Category: Big Questions

  • Music, Memory, Art(?): Where are We Now?

    Last night I attended an incredibly beautiful chamber music concert, the first of the Knoxville Symphony's Concertmaster series for this year and was stunned by the skill, harmony, and emotional weight of the performance.  I also allowed my mind to wander, as the minds of humans are won't to do, enjoying the music, experiencing the place, and allowing my thoughts to attempt to integrate the feelings of the now with the history that has led up to the now.  It became a tangled mass of branching thoughts, which also seems to me to be a very human phenomenon.  It is only when we cling too tightly to simplicity that we can be led astray.

    Tangled

    The program consisted mostly of music of the baroque era, and mostly music of great emotional depth and weight.  The exceptions are important here, as was the layout of the program, as the contrast added necessary tension, a tension that served to expand the listeners response, inspite of, or perhaps because of, the interruption in flow.  This is harder to do than one might assume, this contrasting of what I will call style and substance, in a way that actually enhances all of the components, making something that felt whole out of disparate, but thematically related, pieces.

     

    The basic format was along these lines:  style, substance, style, substance.

     

    But how did that take shape?  First there was Corelli, with "La Folia for Violin, Harpsichord, and Continuo", a light vibrant piece that set the tone, a musical amuse-bouche of sorts. Corelli is important for shaping the tone of the baroque, but also because he insisted on a consistency in technique that changed the way music was performed, opening the way, perhaps, for modern orchestral performance.  Corelli also, at least to this listener, seems to be incredibly balanced, lyrical, crisp, happy music, but a music of surfaces only, the depth held tightly at bay.  The Corelli was followed by a longer work by Handel, the Sonata #4 in D Major for Violin and Harpsichord, which was richly resonant, imbued with an emotional sense that played harmoniously with the setting in the Knoxville museum of art.  The lighter movements seeming to bounce playfully off the glass sculpture overhead, to dance through the texture of the cloud-filled sky seen just beyond the musicians, the contrast of baroque music and modern city in the moments before dusk.  And then just that, dusk and the passion of the Scherzando, eternal, and yet also extremely specific to this communal experience in this time and space.

     

    Then we began the second style-substance rotation.  The Handel was followed by Martinu, by the "Promenades for Flute Violin and Harpsichord".  It seems like an interesting choice on the surface, Martinu a very 20th-Century composer, a composer whose music seems perfectly in tune to his milieu between the wars that eternally changed human consciousness concerning who and what humans are and could become.  Martinu was also attracted to the baroque, an interesting choice, but perhaps not surprising, an attempt to find a path forward while looking backward, looking for something in human history that softened the weight of the emotional moment.  In this sense Martinu reminded me of Corelli — perhaps less formally polished and reserved, but also all style — except this was music for the jazz age, music of the 20's, music that was intentionally avoiding the inescapable emotional weight of the recent past.  

     

    I suspect that many in the audience did not love the Martinu as much as the Handel.  I could say that I too might prefer to drift into Handel than Martinu, although I found it both shocking, and it is strange to say that about music that is over 80 years old, and charming in a way that had me considering Martinu differently than I had previously, probably mostly because I am only familiar with his symphonic output.   But the Martinu also served to pull my thoughts together in a way that would have been different had the music not been included.  I think placement was critical here, just before the intermission.  If I were to maintain the food analogy, I would say it was a bit of a tart sorbet or palate cleanser, allowing our ears and minds to reset between two too-rich courses.  

     

    And the second half was rich.  We were treated to two of the Brandenburg Concerti, and due to the considerations of the space, the audience and the larger group of musicians, the space itself began to feel as if we were all participating cells in a single body as the music unfolded, musicians and listeners as one.  There was a very relational sense to this performance, one that is not always captured both between the musicians, and between the musicians and the audience, one where the listeners feel as if they are a part of the music surrounding them.   It was a powerful and beautiful evening.

    TreeRoots

    But this leads me to the other part of this performance, the places the music led my mind to wander, and my own questioning of history, experience, and humanity.   These thoughts are my own, of course, and yet, much as we like to think ourselves unique, this is but a shadow truth.  I am but a speck after all, and music reminds us of this, of the way we are transported into some common place even though our individual experiences of that place are different.  We are all just cells in one giant living tree, twisted and overgrown perhaps, but an inexorably connected piece of  the whole.  It seems interesting, therefore,  that though we live in a time when we prefer to think of ourselves as unique, we still thrill to music written in a time when the uniqueness of the individual was not a priority.  This very dichotomy seems to connect us even more deeply.  Even though we cannot experience anything in the same way as that previous cell did, its existence informs our existence. 

