Philosophical Pals can u help?

[yghartsyrt]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

so funny that jazz was simultaneously ultra-rhythmic sexualized jungle music and a castrating soul-less instrument of collective impotence to the white intellectual

[close]

Don’t mix those two statements. Because that would do Adorno no fair justice. His statement regarding Jazz might sound weird from todays perspective, but the main point here is, that 40s jazz music was one of the first pop-cultural available musics (besides chansons in the 20s. It has less to do with jazz in general and more with pop-culture and pop music. It just happened to be jazz.

[close]

I don’t know, Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong may have been popular music, but they were pretty good!

It never was about the actually quality or craftsmanship of these playing their instruments. It was rather about the function Adorno saw in popular music within capitalism

[S.]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

so funny that jazz was simultaneously ultra-rhythmic sexualized jungle music and a castrating soul-less instrument of collective impotence to the white intellectual

[close]

Don’t mix those two statements. Because that would do Adorno no fair justice. His statement regarding Jazz might sound weird from todays perspective, but the main point here is, that 40s jazz music was one of the first pop-cultural available musics (besides chansons in the 20s. It has less to do with jazz in general and more with pop-culture and pop music. It just happened to be jazz.

[close]

I don’t know, Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong may have been popular music, but they were pretty good!

[close]

It never was about the actually quality or craftsmanship of these playing their instruments. It was rather about the function Adorno saw in popular music within capitalism

I understand, but people have also argued that he was simply listening to the wrong type of Jazz. Ironically many readers of Adorno happen to be jazz fans.

I also think he was wrong. Jazz music and its legacy did way more against fascism than any of the avant-garde music Adorno liked.

[pugmaster]

2 B or not 2 B, is question

[yghartsyrt]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

so funny that jazz was simultaneously ultra-rhythmic sexualized jungle music and a castrating soul-less instrument of collective impotence to the white intellectual

[close]

Don’t mix those two statements. Because that would do Adorno no fair justice. His statement regarding Jazz might sound weird from todays perspective, but the main point here is, that 40s jazz music was one of the first pop-cultural available musics (besides chansons in the 20s. It has less to do with jazz in general and more with pop-culture and pop music. It just happened to be jazz.

[close]

I don’t know, Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong may have been popular music, but they were pretty good!

[close]

It never was about the actually quality or craftsmanship of these playing their instruments. It was rather about the function Adorno saw in popular music within capitalism

[close]

I understand, but people have also argued that he was simply listening to the wrong type of Jazz. Ironically many readers of Adorno happen to be jazz fans.

I also think he was wrong. Jazz music and its legacy did way more against fascism than any of the avant-garde music Adorno liked.

yeah - he was totally wrong regarding jazz, but spot on with so much other stuff, that i just ignore this little blip in his work.

[S.]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

so funny that jazz was simultaneously ultra-rhythmic sexualized jungle music and a castrating soul-less instrument of collective impotence to the white intellectual

[close]

Don’t mix those two statements. Because that would do Adorno no fair justice. His statement regarding Jazz might sound weird from todays perspective, but the main point here is, that 40s jazz music was one of the first pop-cultural available musics (besides chansons in the 20s. It has less to do with jazz in general and more with pop-culture and pop music. It just happened to be jazz.

[close]

I don’t know, Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong may have been popular music, but they were pretty good!

[close]

It never was about the actually quality or craftsmanship of these playing their instruments. It was rather about the function Adorno saw in popular music within capitalism

[close]

I understand, but people have also argued that he was simply listening to the wrong type of Jazz. Ironically many readers of Adorno happen to be jazz fans.

I also think he was wrong. Jazz music and its legacy did way more against fascism than any of the avant-garde music Adorno liked.

[close]

yeah - he was totally wrong regarding jazz, but spot on with so much other stuff, that i just ignore this little blip in his work.

I agree 100 Percent.

[fruits, nuts, + seeds:)]

Expand Quote

so funny that jazz was simultaneously ultra-rhythmic sexualized jungle music and a castrating soul-less instrument of collective impotence to the white intellectual

[close]

Don’t mix those two statements. Because that would do Adorno no fair justice. His statement regarding Jazz might sound weird from todays perspective, but the main point here is, that 40s jazz music was one of the first pop-cultural available musics (besides chansons in the 20s. It has less to do with jazz in general and more with pop-culture and pop music. It just happened to be jazz.

how could anyone possibly mix those two statements- they're polar opposites

my point is that white academia didn't (and doesn't) know how to encounter black creativity on its own terms without retreating into itself

jazz didn't arise as a part of the culture industry (i've read adorno as well) but was subsumed by it (the topic of the thread)