|\| ART BLOG HUMOR BLOG PHOTO BLOG CULTURE BLOG |:| FOR THE RENAISSANCE MAN & THE POLYMATH WOMAN |/|
Monday, August 26, 2019
Friday, August 23, 2019
How to Really Listen to Music
How to Really Listen to Music
An untrained listener’s guide.
During my hour-long commute home from work, when I’m too tired to even listen to podcasts, I listen to music. More often than might be healthy, I listen to Lana Del Rey, as she cycles through her doomy refrains about how her life is over, she’s filled with poison, she’s running like mad to heaven’s door. With their frothy melodrama, Lana’s songs tend to match my postwork mood so precisely that it doesn’t feel like listening at all. I don’t have to concentrate or pull myself in. I am already there. Listening, for most of us, doesn’t feel like doing anything. It’s more of a sensation than activity, a dreamy, ill-defined feeling stretching through us. We’re often not aware we are doing it, or even fully conscious. We literally—when we forget to shut off the television or our Spotify playlists—do it in our sleep.
But sometimes I wonder what would happen if we listened harder, or better, or more rigorously. This might seem exhausting. Am I incapable of relaxing? Probably. But music scholars insist that if we listened to music the way a musician would, understanding how notes trigger feelings, how tones take on their own textures and meanings, then we might experience something more visceral and expansive. We could push deeper into every song.
I reached out to various musicians and music scholars to gather some insights about how nonmusicians like myself could select and listen to music more intentionally. Below is a quick, beginner’s guide to what I learned.
Listen to Different Genres
As any Deadhead or Belieber will tell you, music tastes are etched deep into our identities. They are more than just preferences. They signal who we are, where we see the world from: either from the edges or from the duller, denser centers. Music tastes tend to bind social groups, draw lines around them. The fashion, language, and even mannerisms of our favorite musicians often slowly, unconsciously, become our own.
Ben Ratliff, author of Every Song Ever: Twenty Ways to Listen in an Age of Musical Plenty, says that finding new music starts with overcoming our prejudices. “The sticking point is often around what appears to be objective intellectual criteria,” Ratliff explains, “How can X music be good if it doesn’t have ‘meaningful lyrics’ or has little harmonic movement or isn’t played by acoustic instruments?” This line of thinking, he says, cuts us off. We become genre-stuck. But if we are able to move past our own pretensions, we might discover that not all enjoyable music adheres to our personal rigid criteria.
But be patient. It often takes several listens for us to ease into a new sound. Linda Balliro, author of Being a Singer: The Art, Craft, and Science, explains that when we hear new music, our auditory cortex is too busy processing it for us to fully enjoy it. She suggests seeking out music that falls just outside our preferred genre, or that blends two or more genres together. Cue the approximately hundred thousand remixes of “Old Town Road.” For classical music, start with a time period you enjoy and then try the one right before or after it. For those new to classical, she says, start with contemporary classical, such as “Dead Man Walking,” which has a complex rhythm and language more in line with contemporary music.
Listen in Motion
Since all music is in motion, Ratliff says, listening while moving helps us better connect to the sounds. We pay deeper, closer attention. Arnie Cox, author of Music and Embodied Cognition:Listening, Moving, Feeling, and Thinking, says that listening while exercising creates a composite experience as our listening energizes our movements, and vice versa. Our body feels lifted, heightened, and so does our listening.
Dancing, unsurprisingly, also enhances what we hear. When listening to a song, Cox explains, we immediately feel around for a way to move or sing to it. We rarely simply hear the music, he says. Instead, we comprehend it in relation to movement, either that of the performers or our own.
Cox also suggests listening while driving, especially on a more scenic route. As the visual stimulation combines with the movement and music, the views can (quite literally) color what we hear. The colors, contours, and textures smear across the chords, so that we hear them through the filter of our environment.
Listen to the Rhythm
When listening for the rhythm, Ratliff says to listen to the sounds of the percussion first. That’s the floor of a song. He suggests starting with Max Roach of Bud Powell’s group, John Bonham of Led Zeppelin, Janet Weiss of Sleater-Kinney, and Ziggy Modeliste of the Meters. He also recommends listening to music with three or more percussionists, like Cuban rumba or Brazillian samba.