     

    As I listened to the Corelli, I was transported back to my 17- and 18- year old self, to the girl who loved Corelli, the girl would sit in her dorm room and lose herself in this music.  I wondered what a young girl saw in Corelli and I am not surprised: the joy of it, yes,  but also the harmony and cohesiveness. Perhaps it was that very lack of emotional weight that drew me in.  At that age all I wanted was an escape from the burden of emotional strife, and as I listened to the music again, I reconnected with that sense last night, the was reminded of the way we yearn for peace today, yearn for escape from the sense of strife hammered into us every time we look at the news.    

     

    Corelli and Martinu, Handel and Bach.  Baroque music connects us to some essential yearning. But we cannot have it, not in the way we think anyway.  The way we listen to this music today is shaped by the way the world has been altered over the course of the last 120 years.  It is in our DNA.  The music we heard last night was unique to a particular time and place. We the listeners, and the musicians playing the music, are each completely who we are, and we are products world entirely different from the one in which Handel lived. That Handel could write music that transcended time and place is art.  That is something unique to us, we humans, art and awareness — not just that we are aware, but that we are aware that we are aware, and this awareness changes us throughout subsequent generations, even, and oh the injustice of it, without our being aware that we are changed. 

     

    The music by Martinu reminded me of this, of my adolescent self loving Corelli, of the way we, the collective audience, loved the Handel, and that sense of universal yearning. The Martinu struck me because it made me think about the way many audiences of classical music today struggle with this period, struggle more I think with this "modern" period that occurred between the wars, the music where one world, one social structure, had been torn asunder and yet there was no stability, where another war was going to change our very understanding of humanity.  We struggle because we cannot recapture that feeling experienced by generations before us, by people who were transformed into a different kind of awareness following WWII.   We are inheritors of a different kind of world, but,  in a way, like Martinu, we seek a more distant history, one less imbedded in our more recent DNA. Perhaps we too attempt to integrate old with new, dreams with the reality of the world in which we live, yearnings with experience.

     

    I don't think we think of music, or art, in this way very often, and perhaps my own meandering reflections are shaped by new understandings, or misunderstandings, from recent readings.  But it seems like something worth exploring.  Or not.  

     

    This perhaps is just a beginning, an incoherent beginning at that. 

     

  • Inside, Outside, InsideOut

     

    Light

    Sunset at the Knoxville Museum of Art, the evening light reflecting on Richard Jolley's Cycle of Life.  I was at the museum for a fund-raising event and the way the light reflected on the glass, particularly the light passing through the two pieces of the final stage, Contemplation, really stuck in my head that particular evening, seeming to draw attention to both inner and outer light, the balance, or lack of it that illuminates our humanity, needing both the interior and the exterior stimuli to feed our creativity and wholeness of self.  As I enjoyed the evening, caught up in that externally extroverted sense of social hubbub, I was reminded of this inner light, and the way it sustains us, sometimes glowing from within, other times hidden.

     

    The social season has begun again and the next two weeks will be filled with music and art, some literature, another play, as well as social interaction.  I am reminded of how the external or the social also feeds our creativity, or at least, my own creativity —  reminded  that as much as I need the interior, and feel stressed and drawn when time for necessary quiet is not available, the same can be said for the social aspect of life as well.  I need both for balance, and wonder if perhaps the summer was, in itself, perhaps a bit too isolating, a bit too deeply mired in the internal slough of excess introspection.  

     

    Or perhaps this is simply the story I tell myself.  It increasingly seems to me that as much as well need our stories, both personal and cultural, in order to find our own place in the world,  those same stories also have a tendency to mask truth, which always requires communication and a meeting of perspectives.  As soon as one claims some hold on truth, "my truth", one is already on a slippery slope. 

     

    SynchronoousFirefliesWozniak

     

    And yet I continue to feel unsettled, both exuberant, this sense of buzz and excitement fed by the social milieu, while simultaneously feeling overwhelmed.  Like Tikka when she wanders around in circles, pawing at the carpet or a chair cushion trying to make just the right spot to settle in comfortably, I feel like I've not yet found that comfortable place where the inner and he outer can meet.

     

    Look at this photo above, of a painting by Karla Wozniak called Synchronous Fireflies in the Knoxville Museum.  I was at the museum again yesterday for another event, and I took this photo with an entirely different narrative in mind from the one in which I find myself this morning.  I love the exuberance of the painting, the sense of light, of motion and also lushness.  It. reminds me of the giddy interaction of social setting, of surprise connections, of this dance  of interconnectedness.  And yet the lushness, and perhaps this is just the way I am looking at this painting this morning, also holds a hint of danger. It reminds me of how light and perception can change, and the way something that can seem lush, rich, and exuberant in one moment can be transformed in an instant, suddenly becoming dark, dangerous, and overwhelming.

     

    I am reminded of when I first moved to New York state from Texas, of the way I was enamored of the tall trees and the lush sense of greenness, but how at certain times in my yard, in the flush of rain and humidity and summer heat, I would dream that I was being devoured by that very excessive growth.  I still feel that way sometimes in Tennessee, although not particularly this summer with my flat brown yard, which bare as it is, also holds a comforting sense of promise.  And yet there is still that sense of celebration combined with the fear, (is it fear?) of being overwhelmed, of going too far in one direction or the other.  And I wonder if this very feeling is something shared by others, or if I am just being presumptuous, attempting to project my own mistruth onto the world.  I wonder if I am obsessing over "my story" or if there is some connection there to something more human and universal.

     

    The flash of the fireflies, the light of the painting reminds me of how social interaction sparks creativity and pulls me out of the overgrowth, the strangling vines and deep much of self-indulgent introspection.

    LesterGeorgeHornbyLondonBrdigeC

     

    Two other pictures, also viewed yesterday, reminded me of the opposite extreme, at least for me.  The photo above if of a print made from the cancelled plate of an engraving by Lester George Hornby called London Bridge.  The crosshatched marks are added to the plate to prevent further prints from being made and passed off as originals.  But I also find it interesting in and of itself.  The pattern of the crosshatching seems to me to add a sense of distance, and even disengagement from the view seen in the print, as if one is standing behind a window with heavy leaded panes looking at the world.  For me, this is the danger of too much extroversion, too much social engagement without the requisite private interior time.  I feel like a fly trapped in some sticky surface atop the glass, unable to fully become a part of the scene, present but disengaged.

     

    LesterGeorgeHornbyLondonBridgePrime

    Here is the official print.  Notice how we are much more deeply drawn in here, much more a part of the scene.  I look at this print and feel palpably drawn into this world, into the detail.  This print engenders a sense of connection, as opposed to the sense of separation in the previous print.  Perhaps this is what I am trying to articulate, the struggle to find the balance that is needed in order to live in this world, to function on a daily basis in a world that is basically imposed upon me both externally and by my own psyche, and the ability to look beyond that, to be neither mired in the mud or trapped on the surface, to create the life I want, a life that in the end requires that I look beyond myself and into the whole of the community, a communion, in a sense, with the world.

     

     

  • Meanderings

    I experiences a bit of a petulant moment on Saturday as I was out shopping, whinging to myself, quietly, under my breath, about why there was only one store in Knoxville I could count on for having Belgian endive in stock (or escarole for that matter).  Both are vegetables that I would consume regularly, perhaps weekly, if they were widely available.  But, as is usually always the case with these small annoyances in life, the situation is as much about ourselves as it is about the situation itself.  Of course my formative adult years, ie. my formative cooking years, occurred in the Hudson Valley where both escarole and Belgian endive were indeed widely available in most grocery stores.  It was a different time and place, with a different population, holding different expectations.  It is on me, when moving, to realize that expectations and norms are different in different spaces.  I should be grateful that I can find Belgian endive, and that the store in question is on my list of preferred stores (following last spring's spreadsheet comparison).  I do in fact know where to go to get the things I want, and there are in fact probably many things in the store that are considered essential in this region, things that I never buy. In the end, it seems it is all about how one looks at the world, and how willing one is to adapt.  And therefore I musk ask myself:  Why whinge?

    Chilled Tomato Soup(chilled tomato soup with an endive and shiitake salad, a soup I've been making for over 20 years)

     

    Of course I live in an age that celebrates the individual, which has not been the case for most of human history.  I am not always convinced that this is the best course.  Not that I don't believe that all people should be treated fairly and with dignity, but because I doubt that a society can successfully survive on individuality without developing a class of winners and a class of losers, or in fact whether even a person can live life solely based on his or her own desires without hurting others in the process, even inadvertently.  Then I move on from there, thinking that we are not really living self-actualized individual lives at all.  That each of us is a slave in one sense or another to this vision of society and culture, and that there is no way for some people to make it to the top without forcing other people to be on the bottom.

