Music Financial Markets: Equitable Infrastructure for Contemporary Composers
Historical critique of classical music is anachronistic and fails to express culture that follows new music. Deficiency born from status quo, bias, elitism, outsourcing, necessity and inequity remains. Institutions systemically capitalize off demand and churn analysis; contemporary composers are marginalized and legacies compromised. Hence, this mimetic ecosystem of bad production will be addressed by researching new instrumental music, infrastructure, public performance, community buy-in and corresponding contemporary literature.
Boethius’ De Instituzione Musica (c. 6th century) divides music scholarship into Musica mundana, relationships of notes, Musica humana, the union of body and soul and Musica instrumentalis, the timbre of musical instruments. Boethius’ treatise guided research and composition, taking into account theory, philosophy and affect. Instituzione does not include analyses of extant compositions.
Counterpoint, polyphony and the Renaissance era (1400-1600) waned with the advent of the second practice: stile moderno style (c. 1600) whereby figured bass and homophony serviced vocal melodies. Thus began a great age of tonal monody that has been in tow for 400 years. However brief, the symphonic Classical period (1750-1800) followed this harmonic chordal structure which became the instrumental model that codified absolute music theory.
During the Romantic period (c. 1800s), German idealism influenced absolute, instrumental composition based on pure forms that could theoretically evade ethos and outlast the existence of time. Contemporary literature and community buy-in became prevalent, but eventually receded perhaps due to absolutism’s perceived connection with communism, political ideology and its “proximity to Marxism.”[1] But this perceived connection is antithetical to Marx’ contemporary Eduard Hanslick who wrote, “It is only recently that people have begun looking at artworks in relation to the ideas and events of the times which produced them . . . even further removed from the character of a musical work as such are the social and political conditions which dominate its time.”[2] Indeed, separation of political and social characterizations from musical ideas defines absolute music theory. Hanslick argued that pure absolute music is the spirit of tonally moving forms and not ethos.
Industrial markets burgeoned during the Gilded Age at the turn of the 20th century and demand for new classical music diminished. Over time, the framework and definition of classical music became convoluted. Academics define classical music as ancient Greek revival, mythos, tonality, symphony, symmetry et cetera. Whereas, absolutists promote pure musical forms based on symphonic tradition, stripped of characterization and established by new instrumental composition. However, composition of new classical music halted, markets are flooded with recycled compositions and public performance is overshadowed by ignorant analysis. Further, without public knowledge of a contemporaneous tradition, classical music is rehearsed and received in vain.
Therefore, an unbiased a priori infrastructure that supports new instrumental music should be enacted to validate any musical renaissance. Franz Grillparzer wrote, “music and poetic art thus follow directly opposed routes, the one intellectualizing the corporeal and the other corporealizing the intellectual.”[3] Fundamentally, given status quo it seems implied to formalize the later. To clarify, absolute instrumental music circumvents material refence and, above all, is the experience of form in art which expresses the esthetic of 19th century modernism.
Presently, classical music fails to necessitate demand and produce capital like natural resources such as crops or other commodities. Composition does not grow from the ground naturally. Learned composers need infrastructure: modern facilities, instruction, money, equipment, venue and validation to produce; which doesn’t derive from deceased, imaginary patrons, predatory lending or futures speculation per se. Music culture is established by what composers have to work with contemporaneously, an equitable infrastructure that flags in our capitalist global economy for apparent lack of demand. Sources for new classical music are literally swallowed whole by status quo special interests without regard for new culture, public engagement or community.
From an institutional standpoint, infrastructure for new absolute instrumental music could be viewed as a nonstarter, disconnected from ideological groupthink under a capitalist, global superstructure. The funding of such an endeavor may be viewed as risky. But absolute music works differently from materialism per se, and reflects ideas and perception rather than objective thought processes or deductive end game. Not to admit that idealist philosophy should rework politics. It’s just that absolute music does not advance naturally like other materials under the category of capitalist demand.
Similarly, one could argue that infrastructure for new instrumental music could be influenced by special interests as well. In response, statutory policy based on merit that supports equitable funding for composition could grant artists control and scale over their work and legacies. While equitable infrastructure supports composers, public reception determines the acceptance of new music and the arts and helps us understand what critical factors come into play when researching new music and renaissance. The following discussion will show how public performance of new instrumental music and community buy-in are necessary for music financial markets to stimulate the economy.
