Welcome to The Valve
Login
Register


Valve Links

The Front Page
Statement of Purpose

John Holbo - Editor
Scott Eric Kaufman - Editor
Aaron Bady
Adam Roberts
Amardeep Singh
Andrew Seal
Bill Benzon
Daniel Green
Jonathan Goodwin
Joseph Kugelmass
Lawrence LaRiviere White
Marc Bousquet
Matt Greenfield
Miriam Burstein
Ray Davis
Rohan Maitzen
Sean McCann
Guest Authors

Laura Carroll
Mark Bauerlein
Miriam Jones

Past Valve Book Events

cover of the book Theory's Empire

Event Archive

cover of the book The Literary Wittgenstein

Event Archive

cover of the book Graphs, Maps, Trees

Event Archive

cover of the book How Novels Think

Event Archive

cover of the book The Trouble With Diversity

Event Archive

cover of the book What's Liberal About the Liberal Arts?

Event Archive

cover of the book The Novel of Purpose

Event Archive

The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Happy Trails to You

What’s an Encyclopedia These Days?

Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Intimate Enemies: What’s Opera, Doc?

Alphonso Lingis talks of various things, cameras and photos among them

Feynmann, John von Neumann, and Mental Models

Support Michael Sporn’s Film about Edgar Allen Poe

Philosophy, Ontics or Toothpaste for the Mind

Nazi Rules for Regulating Funk ‘n Freedom

The Early History of Modern Computing: A Brief Chronology

Computing Encounters Being, an Addendum

On the Origin of Objects (towards a philosophy of computation)

Symposium on Graeber’s Debt

The Nightmare of Digital Film Preservation

Richard Petti on Occupy Wall Street: America HAS a Ruling Class

Bill Benzon on Whatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhatwhat?

Nick J. on The Valve - Closed For Renovation

Bill Benzon on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Norma on Encyclopedia Britannica to Shut Down Print Operations

Bill Benzon on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

john balwit on What’s an Object, Metaphysically Speaking?

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on That Shakespeare Thing

William Ray on That Shakespeare Thing

JoseAngel on That Shakespeare Thing

Bill Benzon on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Bill Benzon on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on A Dirty Dozen Sneaking up on the Apocalypse

JoseAngel on Objects and Graeber's Debt

Advanced Search

Articles
RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom

Comments
RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom

XHTML | CSS

Powered by Expression Engine
Logo by John Holbo

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

 


Blogroll

2blowhards
About Last Night
Academic Splat
Acephalous
Amardeep Singh
Beatrice
Bemsha Swing
Bitch. Ph.D.
Blogenspiel
Blogging the Renaissance
Bookslut
Booksquare
Butterflies & Wheels
Cahiers de Corey
Category D
Charlotte Street
Cheeky Prof
Chekhov’s Mistress
Chrononautic Log
Cliopatria
Cogito, ergo Zoom
Collected Miscellany
Completely Futile
Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind
Conversational Reading
Critical Mass
Crooked Timber
Culture Cat
Culture Industry
CultureSpace
Early Modern Notes
Easily Distracted
fait accompi
Fernham
Ferule & Fescue
Ftrain
GalleyCat
Ghost in the Wire
Giornale Nuovo
God of the Machine
Golden Rule Jones
Grumpy Old Bookman
Ideas of Imperfection
Idiocentrism
Idiotprogrammer
if:book
In Favor of Thinking
In Medias Res
Inside Higher Ed
jane dark’s sugarhigh!
John & Belle Have A Blog
John Crowley
Jonathan Goodwin
Kathryn Cramer
Kitabkhana
Languagehat
Languor Management
Light Reading
Like Anna Karina’s Sweater
Lime Tree
Limited Inc.
Long Pauses
Long Story, Short Pier
Long Sunday
MadInkBeard
Making Light
Maud Newton
Michael Berube
Moo2
MoorishGirl
Motime Like the Present
Narrow Shore
Neil Gaiman
Old Hag
Open University
Pas au-delà
Philobiblion
Planned Obsolescence
Printculture
Pseudopodium
Quick Study
Rake’s Progress
Reader of depressing books
Reading Room
ReadySteadyBlog
Reassigned Time
Reeling and Writhing
Return of the Reluctant
S1ngularity::criticism
Say Something Wonderful
Scribblingwoman
Seventypes
Shaken & Stirred
Silliman’s Blog
Slaves of Academe
Sorrow at Sills Bend
Sounds & Fury
Splinters
Spurious
Stochastic Bookmark
Tenured Radical
the Diaries of Franz Kafka
The Elegant Variation
The Home and the World
The Intersection
The Litblog Co-Op
The Literary Saloon
The Literary Thug
The Little Professor
The Midnight Bell
The Mumpsimus
The Pinocchio Theory
The Reading Experience
The Salt-Box
The Weblog
This Public Address
This Space: The Fire’s Blog
Thoughts, Arguments & Rants
Tingle Alley
Uncomplicatedly
Unfogged
University Diaries
Unqualified Offerings
Waggish
What Now?
William Gibson
Wordherders

Monday, April 19, 2010

Culture, High, Low and Other

Posted by Bill Benzon on 04/19/10 at 06:52 AM

Pascal Boyer recently had a post, Cognition under the high brow, in which he posed the issue:

True, high culture does not occur in all human societies, it is a minority pursuit wherever it does, and there may be more important problems for cognitive anthropology to solve. But it is interesting nonetheless. Wherein lies the difference between the high and low registers? Is there any cultural variation in that difference? How does it translate in terms of cognitive processes?


He goes on to mention Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, which he was unable to read, but nonetheless proceeds with caution, suggesting there might be more to the high/low distinction that the need of one group to hold themselves above another.

