new adventures in low-​fidelity

Written by . Filed under articles. Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the Permalink. Post a Comment. Leave a Trackback URL.

In those days, it was either live with music or die with noise, and we chose rather des­per­ately to live.(Elli­son: 187)

In ‘Liv­ing with Music’, the nar­ra­tor — let’s sim­ply call him Ralph Elli­son — recalls how resid­ing in an extremely noisy block in New York force him to redis­cover a repressed musi­cal past. He describes how the scream­ing and shout­ing of the local winos and the singing of a zeal­ous though not overly tal­ented neigh­bor inter­fere with his aspi­ra­tion to become an author. Espe­cially the musi­cal attempts of the lat­ter often bring him close to mad­ness. Not only because her singing breaks the silence that he requires to work, but also because her lack of tal­ent make Elli­son doubt his own writ­ing skills.

I was forced to lis­ten, and in lis­ten­ing I soon became involved to the point of iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. If she sang badly I’d hear my own futil­ity in the windy sound; if well, I’d stare at my type­writer and despair that I should ever make my prose so sing.” (Elli­son: 192)

In spite of the nobil­ity of her inten­tions, the singer pre­vents the author from mate­ri­al­iz­ing his own dream. His neighbor’s vocal and singing exer­cises obstruct the acoustic and men­tal peace that the author needs to con­cen­trate on his writ­ing. There is, how­ever, a more pos­i­tive side effect that derives directly from these noisy con­di­tions. They force Elli­son to revisit times and places that he had long forgotten.

Through his singing neigh­bor, the strug­gling author invol­un­tar­ily remem­bers his own musi­cal back­ground. Before he started writ­ing, Elli­son pur­sued a career as a trum­peter. To a mid­dle class, African-​American boy grow­ing up in Okla­homa City at the begin­ning of the 20th cen­tury, how­ever, the rela­tion to music was never unprob­lem­atic. The nar­ra­tor describes how he was con­tin­u­ously caught in-​between two, often con­tra­dic­tory, discourses.

(…) that of the Negro folk music, both sacred and pro­fane, slave song and jazz, and that of West­ern clas­si­cal music. It was most con­fus­ing; the folk tra­di­tion demanded that I play what I heard and felt around me, while those who were seek­ing to teach the clas­si­cal tra­di­tion in the schools insisted that I play strictly to the book and express that which I was sup­posed to feel. (Elli­son: 190)

In ado­les­cence, the trum­pet was a con­stant reminder of Ellison’s minori­tar­ian posi­tion that urged him to choose between two con­flict­ing dis­courses. On the one hand, he was con­fronted with a dom­i­nant but for­eign past — here in the form of west­ern, clas­si­cal music — that forces the musi­cian to per­form but leaves lit­tle to no free­dom for action in the present. On the other hand, the young musi­cian wanted to respect the minor tra­di­tion of black folk music that calls for rad­i­cal free­dom, a demand that para­dox­i­cally entails cut­ting all ties with the past. Obvi­ously, it was impos­si­ble to fully sat­isfy either one of these demands, let alone to com­bine them. As Ralph Elli­son claims, it was this dou­ble bind that made him a bad musician.

Caught mid-​range between my two tra­di­tions, where one often clashed with the other and one tech­nique of play­ing was by the other opposed, I caused whole blocks of peo­ple to suf­fer. (Elli­son: 190)

Like his singing neigh­bor, the trumpeter’s musi­cal efforts were far from quiet. Ellison’s loud, dis­so­nant per­se­ver­ance, how­ever, was not pri­mar­ily esthet­i­cally moti­vated. To him, jazz and clas­si­cal music rep­re­sented two con­tra­dic­tory stances towards his­tor­i­cal inter­ven­tion. Whereas the lat­ter genre allows the past to deter­mine the cur­rent con­di­tion — I will call this posi­tion pro­duc­tive deter­min­ism — the for­mer denies his­tory any right to inter­fere with the present — crip­pling free­dom. Both sep­a­rately, as well as together, these two atti­tudes obstruct agency. Pro­duc­tive deter­min­ism makes it pos­si­ble to act by reduc­ing the amount of options to a sin­gle one. The indi­vid­ual has no room to influ­ence the course of events and is there­fore not really an agent; he is quite lit­er­ally sub­ject of his­tory. For oppo­site rea­sons, crip­pling free­dom does not leave much room for his­tor­i­cal inter­ven­tion either. Here, how­ever, there is an econ­omy of abun­dance rather than lack at play. In this sec­ond sce­nario, the pos­si­bil­i­ties are infi­nite and there­fore unpre­dictable. Since the out­come of his actions are fully arbi­trary, the sub­ject is stu­pe­fied and par­a­lyzed. As a result, one can­not really claim that his­tor­i­cal change needs an agent’s inter­ven­tion to take place. In the end, pro­duc­tive deter­min­ism and crip­pling free­dom lead to the exactly same, unsat­is­fy­ing out­come: severe lim­i­ta­tion of agency.

Ralph Ellison’s demor­al­iz­ing dilemma was, accord­ing to his own tes­ti­mony, the main rea­son to quit music alto­gether and to pur­sue a career as an author instead. The rad­i­cal nature of this switch, how­ever, indi­cates that it was more than a change of pro­fes­sion; it was a com­plete meta­mor­pho­sis. “Yet it was ironic, for after giv­ing up my trum­pet for the type­writer I had avoided too close a con­tact with the very art which she rec­om­mended as balm. For I had started music early and lived with it daily, and when I broke I tried to break clean.”(Ellison: 193) In ‘Liv­ing with Music’, music and text are con­cep­tu­al­ized as two rad­i­cally sep­a­rated, though syn­chron­i­cally coex­ist­ing and com­pet­ing epis­temes. Each of these realms of knowl­edge is opened up by a tech­ni­cal medium — respec­tively the trum­pet and the type­writer — and cor­re­sponds to a unique set of expres­sive modal­i­ties and lim­i­ta­tions. Ralph Ellison’s self-​initiated, pri­vate epis­te­mo­log­i­cal rup­ture is moti­vated by the sin­cere hope that the Guten­berg Galaxy will pos­sess more poten­tial than music to solve his par­a­lyz­ing exis­ten­tial dilemma.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>