This week's topic of reflection was to research and review two articles of our own choosing that delve into comparing some modern takes on issues like music and morality to the views of Plato in the early Greek era. This proved to be quite an interesting subject that helped to solidify how the discussion of music's importance to culture and character is time-tested and probably destined to continue with similar arguments being made. That is the part that truly surprises me; the discussion of music's connection and importance to cultural and character development does not seem to have fundamentally changed in any significant way. It seems to just rehash old points of view, without any real proof to valid claims on either side (entertainment vs. educationally important).
The first article that I explored was Roger Scruton's Music and Morailty (2010). I was amazed that even beyond the scope of this class there are individuals making these same comparisons, and even putting their views in print. Scruton's article seems to mostly revolve around the concept of today's popular music, and if it can or should be analyzed for it's quality, or if it should be only seen as an entertainment product that is more about rhythm than about the music. Interesting points he makes center on music that is considered for dancing very well may have extreme implications to how we as a culture see ourselves, when to properly dance with the music, one must conform and remove one's own identity to a certain degree. It must be experienced as a collective, and one needs to meld with the music as opposed to letting it flow over themselves. He contends that melodic content and form are almost non-existant in modern popular music, and thus the music is more about the rhythm. He compares this directly to classical music, with evolves over time, and for audiences to appreciate it they must be mature enough to delay gratification as the music flows.
His exploration of our culture is hard to argue, in that we are a non-judgemental culture. The cycle of "who are you to criticize?" coupled with the industries marketing towards the younger generations, who are in turn less educated on the formal practice and structure of music, make it hard to ever begin music criticism of the elements that make up the content much less start to evaluate its moral quality. Add in that so many experience music in such vastly different ways as depicted in the above paragraph, and we have a complicated discourse to pursue. He states that regardless of all of these factors, students must be trained to hear the music, and not just feel it, so that they can begin to assimilate what the music is really trying to say and do, for if this does not happen, then culture will effect changes in our laws, something the Plato himself discusses.
In addition to the writer's own comparisons to Plato, it is easy to see how Plato's views of music effecting morality and character can be seen through these main points Scruton reviews. If one does not understand the music they listen to, and they dance to it in suggestive manners that the music promotes, then it could be argued that over time, such actions could in turn effect the propensity of an individual's beliefs and other actions, thus changing their character. So in turn the study of music and combating the "regression of listening" as Structon implies (2010) is essential to turn the trend of non-judgemental attitudes in the direction of appropriate analysis that will ultimately cause students to pass judgement on both quality and appropriateness of the music and the culture represented by the music, which is something I believe Plato was advocating when purusing improvement of the "soul" through music.
The next article I looked at concerned Tipper Gore and her work with the Parents' Music Resource Center, which in 1985 led the charge for albums to be voluntarily released included labels indicating graphic/adult lyrics and themes. The writer takes a reflective stance a few years later on how he was approached by anti-censorship groups to join their cause, in which they believed she and her group were on a rampage to hinder their right to free speech within their given art. They believed he would join them, as a writer for a newspaper, in that cause.
He then takes them on a question and answer session in which he (in my opinion) proves many of Plato's tenants that good music can help make people good and bad music (or music with questionable moral conviction) could in turn change people in negative ways. He argued that music and any art for that matter helps shape social forces, enriches the human spirit, and that though they believed government did not have the right to keep consumers from purchasing either spectrum of influential music, he compared to it to government and societies' successful attempts to put warning labels on food that is ingested and keeping toxic waste from being put in areas that could contaminate us. The choice still exists, but just as Plato stated that it is more than just an avenue of entertainment but something that can effect us all in profound ways, society should make it a priority for its instruction to as many as possible to help create better, more productive members of our society.
This was a much more interesting topic than I originally believed it would be, and look forward to the future assignments in this class if they promote similar thought and historical comparisons!
References
Royko, Mike. (July 24, 1992). Tipper Gore Gets Bad Rap on Labeling. Chicago Tribune.
Retrieved from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1992-07-24/news/9203060597_1_warp-attitudes-powerful-art-form-the-music-tipper-gore
Scruton, Roger. (2010). Music and morality: Plato remains our finest rock critic. The American Spectator. Feb. Retrieved from http://spectator.org/articles/40193/music-and-morality
No comments:
Post a Comment