Why was this music desirable? On a critical explanation of the avant-garde

Michael Gallope
{"title":"Why was this music desirable? On a critical explanation of the avant-garde","authors":"Michael Gallope","doi":"10.1525/JM.2014.31.2.199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the introduction to his Oxford History of Western Music (2005), Richard Taruskin writes that his account of music history is based in the work of individual people, their statements, and their actions, as opposed to the power of ideas, teleologies, and romantic attachments to style criticism. He also claims that a “true history” of music can overcome the survey genre by offering causal explanations of historical events. In his discussion of the Cold War avant-garde, however, Taruskin points the way toward a slightly different kind of historiography by employing what I call a critical explanation. It is based in a causal question—Why was this desirable?—but the ensuing explanation resembles the hermeneutics of suspicion typically associated with thinkers such as Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud, all of whom were skeptical of the view that individuals are agents of their actions. I argue that Taruskin’s approach to the era has a methodological upshot, enabling readers to evaluate how the Cold War avant-garde might be linked with social and intellectual history in new ways. To demonstrate this, the article begins with a theoretical discussion of causality and its complex relationship to empiricism, proceeds through a survey of Taruskin’s use of existentialism as a critical explanation of the Cold War avant-garde, and ends with an account of some historical details concerning the era’s intellectual actors that expands on a few of the issues his critical explanation presents.","PeriodicalId":413730,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Musicology","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Musicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/JM.2014.31.2.199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

In the introduction to his Oxford History of Western Music (2005), Richard Taruskin writes that his account of music history is based in the work of individual people, their statements, and their actions, as opposed to the power of ideas, teleologies, and romantic attachments to style criticism. He also claims that a “true history” of music can overcome the survey genre by offering causal explanations of historical events. In his discussion of the Cold War avant-garde, however, Taruskin points the way toward a slightly different kind of historiography by employing what I call a critical explanation. It is based in a causal question—Why was this desirable?—but the ensuing explanation resembles the hermeneutics of suspicion typically associated with thinkers such as Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud, all of whom were skeptical of the view that individuals are agents of their actions. I argue that Taruskin’s approach to the era has a methodological upshot, enabling readers to evaluate how the Cold War avant-garde might be linked with social and intellectual history in new ways. To demonstrate this, the article begins with a theoretical discussion of causality and its complex relationship to empiricism, proceeds through a survey of Taruskin’s use of existentialism as a critical explanation of the Cold War avant-garde, and ends with an account of some historical details concerning the era’s intellectual actors that expands on a few of the issues his critical explanation presents.
为什么这种音乐是可取的?对先锋派的批判性解释
理查德·塔鲁斯金(Richard Taruskin)在《牛津西方音乐史》(2005)的引言中写道,他对音乐史的描述是基于个人的作品、他们的陈述和行动,而不是思想、目的论和对风格批评的浪漫依恋的力量。他还声称,音乐的“真实历史”可以通过对历史事件的因果解释来克服调查类型。然而,在他对冷战先锋派的讨论中,塔鲁斯金指出了一条稍微不同的史学之路,他采用了我所说的批判性解释。它基于一个因果问题——为什么这是可取的?但随后的解释类似于马克思、尼采和弗洛伊德等思想家对怀疑的解释学,他们都对个人是其行为的代理人这一观点持怀疑态度。我认为,塔鲁斯金对那个时代的研究方法具有方法论意义,使读者能够以新的方式评估冷战先锋派如何与社会史和思想史联系起来。为了证明这一点,文章从对因果关系及其与经验主义的复杂关系的理论讨论开始,通过对塔鲁斯金使用存在主义作为对冷战先锋派的批判性解释的调查,并以对该时代知识分子行动者的一些历史细节的描述结束,这些细节扩展了他的批判性解释所提出的一些问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信