Politics aside, community buy-in connects culture and validates infrastructure that supports equitable funding. If the community buys into new instrumental music, then representation and validity exist and music financial markets can be sustained. Public performance of new instrumental music is the primary avenue for dissemination, consumption, liquidity, community engagement and solidarity. With performance, the public is equipped with knowledge, ignorance dissipates and inequity equalizes. Consequently, corresponding contemporary literature provokes free thought, incites satire against prevailing norms and kindles originality which are all primary components of musical renaissance.
Moreover, one would expect composer legacy to lie in the format of performance notes and not endless, pretentious research or discursive analysis. Thus, the institution of music would theorize about the relationship of notes, connect contemporary music with the public and provide affect through defined instrumentation just as Boethius instructed. If these crucial tenants are encapsulated within the format of production, then public knowledge can guide reception and reward talent that otherwise passes unnoticed. Public validation clears the path for new music financial markets’ future success.
Certainly, challenges surface on the topic to facilitate a priori infrastructure for new absolute instrumental music performance under a materialist superstructure. Community value can only be understood in a complex matrix of financial markets by creating an unbiased, objective, equitable, profitable and supportive foundation. In democracies, corporate policy shapes culture in profound ways. But perceived lack of demand and public ignorance casts a shadow on any equitable corporate policy to counter new instrumental music deficiency—which has yet to be fully turned around.
Even as performance of new instrumental music remains static, new ideas and infrastructures emerge. For example, Renaissance Music Literary Foundation (RMLF) rmlfcenter.org, a charitable nonprofit corporation, addresses instrumental music’s cultural anachronisms. Their policies are merit based, equitable and capture the imagination of communities by providing infrastructure for contemporary, unbiased music. RMLF’s New Music Challenge (NMC) grants program prompts audiences to write new instrumental music based on: relationships of notes and forms, connecting art with the community and defined instrumentation.[4] These methods cultivate infrastructure for contemporary music, community buy-in, solidarity and corresponding contemporary literature.[5] Anachronistic gaps, ignorance and any mimetic ecosystem of bad production erode under this infrastructure as equitable policy creates unique cultures or artworlds that flourish under prevailing institutional superstructure.
Equitable infrastructure positively impacts communities in the following ways. First, NMC grantmaking catalyzes and elevates once misunderstood composition into a realm of community acknowledgement, acceptance and praise. Patrons are delighted with the amount of community buy-in which results from participating in NMC grants programming. Second, the communication of instrumentalis in the application of new music as Boethius outlined negates ignorance. NMC grants create solidarity in the community as learned instrumentalist have contemporaneous music to recite from which does not recycle or plagiarize from the past.[6] More importantly, communication about defined instrumentation is non-programmatic, non-commercial, non-anachronistic and selfless as passion for original music and instrumentalists who perform it manifests first and not special interests i.e., extra musical ideation or programs. Furthermore, contemporary literature about the timbre of instrumentation and resulting affect in performance engages audiences and opens minds. Thirdly, corresponding contemporary literature that discusses performance practice of new instrumental music closes anachronistic gaps and deficient redundant analysis. Culture is established via technical dialogue about new absolute instrumental music and performance. As Carl Dahlhaus explained, “insofar as music comes to itself, it distances itself from the ‘content’ in which Hegel sees the foundation of its cultural function.”[7] A pronounced shift in public perspective of new instrumental music derives from infrastructure that preserves this Hegelian cultural function.
Now is time to engage in sound instrumental music infrastructure established by absolute composition that communicates non-anachronistic culture. Clearly, the creation of absolute music performance starts with a priori infrastructure and equitable policies that shouldn’t be comingled with bias that comes along with political or social characterizations. New instrumental music performance practice should rather penetrate the democratic superstructure with strong foundation and provide new culture. In Daybreak, Nietzsche claimed “vanity is the fear of appearing original.” Unoriginality permeates instrumental music’s current deficient status. If logical infrastructure goals are realized and communities are served with originality and culture, then music financial markets will stimulate the economy by way of valid, unbiased entertainment. Equitable policies forge a path forward for composers and instrumentalists to perform new instrumental music and the arts.