     

    Oh dear, this is not at all where I thought I was going with post this morning.  And yet here I am.  

     

    I realize the precariousness of my position because my life, and the very things I waste energy fretting over (endive?, landscapers?), where and how I live, are all a part of this same view of society that I am currently questioning, and I am unquestioningly not on the bottom of the heap.  And so it seems I must hold my own good-fortune lightly, recognizing that were it all to disappear tomorrow, both the gain and the loss would be but a blip on the course of human history, and in fact should have nothing to do with the joy and purpose to be found in human life.  Perhaps even my insistence on endive is a failure to adapt, an insistence that the past, my past, was somehow superior to the present, a dogged persistence in holding the ideals of the individual over all the rest.

     

    Oh there is the rub.  But how did I even get into this reflective state of mind?  Blame it on books, because a lifetime of reading has shaped me, both fiction and non-fiction.  Fiction makes us more empathetic, more human (and yes people have studied this); non-fiction forces us to think about the world in new ways.  And the books I have just read, both non-fiction, have put me in a questioning mood.  But to blame my own inclinations solely on books is also misleading — there is truth there of course, but such a simplistic explanation is acceptable only to a fool. Of course books alone do not make the person, so do our environment and the people we encounter, both willingly and unwillingly, but books force us to perhaps look outside ourselves, to open ourselves up to greater encounters with others. Although l cannot blame books entirely for who I am and how I think, they play a role.

     

     Perhaps this is why books are so often banned?  Thinking truly can be subversive, the ability to look outside of one's self and one's circumstances revolutionary.  Or madness……  Or adulthood. Who was it that said the difference between looking at the world as a child and as an adult is the ability to step outside of one's milieu and self and look upon the self as if an outsider?  But that too is revolutionary because the path of self-actualization of seeing the self as it truly is also means letting go of the idea that the world can revolve around one's own needs. The life of self-gratification is the life of a child.

    ThiningBooks

     

    Admittedly one of the books I have been reading, Debt, by David Graeber has perhaps provoked some of my more radical questionings, but I do not think radical questioning of one's basic assumptions is such a bad thing.  Debt, has, in fact, been one of the most intellectually stimulating, enjoyable, and thought-provoking books I have read in a long time.  It is not so much an economics text as it is a study of the history of debt as in idea, both economic and moral or cultural, and Graeber is best when he looks at the historical and anthropological record and pulls big themes and ideas together. He gets a lot right, but he is also sometimes a little loose with the details.  I am not convinced that is important here as the aim seems to be to provoke and challenge the reader to think and perhaps stand up on his or her own opinions.  I certainly don't agree with everything, but I do agree with some of what Graeber says and he has made me think and reconsider many a treasured bias, which proves useful even if I return full-circle to my previous position, now more fully informed.  I think it is a book everyone should read, but which most people won't read, as it is too full of philosophy, history, and just plain old challenging and upsetting ideas.

     

    The other book is in many ways less challenging but still thought provoking.  It is not so much a book about nutrition as a book about the way corporations and the drive to constantly increase corporate profits have reshaped the way we eat and even the way we think about and crave food.  This is not necessarily to our benefit, or to the earth's although Moss doesn't go into that in detail.   He does talk about how sugar specifically, and the combination of sugar, salt and fat are used to create desire, and to change the nature of what and how we eat, of the very way we experience and think about food, and this is sobering.  And he discusses how a drive to increase corporate profits has lead to the way we eat today, across all fields, not just prepared food although that is increasingly the bulk of what we eat, but also dairy and even meat production.  He doesn't really go into the implications, or the way the corporatization of food has altered the environment in ways that we, willing sheep that we appear to be, have allowed because we assume that this is the way things are and must be.  

     

    I suppose I am channelling a bit of Graeber here but also my own natural inclination to question everything even if I don't find answers right away.  Graeber tells us that we aren't asking the right questions.  Moss as well, although not as explicitly.  He shows us a problem and leaves it up to us to decided if we want to ask those tough questions or not.  As for me, as I stated I have long thought that our ability to question is one of our greatest strengths.  I also tend to think there our choices are rarely binary.  If we see the world as black or white, yes or no, this or that, or even this is the way it has always been and anything else is chaos…… then, I've long been with Graeber — we are asking the wrong questions.