"All classical music is boring and sounds the same!" Sound familiar? I have heard this complaint quite often (and am completely guilty of saying this same thing about rap music). I think it stems from not spending time studying and listening, and looking at how the music works. At least, this has been my experience. Critical practices work somewhat the same way. It helps to get us beyond that, "All ______ literature is boring and the same." As much as I do not really care for Victorian literature, Greek writings, or early Baroque music (harpsichords make me shudder), understanding how these theory and practices behind these things has made them more interesting, and I understand how they function (enjoyment, however, may be just beyond reach...).
I came to college as a music major, and, ironically, my music theory courses have been extremely helpful in preparing for L371! Music theory can be thought of as the study of how music works, from its basic components or notes, intervals, and chords to larger phrases and structures. Critical practices can be thought of in a similar way: this is the study of how writing and literature work.
As I've been trying to compose a first blog post, I've been struck more and more by the way Burke resonates with much of my musical training. I think of music theory as a series of "strategies" to understand and create pieces of music. Composers can use things like sonata form or rondo form (two ways of organizing sections of a piece of music) or counterpoint (a method of writing music which defines the relationship between two or more independent voices) as a way to organize musical thoughts, a way to demonstrate what they are doing to the listener. Some music (both ancient and modern) only does not fit into one category - elements of many kinds of musical structures are present in a sort of complex interplay. The same happens with many pieces of writing.
Studying music theory isn't really one long attempt to 'classify' each piece of music that has ever been written; rather it is a way to learn strategies to better understand music. It's helpful that in music you can both see the structure and hear the structure. It's also really cool, that, after learning all of the seemingly dry, boring, and detailed rules of Baroque counterpoint, I actually started to see and hear how they worked to organize and create music meaning. I am seriously hoping that the same thing happens with Aristotle.
Similarly, studying critical practices involves learning strategies to look at how writing and literature work. I guess I don't see literature as hindered by critical practices, just as I don't see classical music as hindered by music theory. Yes, there are forms and structures and rules, but composers and writers make use of these forms for a reason (and sometimes break the rules for even more important reasons). I guess I stand with Burke here: critical practices develop out of situations that re-occur over and over, and need names. Some Baroque musician didn't simply sit down and declare, "All who use counterpoint must follow this long and complicated set of rule." Rather, the rules developed over several hundred years as more and more musicians chose to write in this way – it developed out of “typical, recurrent situations” (Burke 295). Similarly, critical practices didn't come about overnight - they developed over time as people attempted to name (see Burke 294) and explain important situations in writing that occurred again and again.
Writing - whether music or literature - is an art in which on can be trained. Training isn't required, of course (an informal training "picked up" along the way can also be quite good), but in general it seriously improves the quality of the music or the literature. Understanding of the strategies available and their functions leads to knowing when and how to use what theories, and also knowing when to toss them out the window and try something new. It's not a hindrance; it's a way of seeing and understanding.
Thanks to Christopher for the inspiration to write this – it started out as a comment on his post, but turned out too long, and somewhat divergent.
Burke, Kenneth. “Literature as Equipment for Living.” The Philosophy of Literary Form:
Studies in Symbolic Action, 3rd ed. Berkeley: U of California P, 1973. 293-304.
Rebekah,
ReplyDeleteI was actually ecstatic to realize that someone had voiced their opinion that the functions and design of Music Theory is in fact absolutely applicable to Burke's densely packed "sociological criticism of literature." As a pianist who has had more than his fair share of classical and jazz theory training, I can appreciate the method through which you describe theory as a way to "better understand" music, rather than trying to simply classify it.
Burke's frame of critical practice resonates with the intentions and strategy of music theory, and can serve as a tool or road map to something beyond basic understanding. Your post reminds us that the cognitive pattern of human understanding spans every inch of history, from music to politics and technology. Each facet of our curiosity and ingenuity can be found at the core of our creativity. And in this thought process we form strategies to better tackle and organize our ideas.
Music Theory is certainly a great asset that as a younger child memorizing scales or filling in notes on a staff I never would have considered applicable to life outside of music. However I think you have done excellent work in expressing one great way in which it does.
-Gabe
p.s. check out Atmosphere if you're curious about rap which doesn't "always sound the same"