In conclusion, the symphonic tradition is encumbered by structural failure and anachronistic output. Prevailing superstructure based on necessity smothers the creation and reception of new instrumental music and recycles culture from the past. Without new absolute instrumental music performance practice, Hegel’s pure contemporaneous cultural function is concealed. Sound corporate policies and programming grounded in Boethius’ Instituzione and the 19th century idea of absolutism respond to status quo cultural deficiencies. With statutory policy intact, infrastructure-based methods show that new music culture can necessitate demand by incorporating an unbiased equitable foundation. Like any reputable philosophy, infrastructure research can synthesize a priori statutory policy within a nonprofit corporate foundation to objectify a platform for the ideal: absolute instrumental music.Musical culture is modernized by scrapping extra-musical characterizations and initiating performance practice that places instrumentalists at the forefront of the composition process. By creating a platform for new instrumental music, public reception can guide demand. Consequently, contemporary literature transmits essential cultural functions to the public, shifts attitudes and creates a forum for original thought. Negative irony associated with performance notes that recycle anachronistic culture from the past can be managed by structural performance models that promote contemporary thought. Any endeavor could be perceived as risky without a strong foundation that strives for equitability. New instrumental music programming achieves results by constituting policies that negate special interest bias. Equitable policies grant composers scale over their composition and legacies and create a level of trust that allows for honest working relationships and performance. Without innovation, any field of research would remain stagnate. Equitable infrastructure theory forges a path forward for new musical culture and financial prosperity for contemporary composers based on validated demand and the prospect of music financial markets’ future success.
ABSTRACT
The dichotomy between programmatic and nonrepresentational music has sparked philosophical debate regarding the cultural function of music dating as far back as Dionysian-Apollonian duality (c. 5th cent. BCE). The second practice c. 1600 that dictated chordal music service a dramatic function hastened the argument. Moreover, a dichotomy exists between classical and modern musical styles. While classical could denote revival of the ancient Greek classics, the modern musical esthetic expresses the experience of form in art, not content. The ancient style refers to ethos and history, while modern music does just the opposite and has been called the pursuit of prehistory. Just as soon as nonrepresentational instrumental music theory began, the theory became bigger than its practice and status quo politics has interfered with its reception and sustenance. Music Financial Markets was conceived to explore the place of nonrepresentational instrumental music in contemporaneous times via statutory policy and corporate infrastructure. By prompting audiences to compose instrumental music based on forms and incentives through New Music Challenge grant money, Renaissance Music Literary Foundation’s (RMLF) hypotheses and methods have been supported. Hegel’s cultural function of music distancing itself from content can be theorized as the intervening variable.
Bibliography
Rmlfcenter.org “New Music Challenge.” Renaissance Music Literary Foundation (RMLF). https://rmlfcenter.org/new-music-challenge-grants/ (December 2020).
Dahlhuas, Carl. 1989. The Idea of Absolute Music: Translated by Roger Lustig. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Hanslick, Eduard. 1986. On the Musically Beautiful: Translated by Geoffrey Payzant. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
Rmlfcenter.org “Tuxedo.” Renaissance Music Literary Foundation (RMLF). https://rmlfcenter.org/tuxedo/ (October 2021).
Nietzsche, Friedreich. 1997. Daybreak, Thoughts on the Prejudices of Morality: Translated by R.J. Hollingdale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sanna Pederson, “Defining the Term ‘Absolute Music’ Historically,” Music & Letters 90, no. 2 (May 2009): pp. 240-262.
[1] Sandra Pederson, “Defining the Term ‘Absolute Music’ Historically,” Music & Letters 90, no. 2 (May, 2009): 261.
[2] Eduard Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 1986), pp. 38, 47.
[3] Ibid, p. 3.
[4] Rmlfcenter.org, “New Music Challenge,” December 2020, https://rmlfcenter.org/new-music-challenge-grants/.
[5] Rmlfcenter.org, “Tuxedo,” October 2021, https://rmlfcenter.org/tuxedo/.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Carl Dalhaus, The Idea of Absolute Music (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1989), p. 98.