Balliro says to pay attention to what happens during the repetition. Organic drummers naturally vary the pattern, says Aaron Fast, a music teacher in Brooklyn, while electronic musicians tend to repeat the same information again and again. Composers of classical, Balliro says, seek out rhythmic patterns that surprise us. Pop gives us more of what we expect. Brooding, more emotional music has slower, more drawn-out rhythms, stretching notes to sustain the feeling.
Listen to the Tone
Ratliff believes that tone is where the humanity lies, where the emotion sneaks in. The tonal quality that a musician places around a note reveals something about them. It’s a confession: this is how I’m feeling right now. To understand tone, try blending your senses, seeing, feeling, and even tasting the tone. Ratliff suggests imagining the tone as a physical object. How close are you standing to it? How big is it? Is it fat or thin? What is it made of? Wood? Cotton? Melted chocolate?
Again, Balliro suggests sampling different genres to broaden your awareness. Listen to songs that are more emotional such as blues or jazz, rather than techno, whose tones are reiterative. Symphonies often blend several different tones in interesting waves and patterns while singers like Billie Eilish exhibit exquisite tonal shifts in a single hiss.
Listen to the Lyrics
To truly take in lyrics, listen for what’s beneath them. Don’t get too caught up in the logic. Daniel Godfrey, a composer and professor and chair of the music department at Northeastern University’s College of Arts, Media, and Design, describes lyrics as the vehicle for music, rather than the other way around. We don’t even have to make out the words of the lyrics (and we often can’t) for them to invoke something mystic and unknowable, a sensation beyond reason.
Lyrics, Fast says, often drift in and out of coherence. In his slacker anthem “Loser,” Beck deadpans: “In the time of chimpanzees I was a monkey / butane in my veins and I’m out to cut the junkie / With the plastic eyeballs, spray paint the vegetables / dog food stalls with the beefcake pantyhose.” While the words may not cohere into narrative, we get the emotional impact of their meaning: life sucks.
But if you truly want to get to the crux of a song, Dustin Cicero, a musician and instructor of electronic music at Emory University, says to focus on the chorus. The chorus is our way into the story, revealing its overall meaning and intention via catchy repetition. In the chorus of “Loser,” for instance, Beck shoots straight to the point: “I’m a loser baby, so why don’t you kill me?” The droning verse sums up the song but also an era, the unease and disaffection of an entire generation collapsed into a single lyric.
*
Listening intentionally might seem like a by-product of our obsessive need to optimize. Is listening really a skill we need to hone? But like any other pursuit, such as dancing or oil painting, deeper listening becomes easier, even instinctual over time. It’s a process of immersion. We slowly get closer to the sound. After a few weeks of listening to Lana with a keener, sharper focus, I could listen further, and with more clarity, as if in a higher resolution, without even realizing I was listening at all.
Rachel Ament has written for the New York Times, NPR, Oxygen, Teen Vogue and Paste Magazine, among others.

Zizek thinks political correctness is dumb
Why Slavoj Zizek thinks political correctness is dumb
Zizek is on the left and dislikes political correctness. How does that work out?
- Slavoj Zizek is a well-known opponent of political correctness and has often critiqued the concept.
- He doesn't suggest anybody should go around uttering slurs for the sake of it though.
- His stance led him to agree with Jordan Peterson at their famed debate.
Why Zizek hates political correctness
Volume 0%
The first thing that he talks about is the "totalitarianism" that he equates with political correctness. It is worth saying that he denies any agreement with the American right, which tends to view political correctness as a plot to "destroy the American way of life" and that he doesn't mean people who are PC are out to restore Stalinism. What he means is that what we call "political correctness" can be used to amplify old authoritarian methods.
As he says in the video:
"Imagine you or me, I'm a small boy. It's Sunday afternoon. My father wants me to visit our grandmother. Let's say my father is a traditional authority. What would he be doing? He would probably tell me something like, "I don't care how you feel; it's your duty to visit your grandmother. Be polite to her and so on." Nothing bad about this I claim because I can still rebel and so on. It's a clear order.
But what would the so-called post-modern non-authoritarian father do? I know because I experienced it. He would have said something like this, "You know how much your grandmother loves you, but nonetheless I'm not forcing you to visit her. You should only visit her if you freely decide to do it." Now every child knows that beneath the appearance of free choice there is a much stronger pressure in this second message. Because basically your father is not only telling you, you must visit your grandmother, but you must love to visit it. You know he tells you how you must feel about it. It's a much stronger order."


