Music, the Arts, and Ideas: Patterns and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Culture

389 Pages·1994·13.825 MB·English

by  Leonard B. Meyer

MUSIC
THE ARTS
AND IDEAS

MU SIC
THEARTS
AND IDEAS
Patterns and Predictions
in Twentieth-Century Culture
BY
LEON ARB B. MEYER
With a new Postlude
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS
CHICAGO AND LONDON
For my favorite Quintet:
Lee and Marion, Muffie, Carlin & Erica
This edition of Music. the Arts. and Ideas
is dedicated to my grandchildren,
Emma Blumer and Molly Jacobs-Meyer,
who will "be there" to see
and hear what happens.
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO 60637
The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London
© 1967, 1994 by The University of Chicago
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States ofA merica
09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 0099 23456
ISBN 0-226-52143-5 (pbk.)
Library of Congress Catalogjng-in-PubUcation Data
Meyer, Leonard B.
Music, the arts, and ideas: patterns and predictions in
twentieth-century culture I by Leonard B. Meyer; with a new
postlude.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
1. Music-Philosophy and aesthetics. 2. Music-20th
century-History and criticism. I. Title.
ML3800.M633 1994
780' .9'04--dc20 93-45855
elP
MN
e
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum
requirements of the American National Standard for Information
Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials,
ANSI Z39.48-1992.
PREFACE (1994)
A new edition presumably calls for a new preface. But what should
such a preface contain? At one time I considered writing a "commentary"
discussing ideas about which I have changed my mind since 1957 when
the first chapter of this book was written. But because a satisfactory com
mentary would broach a succession of intricate and distracting issues, I
have chosen to follow Falstaff's example: "The better part of valor is
discretion."
More importantly, the proper preface to this edition of Music, the Arts,
and Ideas is, paradoxically, its newly composed Postlude, "Future Tense:
Music, Ideology, and Culture."*
L. B. M.
*Unfortunately, we have not been able to include the works cited in the Postlude in the
bibliography. Nor will the Postlude tenns be found in the index.-ed.

PREFACE
This book is an attempt to understand the present-to discover some
pattern and rationale in the perplexing, fragmented world of
twentieth-century culture. The search began with music, and music has
remained both the main focus of attention and a valuable source of
ideas and concepts. But questions about music continually led to ques
tions about the other arts -and, more broadly, about the ideas and beliefs
that characterize our culture.
At first I supposed that an underlying order would reveal itself if
some basis could be found for deciding which of the several currents of
contemporary music would become "the style of the future." I formu·
lated the question many times, and in many different forms: how will
twentieth-century music develop? which existing tendencies will be the
dominant, consequential ones? why, after fifty years, have we not
arrived at a stylistic consensus? and so on. But none of the "answers"
seemed satisfactory. Mostly they turned out to be plausible platitudes.
Then it occurred to me that, because it presupposed a particular kind
of answer, perhaps the question itself was the wrong one. Perhaps our
time would be characterized, not by the cumulative development of a
single style, but by the coexistence of a number of alternative styles in a
kind of "dynamic steady-state." It is the exploration of this hypothesis
which forms the central core of my book.
As I remember it, this possibility suggested itself in a general and
VB
Preface
amorphous way just -after I finished reading Herman Hesse's Magister
Ludi. Then I began to engage in my own intellectual "Bead Game"
-playing with ideas, seeing what their logical consequences and
psychological implications might be, questioning the necessity and va
lidity of opposing viewpoints and accepted formulations, and asking
whether empirical evidence from other disciplines and other areas of
culture supported the hypothesis. In so doing, I have not hesitated to
consider and speculate about fundamental problems-for instance,
about the nature of history and our relationship to it, the organization
and prerequisites of complex hierarchic structures, the relationship of
the arts to culture, and so forth.
From this point of view, my book is somewhat self·indulgent. I have
tackled and conjectured about problems, not only because they were
relevant, but because they fascinated and challenged me. Nor have I
tried to be cautious and circumspect in dealing with them. Conse
quently, there will undoubtedly be a number of dissenting-even out
raged-reactions to what I have written_ Fine. I am by no means
confident that everything in the book is incontrovertible and correct,
that the answers proposed are final truths. But I am sure that the issues
broached and problems posed are important, exciting, and fun.
A hook about contemporary culture is speculative for other reasons
too. First, because the meaning of the present will be definitively
established only when its implications-its consequences-have become
the facts, problems, and perplexities of some future present. And second,
because, however much one may try to be detached and impartial
observing relationships and movements rather than judging them-it is
impossible to stand outside of culture. For the models and categories we
use in conceptualizing and ordering the world are necessarily limited to,
if not determined by, those which are provided by our particular
culture. If I have adopted a position close to what is called "analytic
formalism" in chapter 8, it is not because formalism is per se a better or
more valid position than any other hut because it is the one best suited
to the task at hand-the task of comprehending the multiplicity of
twentieth-century thought and culture.
What I am presenting, then, is a theoretical construct rather than a
chronological account. Because its main thrust is explanation rather
than documentation or description, no attempt has been made to cover
all aspects of contemporary music-let alone the other arts and culture
generally. Much has been left out: major composers not mentioned,
significant movements slighted, interesting concepts neglected. I have
admittedly been very selective, and, given the wealth of diverse and
divergent material presented hy a culture as rich and variegated as ours,
viii
Preface
I can only hope that my selection has not heen too much influenced hy
the hypothesis heing considered.
The hook is divided into three parts. The first, "As It Has Been,"
consists of five essays already published. Although it seems, in retro·
spect, that I was moving toward a new conception of the present, these
essays were written before the formulation of the central thesis of this
book. Since it deals for the most part with the understanding of tradi
tional music and established aesthetic values, Part I acts as the base and
as a point of reference for what follows. Part II, "As It Is, and Perhaps
Will Be," states the main thesis of the book, tries to show that a
considerable amount of evidence supports it, and considers what its
consequences might be. Part III, "Formalism in Music," ret!lrns to an
explicit consideration of music and examines problems having to do
with the theory and practice of highly complex experimental music.
The debts owed to the ideas and work of other writers and scholars
are so numerous and obvious from the references in the text that it
would he pointless to list them here. If some chapters seem overbur
dened with footnotes and other "trappings and suits" of scholarship, it
is not because I wish to impress or to pretend to an erudition which I do
not possess but because the views and opinions of others-artists,
historians, scientists-are my data. It is with their view of the world,
whether right or wrong, that I am concerned. In other cases I have
leaned heavily upon the work of others because I lack their knowledge
and competence in a particular field. This is the case, for instance, with
the many quotations from Professor Nagel's book.
The debts owed to my students and colleagues should also be acknowl
edged. These are the result of many, many discussions-sometimes
heated, often lengthy-in which ideas have been tried out, objections
argued, and evidence examined. When I think about this sort of ex
change, four people especially come to mind: Leo Treitler, John R.
Platt, Rohert McMahan, and Grosvenor Cooper. Though I doubt that
any of them will agree with all, or even most, of this book, I am certain
that each of them will find it interesting, suggestive, and thought
provoking. And that is what I hope other readers will find as well.
Grateful acknowledgment is made to the journals in which a number
of the chapters of this book first appeared: The Journal of Aesthetics
and Art Criticism, Vol. XV, No.4, June, 1957 (chapter 1), and Vol.
XVII, No.4, June, 1959 (chapter 2) ; Journal of the American Musico
logical Society, Vol. XIV, No.2, Summer, 1961 (chapter 3); The Yale
Review, Vol. LII, No.2, Winter, 1963 (chapter 4); and The Hudson
Review, Vol. VI, No.2, Summer, 1963 (chapter 5).
IX