Archive for May 14, 2008

Experimental Music – Underrated or Underachieving?

{ May 14, 2008 @ 12:34 am } · { Personal Opinion }
{ Tags: , , , , , , } · { Comments (1) }

Experimental Music – Underrated or Underachieving?

Thinking about the idea of music histories is a daunting one. Music generally has had a recorded history for an incredibly long time.

However, I find that much of the recorded history of music ignores certain genres, and mainly focuses on the most popular genres and their history, as I explored in my previous post.

This may be seen as the logical and obvious reason for charting the particular music histories that have been charted because they are the most popular, thus the majority of people would be most interested in the music that is most popular to them, but what about the rest of the vast, diverse and infinitely expanding genres in the world of music?

Even though they may not be the most popular, they may be obscure, they may be hard to listen to, they may be hard to understand, and you may not even like them, I believe they still deserve to have a place in the history of music.

All music is valid because it is all interconnected and styles influence each other and evolve from one another.

I would like to investigate experimental music which I believe is a heavily underexplored genre of music. I also believe it is a highly valuable genre of music because it is constantly pushing the boundaries and challenging what people see as ‘music.’ I’m not arguing that it is more valid or better than ‘popular music’; I more want to explore why it isn’t as popular and what makes this music so interesting and what it gives to the world of music.

To give an idea of what experimental music is, “in a broader sense, it is used to mean any music that challenges the commonly accepted notions of what music is.” (Experimental Music, online) John Cage, which many will know from the 4’33” composition, states that the term ‘experimental’ “is apt, providing it is understood not as descriptive of an act to be later judged in terms of success or failure, but simply as of an act the outcome of which is unknown” (Experimental Music, online)

In explaining experimental music further, I thought I would use Heath’s explanation of popular music and define some of the differences between the two genres.

·         The first major difference is that experimental music isn’t popular in the same sense that popular music is; experimental music isn’t “widely liked.”

·      In relation to cultural capital and attitudes towards experimental music, I believe that today, high culture and increasing one’s cultural capital are both associated with experimental music because it is so far from ‘the norm’ and I agree with the idea that the genre of ‘popular music’ is seen as inferior to other genre’s of ‘serious music’ such as experimental music. However, I don’t agree with the idea that one genre of music is inferior to another – I believe all music is valuable and each style or genre has something to offer – some genres have been ignored though in constructing a history of music.

·      Adorno refers to popular music as being constructed through a definite structural form, whereas experimental music is very much unorganised and doesn’t follow a set structure most of the time.

To conclude in explaining experimental music and its difference from popular music, experimental music is seen as being original, diverse, not standard, constantly changing and evolving and not following a set structure; all of these characteristics are seen to be in opposition to the idea of ‘popular music’.

I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with popular music, (I swear!) I just believe that the genre of experimental music has contributed a lot to the world of music which it isn’t given credit for and is a valuable addition and is worthy of investigation as it is an area of music that is highly unexplored.

I’d really like responses from other group members on their opinion of experimental music – even if you think you’ve never heard anything that could be classed as experimental music, I’d just like your ideas about it!

A History of Music?

{ May 14, 2008 @ 12:31 am } · { Academic Research }
{ Tags: , , , } · { Leave a Comment }

A History of Music?

This project is titled ‘Music Histories’ so I thought it was important to define the importance of history within the field of music.

First of all, I believe that it is important to note that without a history, music as we know it would not exist. This is because many of the music genres and styles that we are so interested in have evolved from previous music styles that we had knowledge of. History gave us this knowledge. Thus, without history, we wouldn’t have the vast, varied and diverse range of music styles that we do.

Overall, history is an integral part of society and is important in music as it tells the significant story of music and its past, present and future. There is a vast history of music in general stretching from music in the ancient world, to music of the 21st Century.

However, as we have discovered, there is too much emphasis placed on popular music and related genres and styles. Much of musical history revolves around what are seen as the most popular central genres or styles, and because music is such a vast, varied and diverse field, much is left out.

This means that many other styles are ignored because of their lesser popularity and because they are not part of the typical ‘Top 40’ highly rotated collection of music.

Because these styles are not part of the ‘Top 40’ popular genre of music, they and their histories are not recorded and we miss out on some highly important and crucial milestones throughout the evolution of music.

Keith Negus emphasises the importance of history within music and to society in his statement; “history is important for an individual and group sense of identity; it provides knowledge and ideas from which ‘we’ decide who ‘we’ are, where ‘we’ came from and where ‘we’ are going.” (Negus, 1996, p. 137)

There is a need to rectify the situation in the history of music. Many more diverse styles must be explored and their histories recorded and placed in the timeline of music history, in order to provide a truly all encompassing history of music – not purely a history that focuses on the most popular genres.

I found this Keith Negus statement highly related to our area of study; “no one can have the last say in the history of any musical form.” (Negus, 1996, p. 161)

References:

Negus, Keith. Popular Music in Theory – an Introduction. Published by Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers, 1996, Great Britain