In another section of the clip, he remarks:
"Do you know that when civil war exploded in Yugoslavia, early '90s and already before in the '80s, ethnic tensions. The first victims were these jokes; they immediately disappeared. Because people felt well that, for example, let's say I visit another country. I hate this politically correct respect, oh, what is your food, what are your cultural forms. No, I tell them tell me a dirty joke about yourself and we will be friends and so on.
So you see this ambiguity — that's my problem with political correctness. No it's just a form of self-discipline, which doesn't really allow you to overcome racism. It's just oppressed controlled racism. And the same goes here."
For Zizek, political correctness doesn't address any of the problems, like racism, it hopes to solve, but instead regulates them. Given his historic dedication to the left-wing notions of actually solving those problems, you can easily understand why he wouldn't like something that claims to do everything but accomplishes nothing in that area.In this way, politically correct language can actually be better at maintaining old systems of oppression than at fixing them, since now you're talking about them in cleaned up language rather than the direct, blunt language that makes the issue plain.
So, what would he have us do?
Volume 0%
He is merely saying that context is everything and that we should be less concerned about the specific language or jokes used and more concerned about how we use them. If a joke or word is used to humiliate people and keep them down, it and the person who uttered it should be condemned. If a joke is used to break the ice, address the elephants of race and gender in the room, and help to bring people together in a way that is not humiliating or patronizing he suggests it is permissible and even useful.
To quote him directly:
"Because it's easy to be a non-racist in this political correct way oh I respect your food, your national identities, no. When does it happen real contact with another? I claim it's very difficult to arrive at it without a small exchange of an obscenity. It works in a wonderful way. So I claim for me and ideal post racist situation is let's say I am an Indian and you are an African American. We are telling all the time dirty jokes to each other about each other about ourselves, but in such a way that we just laugh and the more we are telling them the more we are friends.
Why? Because in this way we really resolved the tension of racism. What I'm afraid, now coming back to your question, with political correctness is that it's a desperate reaction. They know they cannot solve the real problem so they escaped into controlling how we speak about it. And by real problem I don't to mean in a primitive way just economic redistribution and so on, but even the symbolic fact of actual social relationship and so on."
His stance reminds me of another great thinker's ideas of language and our attempts to clean it up without changing how we feel about what it refers to.Is this just some one-off thing or does he tie this back to his philosophy?
Volume 0%
00:30
02:03
In a 2007 essay called Tolerance as an Ideology Category, Zizek addressed similar issues of tolerance being used as a tool to perpetuate repressive systems rather than as a tool to address them. He opens the essay with a bold claim:
"Why are today so many problems perceived as problems of intolerance, not as problems of inequality, exploitation, injustice? Why is the proposed remedy tolerance, not emancipation, political struggle, even armed struggle? The immediate answer is the liberal multiculturalist's basic ideological operation: the 'culturalization of politics' - political differences, differences conditioned by political inequality, economic exploitation, etc., are naturalized/neutralized into 'cultural' differences, different 'ways of life,' which are something given, something that cannot be overcome, but merely 'tolerated.'"
This critique of "tolerance" is little different than his critique of political correctness,Most criticism of political correctness comes from the right, where it is viewed as either "Cultural Marxism," censorship, or evidence that people are too sensitive. Zizek is a curious example of a left-wing critic of the practice. While his tendency to tell dirty jokes might be a bit off-putting and his enjoyment of riling people up intemperate; he does base his arguments not on wanting to "go back to the way things were" but instead on a sincere dedication to actually changing oppressive systems for the betterment of all and not just changing how we talk about them.
https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/slavoj-zizek-political-correctness?rebelltitem=5#rebelltitem5

RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
- A Reply to my Critics Concerning an Engagement with Jordan ... ›
- A Case of the Deadlock of Political Correctness | Slavoj Žižek ... ›
- Slavoj Žižek Calls Political Correctness a Form of "Modern ... ›
- Getting a Grip on Slavoj Žižek (with Slavoj Žižek) | JSTOR Daily ›
- Slavoj Žižek thinks political correctness is exactly what perpetuates ... ›
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
