On occasion I have argued that the view of art as wholly autonomous that prevailed in the 20th century, and the principle of “l’art pour l’art” bound up with it, needs correcting in today’s situation. In my opinion a lively dialogue between art and society is indispensable for both sides. In this dialogue, part of the artist’s task is also to commit himself to developing a humane image of the individual and of society.
The question naturally arises how this can happen, and how such commitment can be realised in music in particular. After all, especially in pop music, there are plenty of examples where artists’ political commitment comes across as superficial and embarrassing. In Thomas Mann’s famous novel “Der Zauberberg” (The Magic Mountain), Settembrini, the man of the Enlightenment, even calls music “politically suspect” and denies it the positive social function he ascribes to literature. So I set out to think through, from first principles, the way music works, beginning with the qualities that belong to the nature of every form of music. Social commitment in the narrower sense comes only at the end of my reflections. This gives the following structure:
- I. Sound and experience of the self
- II. Creativity and self-development
- III. Music as relationship lived out
- IV. Visions of society in music
I. Sound and experience of the self
The post-industrial world we live in is marked by a sharp differentiation of the areas of life, which leads to people’s experience of the world and of themselves being splintered. In different situations, quite different role expectations are placed on the individual, often enforced under great pressure. Think, for example, of work, leisure, education, consumption and family. At work, people are expected to be efficient, strong-willed, combative and driven by success. In their leisure time, many are under pressure to show off fun and fashionable experiences. The constant need for further training presupposes an ability to learn, modesty and an awareness of one’s own weaknesses. Consumption, which is indispensable to the functioning of our economic system, demands that we follow our impulses as freely as possible. The family is supposed to be the place for the whole realm of emotional experience and reliable relationships that is otherwise shut out, which often overburdens the family and leads to its breaking apart.
In this situation, listening to and making music is an alternative to the splintering of the individual sketched above. Sounds are by nature whole. They speak to mind and body alike, and our experience of them is rooted in early childhood. The perception of sounds comes before all thinking in words and unites the emotional and rational elements in us. Whoever listens to music, and above all whoever makes music, has the chance to experience himself as a whole being, as a unity. First of all, this experience enables us to integrate within ourselves the worlds of life that are pulling apart. It also encourages us to look for ways of living that connect the different areas of life more closely.
Whoever stands up for music, and above all for actively making music, strengthens people’s resistance to the splintering of the individual in our society.
II. Creativity and self-development
There are, of course, very different kinds of music. The qualities of sound described above mean that it is deliberately used as a means of pacifying and manipulating people, for instance as constant background music in public spaces or in advertising. This kind of music does not serve to make people aware and help them experience themselves; it serves to keep them from perceiving reality.
So music that is committed in a positive sense must meet a further requirement: it must be an authentic statement by the artist, in keeping with his person and his life. In creatively engaging with the sounds, rhythms, moods and musical styles around him, the musician develops his identity. In a major artist, this self-development may consist in creating a new style of music of his own. But it also happens when an amateur musician actively engages with music that speaks to him personally.
This creative way of dealing with music is an act of human freedom. The artist realises it by taking his own way of perceiving and expressing seriously.
He does not let himself be deformed as a person and squeezed into roles defined by their usefulness; he insists on his own personality. At first it does not matter what comes out of this creative process. So it applies equally to jazz, contemporary concert music and authentic forms of popular music. Here artists take on the role of models and pioneers, and this radiates into other areas of society.
Whoever strives to develop an independent artistic identity encourages others to unfold their personalities too, and not to submit to the many pressures of society.
III. Music as relationship lived out
So far we have been concerned above all with the effects that sounds and the creative process have on the individual. But music always happens in community. It can only be learned through experiences and traditions of listening; it happens in the relationships of the musicians in an ensemble with one another; and it happens in the relationship of the musicians to the listeners.
This communal side of music stands in clear contrast to some of the values that dominate our society. Making music successfully requires listening to one another intensely, and the individual being able to hold back when the situation demands it. Unbounded individualism, ruthlessness and self-absorption are qualities that music immediately exposes as obstructive and destructive.
The communal character of music, however, unfolds in very different ways in the various styles. So it is important to look at the styles separately and to consider the different patterns of relationship within them. This is where one of the essential achievements of jazz becomes apparent.
A classical orchestra has an organisational structure that can in some respects be called totalitarian. The conductor is the absolute sole ruler, to whom the musicians must submit even in matters of the smallest musical nuance. The creative act belongs to the composer alone; everyone else involved merely has tasks of execution. In classical chamber music the interpretation of a work may be worked out jointly by the musicians, but here too the composition may not be changed. The rituals of concert life are designed so that there is as little contact as possible between musicians and audience. Classical music starts from the view that the “work” alone is at the centre, and that the audience is present more or less by chance. As a result, avant-garde concert music has even grown used to making music practically without listeners.
