In a 1977 article entitled "Musical Cosmology," written by electronic composer and cognitive theorist Bejanmin Boretz, four definitions of what the consitution of music actually consists of is given. Music, whose metonymic allusion is that of the perceptually endless yet studiably finite "cosmos" [such opposites are relevant later on], can be seen as either....
Music as blend of musical combinatorics, in-turn causing a presence of biocenosis.
Music as anything with an intoned existentiality, regardless of the source of intonation
Music as the outcome of historical permutations of aesthetics, techniques, and forms
Music as a polymethodological phenomenon encapsulating thought, word, and deed
What these definitions point to is the realization so many have had, and that is the idea that music is the synthesis of micro-realities which coalesce and create macro-realities which are not homogenized universes of previously autonomous vehicles of thought which, upon convening with each other lose their independence upon the altar of architectonics. Instead, music retains its dialectical core, where individuality of the components is kept but plugged into a framework of a larger form, thus giving a secondary teleology to the once isolated semiotic, now reconfigured to be not an isolated semiotic but a individually meaningful part of a larger semiotic object which is not itself anything other than elements brough together in its own meaningful way. Whether this process is understood through a constructivist approach [genesis of musical unity from the blending of tones], uncurated sound reflections of life [think of a tree falling], antiquarian conventionality [usage of premade aesthetic procedures], or instead a holistic and unpurposeful comingling of inspiration, action, and perception, the outcome that we understand as music is but an aggregate of a myriad of elements which combine to form an tactfully-integrated "cosmos".
Upon this backing, and because my genre of choice is (Russified) Hip-Hop, there stands a challenge which must be interrogated first, and that is the cosmogonic synthesis of non-notational instrumental textures and their semantic partners, specifically avoiding the stale conception regarding Western musical symbology and instead a pluralized understanding. Hip-Hop, unlike classical music, is not solely formed by the arrangement of notes in two-dimensional space whereupon their horizontal and vertical relationships, presided over through curated time-space [rhythm, tempo, etc.], create the thing which we call music but which I am going to call "audible thought." Instead Hip-Hop, through the help of either mouth-beats, hand-clapping, machines and/or digital applications [depending on the era], create musical biomes which are not ruled [for the most part] by two-dimensional tones but aurally-organized sound combinations which, while viable for two-dimensional mapping in some cases, are created to be purposefully aural. Hip-Hop is not a notational art form, thus when dealing with its elements one must first rely on cognitive perceptions of "living" sound.
But another element that classical music lacks is the unoptional, lyrical component. Unlike artsong, opera, lieder, or vocal repertoire, Hip-Hop's musical ontology is tethered to the lyrical, the linguistic representation of feeling and emotion. Without this layer, one is left with curated instrumentation which does have its own viscerality but cannot justifiably be called "Hip-Hop" as it lacks a narratival core and becomes a poor mimetic of programmatic repertoire. Some would argue with heavy consertation at this assesstment but one has to contend with the tenants of the Hip-Hop art form, of which the lyrical layer is unsacrificable. Boretz mentions the dialectic of "About" vs. "Within," an interesting point when thinking about where meaning lies in Hip-Hop and if it's generated in lyrics and then applied to the musical material, or if the musical material itself contains a narrative, which is voiced through text? As Boretz notes, understanding what the musical material is trying to tell you can be descerned through the "about" method, where thoughts are subjectively inferred and then the music is used to corroborate such feelings, or the "within" formula, where meaning is dictated by the musical material and its configurations. I tend to align myself with the second option, as musicians are not ones for empty semiotics, and don't put musical works together, using certain elements, simply because they feel inclined to. The fascinating part is Boretz's breakdown of the "Within" as something "descriptive" and "attributive," alluding to the feasibility of understanding that a musical work posesses as something meaningful and studiable in its own right or an empty canvas which we apply meaning to to help ourselves.
This could very well be the case with Hip-Hop but I would argue that the 'attributive' case is incredibly unlike in any musical space, as every composer is vying to express a truth that has solidified into an intoned expression of self in need of time-space. Boretz notes that the 'attributive' category is tied to our comprehension of the musical material, and if we are unperceptive in our reading of the music, then we do not perceive meaning. This opens up the conversation of 'Is meaning inherent in music or is it solely applied,' one of the more popular lines of discourse being 'Is emotional states inherent in pieces of music or do we ascribe them?' I don't necessarily have an answer but music is unarguably able to fulfill a 'suggestive' role in mental reconfiguration of psychic states, take for example Rachmaninoff's Op. 29 "Isle of the Dead," a monstrously grand and sophisticated piece of symphonic literature. The monotonous drudge-like quality could be the waves, or it could be the hand of time, or something else? My main point is that musical material carries a base meaning, and while subjectivity is indeed valid, a composer's ideation of their art is primary.
What remains? The act of implementing such methodologies, and the discovery of the relationship between the sounding world, textual meaning, and sociopsychological stimuli. In my pursuit of documenting how, at least in Russian Hip-Hop and its various aesthetic characterizations, the tenants of Asafievian theory like Symphonism, "Musical energetics" [among many other things] are invoked and present themselves in this genre, along with the utilization of the nine core elements of Musicology according to the sagacious and Delphic Theorist [not a term I use lightly], I want to look at Oxxxymiron's 2021 Album "Beauty and Ugliness" from the perspective of articulating the relationship of soundscapes, poetics, and psychological impulses. It's more than apparent that this Album is a fortuous occurence of when the "psychic state" of the creator is personified through "the art of sound." However, I want to simply and effectively document what that actually means, not only for Academic purposes but because by doing so, Russian Hip-Hop can be more accurately understood as its own species, incorporating its own 'intonational vocabulary' and musical linguistics.
This is all that I was able to do today because the majority of the morning was spent in indecisive ambiguity on how to cogently begin this investigative work, and even now I am unhappy with the progress that I've made, seeing as I wanted to actually look at the music today instead of read yet another article. But that's the process to which such a project must align itself, so I concede my original plan for this ad hoc alternative. I'll leave you with a quotation from Boretz, a snarky yet illuminating outlook on the musical Weltanschauung.
“We [artistic characters], in other words, presume to decide and create what reality is to be, while you [scientists] presume that what you decide and create is what reality is and must be.”
Comments