Nary a 
>> > mention of activity structures giving refuge from oppression, 
>> > though they are generally literate and university- or conservatory- 
>> > trained. What I do glean is more along the following lines:
>> >
>> > - Certain instruments, such as trumpet, clarinet, or singing voice, 
>> > produce one tone at a time and thus lend themselves to melody 
>> > (unless combined in big-band format, which Preservation Hall is 
>> > not). So one
>> looks
>> > elsewhere, to upright bass for chord root tones, and 
>> > piano/banjo/guitar, for instruments that can play 3 or 5 or 10 
>> > chord members at once. Those musicians carry the role of setting 
>> > the chord progressions the others
>> fit
>> > into or around.
>> >
>> > - As to some extent with classical genres such as symphony, ballet,
>> opera,
>> > or chamber music, the venue and the genre connect, and somewhat 
>> > govern
>> the
>> > sound. Ragtime originated in brothels, blues in bars, gospel in
>> churches,
>> > marches gave celebrants or mourners a beat to set their pace. 
>> > Listen to "Just A Closer Walk With Thee" and you will hear 
>> > chromaticism not wholly unlike what Bach did with the simple 
>> > Lutheran tune "Sleepers Awake". The tempo resembles blues but the chord progressions are more complex.
>> >
>> > - Jazz is a family of styles; blues and its close relatives /
>> descendants
>> > are usually considered within that family.
>> >
>> > - Most accomplished musicians can switch styles; they may be famous 
>> > for one or another, but the exact style varies from song to song 
>> > and performance to performance.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:18 AM, valerie A. Wilkinson < 
>> > vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi!  I am doing one of my dives from the abstractions of General 
>> > > Systems Theory.
>> > > Actually, since I am always "on the fly" I don't have time to 
>> > > write a well-developed thought this time, either.
>> > > When I read Aristotle's Categories at school, the first part of 
>> > > the work is essential. It sets up the frame. Essence or accident, 
>> > > a singular representative of a species - or the whole. (I can see 
>> > > that I've set up a bit of homework for myself) In that work, it 
>> > > sticks out like a sore thumb that the list of "categories", when 
>> > > we finally get around to it, is made of incidental and accidental "properties."
>> > > Color and length don't tell one much about the animal.
>> > > Being a generalist means I'm not going to dig in deep here.
>> > > But in this short (so far) thread, Huw has replied with 
>> > > circumstances/environmental conditions being causal, whereas 
>> > > Michael starts out with looking for some fundamental sense in the 
>> > > progression
>> of
>> > chords.
>> > > (Harmonics is an ancient thread)
>> > > Michael's first observation, that categories, which "someone" 
>> > > sets up, seem provisional but are soon treated as set in stone...
>> > > And he said, "Not only for Jazz ..." (Even right brain (RB)/left
>> > > brain(LB) are provisional distinctions in an extremely 
>> > > specialized
>> > > field.) Does "that's how humans think" cover the topic?
>> > >
>> > > It's a rabbit hole. Gotta git before anyone asks me any questions!
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: xmca-l-bounces+vwilk=inf.shizuoka.ac.jp@mailman.ucsd.edu
>> [mailto:
>> > > xmca-l-bounces+vwilk=inf.shizuoka.ac.jp@mailman.ucsd.edu] On 
>> > > xmca-l-bounces+Behalf
>> Of
>> > > Glassman, Michael
>> > > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 0:43
>> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The idea that our categories are created
>> > >
>> > > Hi Huw,
>> > >
>> > > Just off the top of my head I would say the blues more so.  I 
>> > > wonder if a music historian has ever taken an Activity Theory approach.
>> > >
>> > > Michael
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: xmca-l-bounces+glassman.13=osu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
>> > > xmca-l-bounces+glassman.13=osu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of 
>> > > xmca-l-bounces+Huw
>> > > Lloyd
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 11:26 AM
>> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The idea that our categories are created
>> > >
>> > > The impression I have is that the roots of jazz stem from an 
>> > > abeyance from culturally perceived unpleasant/oppressive 
>> > > conditions and that patterns in chord progression would be 
>> > > derived from that activity structure, not from anything inherent 
>> > > in the music per se, i.e. an
>> > orientation.
>> > >
>> > > Huw
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 3 June 2015 at 15:53, Glassman, Michael <glassman.13@osu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I found this article from the New York Times incredibly 
>> > > > interesting
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/technology/personaltech/spotify-se
>> > > > es
>> > > > -a-future-where-music-genres-dont-really-matter.html?hp&action=
>> > > > click
>> > > > &p
>> > > > gtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.n
>> > > > av=to
>> > > > p-
>> > > > news&_r=0
>> > > >
>> > > > Having developed a very nascent knowledge of music late in life 
>> > > > because my daughter is studying to be a jazz guitarist and I 
>> > > > don't want to feel like a complete idiot when I discuss one of 
>> > > > her concerts with her - the article reminds me that we (or the 
>> > > > media trying to sell us stuff) creates categories that then for 
>> > > > some reason become set in stone until they aren't anymore (but 
>> > > > the decisions always seem to come from some place else) and the 
>> > > > ways the Internet may be changing that faster than many of us can understand.
>> > > >
>> > > > If you read the first paragraph and the children of the writer 
>> > > > going through different types of music as a stream -  I wonder 
>> > > > though if the writer has it wrong, that if you went back and 
>> > > > listened closely you would find they shared chord progressions 
>> > > > taken in different
>> > directions.
>> > > >
>> > > > I may have this wrong the way I'm talking about it (I can see 
>> > > > my daughter rolling her eyes in my mind), but jazz has its 
>> > > > developing chord progressions, blues has its chord 
>> > > > progressions, they swap back and forth, rock and folk and new 
>> > > > wave takes from both and from classical, and derivative pop takes and simplifies from all.
>> > > > Perhaps there is a natural flow as they move between each 
>> > > > other, something we can never hear when there are strict 
>> > > > category boundaries.  The steaming music phenomenon makes these 
>> > > > boundaries transparent, almost as if they don't exist, so we 
>> > > > traverse them without thinking we are making some type of 
>> > > > transgression.  How will appreciation of music change when we 
>> > > > don't have the gatekeepers (using Lewin's original
>> > > concept) determining what we listen to?
>> > > >
>> > > > This of course is not just music.  In the academy there has 
>> > > > been greater and greater move towards particularization and 
>> > > > strict boundaries - AERA isn't one big conferences but hundreds 
>> > > > of small conferences.  Will the boundaries start to break down 
>> > > > so we can see and appreciate the "chord progressions?"
>> > > >
>> > > > Interesting to me, wonder what others think.
>> > > >
>> > > > Michael
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>