More interesting, and more germane to our interests, is the notion that appreciation of high culture artifacts somehow requires more “mental work” than that of lesser genres. For instance, a lot of popular music (in which we may include a lot of Vivaldi but not all Mozart, all Glenn Miller but certainly not Duke Ellington) strives for harmonic simplicity, for the repetition of identical harmonic progressions, for fewer modulations or departures from the tonal centre. By contrast high-culture Western music, e.g. Beethoven’ quartets or Chopin’s Etudes or all of Ravel, strives for more complex, unpredictable resolutions, fewer cadences, surprising harmonic progressions, variation rather than repetition, etc. I only mention Western works because they are more familiar to most of our readers. But the difference may well be more general.


A long and lively discussion ensued, with particular attention to flamenco: high or low?

Comments

Interesting argument.  I think Boyer should avoid discussing classical music, though.  I’m not an expert, but there is an incredibly complex evolution within classical music from the variability he attributes to Beethoven and Chopin and the recognizable melodic progressions and repetitions he gives to Vivaldi and some of Mozart.  There was a purpose to it, and it was absolutely a formation due to adjustments in class structures.

You’d have to wonder, too, if he would look at Japanese theater (traditional theater such as Kabuki, Noh, and Bunraku) and make the same argument.  One of those (and I forget which...Kabuki, maybe?) was absolutely a class product, and yet did not necessarily reduce the mental work needed to enjoy (in fact, the more “low brow” of the Japanese theatrical forms was rooted deep within Japanese mythology).

So, yeah.

By SMD on 04/19/10 at 09:34 AM | Permanent link to this comment

While I’m sympathetic to whatever it is Boyer’s getting at, I’m not sure about the mental work aspect. If you’re not familiar with the conventions of, say, Kabuki, then you can expend considerable mental effort and get nothing for your efforts. But if you’ve got those conventions down cold, then watching Kabuki might be effortless, and rewarding too.

By Bill Benzon on 04/19/10 at 12:17 PM | Permanent link to this comment

See also The Forger’s Spell for the issues of projection in art appreciation (wine appreciation appears to be even more set-and-self image bound).  Tastes of people with more time on their hands (more likely to be upper class or academics) may be more complex (I suspect they frequently are), but complexity doesn’t guarantee quality anymore than simplicity does.

I like some classic ballads, but they were generally the product of people who were described as masterless men and getting caught being a bard more than a couple of times could get one hanged in Scotland (a check of “bard” in the OED explains very succinctly why the ballads were anonymous).

By on 04/19/10 at 01:46 PM | Permanent link to this comment

In the Clockwork Muse (1990), Colin Martindale claimed he could use statistical methods to show trends of increasing formal complexity in a vast range of artistic traditions. His explanation for this phenomenon was simple: to be recognized by your peers as a creative artist, you have to do something new. That imperative often has the effect of making art objects more complex, though the requisite novelty can also be achieved by violating taboos. 

If there’s something to this admittedly very simple theory, the increasing mental efforts required by the audience of elaborate art is largely an automatic side effect of the accumulation of cultural capital, something that is frequently associated with privileged groups but can also take place among despised minorities such as black jazz musicians or Talmudic scholars.

By Jim Harrison on 04/19/10 at 02:15 PM | Permanent link to this comment

I think the arts piggybacked on the science model in some ways.  Jazz is particularly peculiar since it’s wandered from being low-brow and popular in a minority community (in the place that rap and hiphop are today) to being esoteric (an average jazz audience in Philadelphia is black bourgeois, white hipsters, in at least equal numbers, if not with a white majority, and with plenty of white jazz musicians with college degrees).  I haven’t seen the same thing completely take off with white working class musical genres like old timey, bluegrass, and country, but those are becoming more aware of their roots (a pop banjo tour included an Ethopian playing an African banjo), which could lead interesting places.

By on 04/19/10 at 02:31 PM | Permanent link to this comment

Mr. Benzon:  Exactly.  And I would think that the level of mental work needed for different cultural products would vary based on too numerous of factors to list here with any authority.  At the very least, things like race, class, and so on would play in the field.

By SMD on 04/19/10 at 03:36 PM | Permanent link to this comment

High versus low is a sociological distinction, not an aesthetic one.  It is a minority pursuit because if it weren’t, it wouldn’t be classified as “high.”

By Jonathan Mayhew on 04/20/10 at 09:10 AM | Permanent link to this comment

It’s a minority pursuit classified as high because it’s done by people of higher socioeconomic status or prestige.  There are plenty of minority pursuits (and written science fiction is far less of a mass medium than movie or television SF).  Certain kinds of rural music are definitely a minority taste, but they’re never considered high culture.

By on 04/20/10 at 10:02 AM | Permanent link to this comment

Yes, Jonathan, it is a sociological distinction. But is it indifferent to aesthetic issues?

By Bill Benzon on 04/20/10 at 10:30 AM | Permanent link to this comment

The implication was that works of greater complexity would be “higher.” That might obtain in certain situations, but really that’s a question of whether a given society wants to code that particular kind of complexity as “high” or not.  The fact that certain cultural expressions can change their “brow” from one period to another implies that sociology trumps aesthetics.  The gentrification of jazz, flamenco, or Shakespeare come to mind.  Once something is gentrified, then its complexity comes into play--but that complexity could have been there all the time.  Or alternatively, something can descend in level, no longer seem so complex or rarefied, like Picasso maybe.  Over the course of the years Cubism becomes more like Vivaldi rather than like a late Beethoven quartet.

By Jonathan Mayhew on 04/20/10 at 11:19 AM | Permanent link to this comment

Add a comment:

Name:
Email:
Location:
URL:

 

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: