Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Is MetaMusic metamusical?
Up to about a year ago a www search would have turned up this site, the Anachronisms site and related sites and random junk. Now a search is dominated by commercial purveyors of a kind of muzak that uses sounds of nature and sundry "relaxing" sounds. Ironically this itself may be metamusic as, indeed, muzak may be.
How can this be? The answer is suggested by a latent masterpiece, perhaps soon to be hidden no longer. I refer to Sid Herpes’ unreleased Themes from the History of Time (known to aficionados via bootleg tapes) which begins with God composing a song, inspired by -- the noises of wind and foliage. Thereby creating music -- or metamusic? Word has it that the Anachros have made Themes their next project, once the current album, provisionally titled, Extraordinary Renditions, according to well-placed sources, is complete.
The answer, I suggest, is that music and metamusic constitute a dialectic built into the very DNA of Western civilization. The dialectical relationship only became apparent in the late C20; before that the logic of the law of contradiction ruled, with Music seemingly opposed by non-music. Thanks to the pathbreaking work of the Anachronisms the true paradox is revealed. We await the next synthesis with bated breath.
Up to about a year ago a www search would have turned up this site, the Anachronisms site and related sites and random junk. Now a search is dominated by commercial purveyors of a kind of muzak that uses sounds of nature and sundry "relaxing" sounds. Ironically this itself may be metamusic as, indeed, muzak may be.
How can this be? The answer is suggested by a latent masterpiece, perhaps soon to be hidden no longer. I refer to Sid Herpes’ unreleased Themes from the History of Time (known to aficionados via bootleg tapes) which begins with God composing a song, inspired by -- the noises of wind and foliage. Thereby creating music -- or metamusic? Word has it that the Anachros have made Themes their next project, once the current album, provisionally titled, Extraordinary Renditions, according to well-placed sources, is complete.
The answer, I suggest, is that music and metamusic constitute a dialectic built into the very DNA of Western civilization. The dialectical relationship only became apparent in the late C20; before that the logic of the law of contradiction ruled, with Music seemingly opposed by non-music. Thanks to the pathbreaking work of the Anachronisms the true paradox is revealed. We await the next synthesis with bated breath.
Monday, July 16, 2007
"Art is art to the extent that it rejects conventional ways of looking at the world and instead attempts to project itself into the world" (J-I. Ange).
"Le monde n’est pas un produit de l’art, et l’art n’est pas un produit du monde" (Roland Barphe).
That is what fucking art is, and what it means to fuck art. You don't fuck art by writing "People tell me you're wasting my time/Keep wasting it, baby, because it feels so fine." "Baby," indeed.
"Le monde n’est pas un produit de l’art, et l’art n’est pas un produit du monde" (Roland Barphe).
That is what fucking art is, and what it means to fuck art. You don't fuck art by writing "People tell me you're wasting my time/Keep wasting it, baby, because it feels so fine." "Baby," indeed.
Labels: Metamusic
Monday, July 09, 2007
I would remind Sid that no matter what he thinks (as described in his last post) of our advice, if he'd listened to me and his mother he'd never have ended up writing his soppy love song "That Way." Of course, Sid is our son, so we have borne up silently under the opprobrium, but we believe it's time he lost his fascination with Lawrence Welk.
Labels: Metamusic
Thursday, July 05, 2007
I got enough of the old man and the old lady's bullshit when I was growing up, and believe me -- publishing it here ain't helping anyone.
You want to know what metamusic is? Then listen to "Art." What do we say over and over again in that song? Right -- "This is fucking art."
Meta-art is art fucking art. Metamusic is music fucking music. And what happens when two things fuck? New things are born, eh?
Okay, more often I get the clap.
You want to know what metamusic is? Then listen to "Art." What do we say over and over again in that song? Right -- "This is fucking art."
Meta-art is art fucking art. Metamusic is music fucking music. And what happens when two things fuck? New things are born, eh?
Okay, more often I get the clap.
Labels: Metamusic
Friday, May 11, 2007
My husband, Hardwick Herpes, has been mooning about the house for weeks now talking about re-defining metamusic. Nothing seems to be getting done, however, so I decided to take the matter in hand.
Of course, metamusic needs to be redefined. Purveyors of New Age recordings which are supposed to alter your brain waves have co-opted the term. I'm afraid that my husband muddied the waters a bit by his popularization of the term metamusic.
"Metamusic" literally means "after music," which implies that it is not music. The point of the Anachronisms work (sic, Hardwick, not oeuvre), however, is that music has become corrupted by commercial considerations and an over-emphasis on technique. That is, they have returned to real music, while corporate interests have got muic consumers hooked on "music."
You will notice that I talked about consumers of music. The music market requires consumers, so instead of encouraging people to play, "music" suppliers encourage them to appreciate music instead. The work of the Anachronisms, on the other hand, has not been commodified. It is even distributed gratis at NEW IMPROVED HEAD.
The Anachronisms' work is active, while commodified music is passive. The Anachronisms' work is expressive, while commodified music is obsessed with technique.
In short, the Anachronisms' work is music. All the other stuff is what's left after music has been stripped of its soul and forced to serve the interests of wholesalers and retailers.
The Anachronisms' work, and the work of others like them is music. All the rest is metamusic.
Of course, metamusic needs to be redefined. Purveyors of New Age recordings which are supposed to alter your brain waves have co-opted the term. I'm afraid that my husband muddied the waters a bit by his popularization of the term metamusic.
"Metamusic" literally means "after music," which implies that it is not music. The point of the Anachronisms work (sic, Hardwick, not oeuvre), however, is that music has become corrupted by commercial considerations and an over-emphasis on technique. That is, they have returned to real music, while corporate interests have got muic consumers hooked on "music."
You will notice that I talked about consumers of music. The music market requires consumers, so instead of encouraging people to play, "music" suppliers encourage them to appreciate music instead. The work of the Anachronisms, on the other hand, has not been commodified. It is even distributed gratis at NEW IMPROVED HEAD.
The Anachronisms' work is active, while commodified music is passive. The Anachronisms' work is expressive, while commodified music is obsessed with technique.
In short, the Anachronisms' work is music. All the other stuff is what's left after music has been stripped of its soul and forced to serve the interests of wholesalers and retailers.
The Anachronisms' work, and the work of others like them is music. All the rest is metamusic.
Labels: Metamusic
Monday, January 29, 2007
rupert's highly informative post has led me to propose another possibility: that music and metamusic are reframings not only of a more fundamental category but also of each other. For example, Monteverdi's introduction in "Tancredi e Clorinda" of consecutive quarter notes of the same pitch was initially rejected by the musicians hired to play it. To their minds it was like music, but not music. Eventually they were able to reframe music in light of their exposure to a metamusical innovation. Monteverdi, of course, had composed "Tancredi e Clorinda" while reframing music and metamusic simultaneously!
I also am exhilarated by Dr. LaPaunche's breakthrough in the field of song. I am familiar with his earlier work on the reframing of song and poetry and see this as a tremendously fertile development of it. I propose naming the fundamental category he discusses in his honour – as Aunche.
I also am exhilarated by Dr. LaPaunche's breakthrough in the field of song. I am familiar with his earlier work on the reframing of song and poetry and see this as a tremendously fertile development of it. I propose naming the fundamental category he discusses in his honour – as Aunche.
Friday, January 26, 2007
More breakthroughs in metamusic theory
Developments in metamusic theory have come so thick and fast recently that your humble reporter has been in “deer frozen in the headlights” mode these past several months. Let me try to summarize the extraordinary conceptual breakthroughs that have been made and are in process, as I write.On the heels of the proposed definition of metamusic as “something like music” Dr Herpes has made the radical suggestion that metamusic is a “reframing” of music. An important demurral by Dr Backwards, to the effect that this implies that metamusic is derivative of music, whereas the opposite could be true, has been resolved by an astonishing application of the dialectic; both music and metamusic are separate reframings of a more fundamental category. The terms “usic” or “meamuic” are being debated as appropriate terminology.
If the discovery of a fundamental art form were not enough in the way of epoch-making analysis, the debate on the reframing issue has led Dr Lapaunche to conclude that “song” is its own category, neither derivative of music (or usic) or metamusic (or metauic). While song is related to music/mic and metamusic/metic it has its own independent authenticity. He is now working on a reframing of song as “anson” or “ong”, in English
Developments in metamusic theory have come so thick and fast recently that your humble reporter has been in “deer frozen in the headlights” mode these past several months. Let me try to summarize the extraordinary conceptual breakthroughs that have been made and are in process, as I write.On the heels of the proposed definition of metamusic as “something like music” Dr Herpes has made the radical suggestion that metamusic is a “reframing” of music. An important demurral by Dr Backwards, to the effect that this implies that metamusic is derivative of music, whereas the opposite could be true, has been resolved by an astonishing application of the dialectic; both music and metamusic are separate reframings of a more fundamental category. The terms “usic” or “meamuic” are being debated as appropriate terminology.
If the discovery of a fundamental art form were not enough in the way of epoch-making analysis, the debate on the reframing issue has led Dr Lapaunche to conclude that “song” is its own category, neither derivative of music (or usic) or metamusic (or metauic). While song is related to music/mic and metamusic/metic it has its own independent authenticity. He is now working on a reframing of song as “anson” or “ong”, in English