In jazz the most important form of ensemble is not the orchestra (here: the big band) but the combo. In a jazz combo the abilities of all the musicians can be brought out in a flexible way. How the pieces are shaped is usually discussed together, even when the band has a leader. Compositions are understood as a stimulus and adapted to the needs of the situation, or even completely reinterpreted and rearranged, which jazz composers expressly welcome. Through the improvisations, which usually make up most of the music, every musician can take part in the creative process.
Even a big band is not totalitarian but rather hierarchical in its organisation. A good leader keeps the overview and sets out the broad lines, but many details are settled among the sections of the band themselves (the rhythm section or the trumpet section, for instance). Because of the large number of musicians it is practically impossible to change compositions at short notice or to give every musician room to improvise, but at least the soloists take part in the creative process on an equal footing.
The close relationship between musicians and listeners in jazz finds expression in various ways: in spontaneous applause and calls from the audience; in the announcements, which are often spontaneous and witty; in the choice of programme, which is tailored to the concert situation and often takes the listeners’ wishes into account. (See also: Jazz musicians and their audience)
Popular music, too, when it is not a pure industrial product aimed solely at commercial success, has intense group structures corresponding to those of a jazz band. Since the music is more simply built, the personal bond between the musicians often matters more than in jazz. As a result, the identity of the group is more important than the individuality of the single musicians. The simple musical structures also open the music up to people who are not as thoroughly trained as is normally the case in jazz and classical music. The approach “buy a guitar, learn three chords and start a band” has a decidedly democratic impetus, even if the actual musical results are mostly meagre.
One problem throughout popular music lies in the relationship between musicians and audience. “It’s just a show, but people think it’s reality,” Mick Jagger once said. This of course contains the seed of a self-deception that only ever feigns authenticity. It is no accident that one of the records by the legendary punk band “The Sex Pistols” is called “The Great Rock ’n’ Roll Swindle”. The irony of the title is that the band, with its carefully cultivated rebel image and the centrally designed trash aesthetic of punk, was itself part of this swindle. Because of this show character, popular music is able to take on industrial forms and to build huge markets by constructing illusory realities. Even so, authentic and artistically ambitious forms of popular music still exist today. (When it comes to authenticity, the youth centre round the corner is probably well ahead!)
Whoever makes music enters into intense relationships with fellow musicians, and in this way runs counter to the ever-growing isolation of people in our society. Through their choice of style, musicians always shape particular patterns of relationship as well, and these become models. Whoever plays jazz conveys a form of relationship that balances individuality and responsibility to the group in a flexible way. Jazz musicians practise (on stage!) a form of community that gives positive impulses for shaping society.
IV. Visions of society in music
The previous section on structures of relationship has already made clear that in choosing a particular style of music and a particular form of expression, one is in a sense also choosing a way of living together and an image of society. The careful balancing of the group and individual freedom in a jazz band contrasts, for example, with the collective anarchism of a punk band, the structural conservatism of a symphony orchestra or a techno DJ’s fixation on technology.
By its mere existence, then, music already implies a vision of society. To say more than that, however, the artist has to leave the realm of pure music and bring in forms of verbal expression. There are several ways of doing this:
1. Music in itself always has the character of a language. Styles of music carry messages that have formed in listeners’ minds through their historical development: jazz is always also the music through which the oppressed Black people of America found their identity. Classical music carries echoes of the splendour and power of the court elites of past centuries. Rock music always also conveys an idea of rebellion and of an anti-bourgeois subculture. So in this way, too, the musician makes a political statement through his choice of style. This element can also be used deliberately, as on the record “Ballad of the Fallen” by the jazz bassist Charlie Haden, where the Latin American pieces express the band’s solidarity with the people of El Salvador.
2. The inclusion of texts that take a direct stand on particular issues has been part of every form of music from the very beginning, whether Celtic bards, African griots, medieval church chant, operas and oratorios, or pop songs. A crucial example from jazz is the song “Strange Fruit” sung by Billie Holiday, which deals with the lynching of Black people in the southern United States in a way that was shattering at the time and is still moving today. Since jazz is mostly instrumental, the titles of pieces often take on the function of a text, as with Charles Mingus, whose titles such as “Prayer for Passive Resistance”, “Oh Lord, don’t let them drop that atomic bomb on me” or “Goodbye Pork Pie Hat” carry very intense political and personal messages.
3. A musician can use the authority he has gained in the artistic field to take a stand in the political field. One example is Miles Davis, who made no political statements whatsoever in his music, but often spoke out quite vehemently about the situation of Black people in America.
Through the use of musical styles, of texts and titles, and through public statements, a musician can be socially committed in very different ways. This has been one of the tasks of music from the very beginning.
As we have seen, there are many different ways for a musician to have an effect on the social discourse. Let us use them!