The Radio 3 Boards Forum from myforum365.com
06:55:51, 02-12-2008 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Whilst we happily welcome all genuine applications to our forum, there may be times when we need to suspend registration temporarily, for example when suffering attacks of spam.
 If you want to join us but find that the temporary suspension has been activated, please try again later.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Lachenmann on the 'culture of "fun"' (Spaßkultur)  (Read 302 times)
Ian Pace
Temporary Restriction
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4190



« on: 00:11:09, 30-06-2007 »

On composition and the idea of retrieving the concept of art with reference to society, its "occidentally"-based restrictions, and not least the human need for self-realisation through the creative process.

The not entirely unpretentious notion of "retrieval" refers to the dictum pronounced by Karl Kraus, that tireless admonisher and prophet of the "Last Days of Man", which he recognised during the outbreak of the First World War in an ardent protest against the current political and national over-enthusiasm of a warmongering journalism; who in the 1930s, however, upon the Nazis' rise to power, abstained from further "burning" articles, whose futility and helplessness he realised, and saw only a single necessity: to "bring language to safety" in the face of such an all-suffocating barbarism.
      This all-suffocating barbarism diagnosed by Kraus was not overcome through the two world wars - on the contrary, it came to infiltrate all areas of life in a fatally harmless guise: as a culture of "Fun" whose universal, cheapened availability gives rise to a rapid devaluation of all that has been precious to us as artistic experience. We are thus today once again faced with the task of bringing art "to safety", even if the word "safety" may initially give us a start.

Helmut Lachenmann -'Philosophy of Composition: Is there such a thing?', translated Wieland Hoban, in Identity and Difference: Essays on Music, Language and Time (Collected Writings of the Orpheus Institute) (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2004), pp. 55-56.

The term 'culture of "Fun"' was Spaßkultur, a reasonably common term in recent times in Germany (together with the concomitant Spaßgesellschaft, see here). The article has to the best of my knowledge only been published in English translation.

A very acute diagnosis of the situation of new music today.
« Last Edit: 00:19:26, 30-06-2007 by Ian Pace » Logged

'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
increpatio
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 2544


‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮


« Reply #1 on: 21:22:09, 30-06-2007 »

A culture of fun?  Not sure if I fully understand what that means; I mean England was the birthplace of Utilitarianism, but even that doesn't carry the same connotations and implications as that expression - I take it that it is meant to imply that there be some shallowness to all of the experiences denoted as fun?  Or does it refer to the gradual turn away from the traditional virtues/moral pursuits, or?
Logged

‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮
Ian Pace
Temporary Restriction
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4190



« Reply #2 on: 21:31:15, 30-06-2007 »

Spaßkultur, as the term seems to be used, refers to a culture dominated solely by hedonism, consumerism and a certain infantilism, in which wider social and other concerns are overlooked (as well as issues of altruism, community, etc.). The Spaßgesellschaft is particularly associated with the period after the end of the Cold War i.e. from the beginning of the 1990s until the present day. Spaßmusik is a term used in Germany mostly in the context of popular music, I think (not sure about this); more widely the term might be used as an extension of the others, to denote a music with no other purpose or result than to be 'fun' to listen to, appealing to those aforementioned factors in the Spaßkultur. Some, of course, might claim that this is all music either can or should do.
Logged

'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
increpatio
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 2544


‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮


« Reply #3 on: 21:47:21, 30-06-2007 »

That does a great disservice to the range of possibilities that the English (language) notion of word "fun" can have.  I think also in my (admittedly very weak) sense of the German sense.  Same for "Spaßkultur".  Will give myself an evening to try and get over the dissonance his use of these terms causes in me before saying any more.
Logged

‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮
oliver sudden
Admin/Moderator Group
*****
Posts: 6411



« Reply #4 on: 22:03:01, 30-06-2007 »

even if the word "safety" may initially give us a start.

Hm. Not the most elegant or unambiguous of phrasings... Wink

Some may know, but some might not, that the more or less standard terms for 'popular' and 'classical' music in German are 'U-Musik' and 'E-Musik', standing for 'Unterhaltungsmusik' (entertainment music) and 'ernste Musik' (serious music) respectively. Obviously those are rather troublesome designations...
Logged
Ian Pace
Temporary Restriction
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4190



« Reply #5 on: 22:08:53, 30-06-2007 »

Some may know, but some might not, that the more or less standard terms for 'popular' and 'classical' music in German are 'U-Musik' and 'E-Musik', standing for 'Unterhaltungsmusik' (entertainment music) and 'ernste Musik' (serious music) respectively. Obviously those are rather troublesome designations...

I've always got the idea that the terms are not quite equivalent to 'popular' and 'classical', though the differences are subtle. Would you say this is the case? Are there any cases of music that we might call 'popular' (including some now 'classic' jazz, say) being designated E-Musik?

(By coincidence, just made a copy of a Dahlhaus essay 'Ist die Unterscheidung zwischen E-und U-Musik eine Fiktion?' (Is the distinction between E- and U-music a fiction?) today, but haven't read it yet)
Logged

'These acts of keeping politics out of music, however, do not prevent musicology from being a political act . . .they assure that every apolitical act assumes a greater political immediacy' - Philip Bohlman, 'Musicology as a Political Act'
oliver sudden
Admin/Moderator Group
*****
Posts: 6411



« Reply #6 on: 22:16:52, 30-06-2007 »

I've always got the idea that the terms are not quite equivalent to 'popular' and 'classical', though the differences are subtle. Would you say this is the case?

Depends who you talk to... of course the distinction has most force when preparing one's royalty statements (I trust all the German-resident performers on the board got their GVL in in time?).

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-,_U-_und_F-Musik

Popular and classical are slightly slippery terms in English as well, with plenty of grey in between them.
« Last Edit: 22:19:12, 30-06-2007 by oliver sudden » Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: