MODERNISM — APOCALYPSE OR TRAVESTY?
By Bjørn Sverre Kristensen
Modernism is the collective name for the wave of experimental (avant-garde) styles in visual arts, architecture, literature, and music from the late 19th century and beyond the 20th century. Modernism is characterized by many stylistic expressions and is known for experimentation and innovation. Modernism is often categorized in opposition to classical expressions, and as a radical tradition particularly associated with new generations. This is a quotation from the Great Norwegian Encyclopedia from the years 2005–2007.
Modernism has become a minority and elite culture, which to a small extent reflects the spiritual life of modern man, I would argue. Is the core of modernism’s art project to present the lonely person without any hope, a mere actor in a fragmented, atomized existence? We can often be led to believe that, where modernism has long hung on to, or should we rather say, conducts an isolated cultivation of the conflict and the pain per se? We all know that conflict is a central part of life, and thus also a central part of art, but conflict without hope, without consolation, without compassion, without being shown a way out of the struggle, has little value in itself. We all know that; we have all been in situations where we have approached the outer limit of the human experience. It is there, in my opinion, that modernism has failed. And the tragic thing is that modernism still lives on artificial oxygen intake, it is no longer a viable style. It is a style that fewer and fewer find relevant for expressing their daily drama, and many accept it only as one of many styles in our culturally pluralistic age. Therefore, modernism is being torn down from the position that a minority is still trying to defend. As an elite culture, I see it as an increasingly worn-out banner that certain gatekeepers within cultural life keep waving. Here the very concept of modernism comes into play, because the table captures, so to speak. All, or at least, the vast majority of us, perceive ourselves, or at least, want, in one way or another, to be modern. The fact that the direction within art and cultural life which for well over 100 years has gone by the name of modernism has given the direction an ideological durability that is difficult to puncture. For what will come after modernism when this direction has sung its swansong; traditionalism, antiquarianism, authenticism, or another -ism?
One can well argue that modernism in the field of music is on its way out, but something still remains, and this «something», which proves to be quite durable, is the aesthetics, especially since the aesthetics of timbre and sound texture is probably the foremost characteristic of musical modernism. The attempt to build an entire aesthetic in which timbre and texture at the expense of melody, as the most important pillar of human cognition through organized sound, and a structural element of the musical dramaturgy, has proven to promise much more than it is able to deliver.
One cannot abolish modernism any more than one can abolish other trends that have been given their designation throughout art history. But a lot has happened within the field of art in general and the field of music in particular in recent decades, especially with a focus on opposition to classical expressions and as a radical tradition especially associated with new generations. There, the style of retrogardism speaks for itself. The musical ceiling has become so much loftier, and the concept of contemporary classical music today contains far more creative variations than just 20–30 years ago I may maintain. A musical aesthetic rebellion directly aimed at modernism is therefore today more or less synonymous with trying to smash in already opened doors.
On musical form: As everyone in this convention knows, form is an integral part of any work of art. Although art “talks to the heart”, it also goes through the brain. Anyone who has read a novel, seen a play or a cinema film, listened to a piece of music, or studied a picture knows this; we are captured by the form. Form, the submersible nerve fibers in the work of art, are guided into the emotional universe that every art form offers to the perceptive human being. In music, this is clearest expressed in the classical Viennese sonata movement form, where a powerful main theme is set against a milder side theme, and where the middle section, the development part, symbolizes the battle between these two themes. This thematic dualism is a direct parallel to what we find in the classical ancient Greek dramas of Aiskcylos, Sophocles, and Euripides, with the struggle between the antagonist and the protagonist, as theorized by Aristotle. Is melody a stronger carrier of form and content than timbre and texture? If so, how can the melody be brought back as a sustainable musical expression of human endeavor and as a viable size within contemporary classical music without being labeled as “sentimental” or reactionary?
On improvisation as an independent art form. Improvisation as an independent art form and means of expression within Western classical music, has largely disappeared from music history. If we go back to the Renaissance and the early Baroque, to the eminent lute player Johannes Kapsberger, we find solo pieces which, although notated, leave clear traces of improvisation. If we move on to Johann Sebastian Bach’s mighty Toccata and Fugue in D minor, we find the same thing. J. S. Bach’s son, Carl Philip Emanuel, was a brilliant improviser on the harpsichord, as was Georg Friedrich Händel. Furthermore, we know that both Mozart and Beethoven improvised solo cadenzas when they were soloists in their own piano concertos. The art of improvisation was relegated from Western art music during the latter half of the 19th century when the scores became more and more detailed and the desire for control over the individual musician became increasingly pronounced. Improvisation had almost no place within the modernist scores. Improvisation was assigned a place in jazz music where it was an integral part of the musical expression right from the start. It has been there ever since, behind a high fence with barbed wire on top. Rock musicians entered the enclosure and brought out knowledge and skills via the blues. The art of improvisation should regain its rightful place within contemporary classical music. The only place where melodic improvisation has survived to some extent in classical music is in the education of church organists. There, the future cantor must practice prelude improvisation and improvisation over psalm tunes. But then, we are talking about improvisation within tonal, modal, or other music, just think of all the exciting scales that Arabic music, or other music offers, here the possibilities and aspects of beauty are infinite! Improvisation within atonal, or non-tonal, timbre- and texture-based music is also entirely possible but represents a microscopic part of the modernist tradition, it somehow does not have a place in this direction where the notated music takes precedence.
On melody and scale: Many people think that singability only belongs to the world of major and minor, i.e. in tonal music. One tends to forget, or perhaps one doesn’t bother, to check out what other scales exist both in Western culture and in all the other cultures of the world. In the West, we find a lot of modal music, i.e. music that uses the so-called church modes, Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, etc. We also find pentatonic scales or the blues scale. But what about the double harmonic scale or the enigmatic scale, the hypoechoic or the Spanish 7-tone scale? And if one crosses the border and ventures over to the Arab music world, we find amongst others, the beautiful Hiaz scale, and the enigmatic Shad’ Arabam scale. In other words, there is a large, tempting musical color palette there ready to be utilized!
On beat and rhythm: The Norwegian composer Arne Nordheim once said that popular music in general, and disco music in particular in 2/4 measure, feels like a military march. This is perhaps why pop goblins and heavy metal apostles are so terribly bad at dancing. 3/4 measure and other time signatures have become endangered. There are a lot of exciting time signatures and rhythms around the world. We mention in succession: springar and gangar rhythms from Norway, polska and masurka from Sweden, tango from Argentina, merengue from the Caribbean, rumba and son from Cuba, reggae from Jamaica, high-life from Kenya, or great Arabic rhythm modes such as maqsuum, masmodi and saidi, not to forget all the tempting Bulgarian time signatures. Get started and use them!
On the relationship between zeitgeist and the timeless. The following is a powerful paradox that we should think about in our efforts to win back the beauty that we claim to have lost. That paradox is that great art transcends time. Although Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Debussy, and others were all contemporary figures, we still listen to their music. Their music is timeless because every generation finds something new in it. Therefore, the world will never grow weary of Bach’s passions and cantatas, Handel’s oratorios, Haydn’s string quartets, Mozart’s operas and piano concertos, Beethoven’s sonatas and symphonies, and Shubert’s lieder, to name a few, — and the common denominator for these composers and their music is the artistry of musical quality, the superior craftsmanship, what some may call kitsch if this expertise is used today.
On ethos and affect: One cannot abolish modernism any more than one abolished other art movements in the past. The art trends merged into one another because, in the past, certain expressions were found to be too little relevant to what one experienced and what was important to one then and there. Another important point is that such changes in style also simply have to do with fashion trends. In the history of art and music, we operate with the terms ethos and affect, where ethos, in short, refers to art or style where the form is perhaps more prominent than the content, and affect where the relationship is the opposite. Many see the history of art as an eternal pendulum movement between ethos and affect, for example from the ethosbased austerity of the Renaissance to the affect-driven expression of the Baroque to the ethos-driven art of Viennese classicism and from there to the affective focus of romanticism, and to the ethos of modernism, if we may say so. The Norwegian historian Jens Arup Seip once said many years ago that it is impossible to name one’s contemporary epoch; historians must let a good measure of time pass before they can say anything unifying about the cultural or aesthetic content of an epoch. This is also the case of our contemporary; it is difficult to say exactly what it is all about.
Should one rebel against modernism? Certainly, but historical experience shows that styles in art tend to die out by themselves. People are constantly finding new aesthetic approaches to tell the stories of their lives, what they are toiling with; the eternal problems, the great stories, and what has always constituted the human project. Some try to be ‘modern’, while others harken back to the aesthetics of earlier styles and reinvent them to make them contemporary. Both ways may be equally viable, but the problem with modernism is, as previously stated, that it lives on borrowed oxygen, its time seems to be done.
So, what to do? A famous American Gestalt therapist once said to a client: Do not push the river! Perhaps this can be a piece of advice for you: Do not push modernism, but let it flow out and away.
And how are we going to make this happen? The answer is quite simple: Create art! Create art in your own image, based on your own beauty criteria! A true artist creates art for herself. Whether it resonates with others; is a completely different matter. But art history has shown that it does, time and time again!
Beauty depends on the aesthetics you cultivate. And so, once again back to the music: Most stylistic eras here in the West have had their preferred melodic structures or melodic formulas. What structures or formula can the melodies of our times have, to capture and illustrate the contemporary human life; it’s comedy and tragedy, it’s love, it’s fervor, it’s hope and consolation?
So, back to the title of my article; modernism, apocalypse, or travesty? Is modernism a style that heralds the downfall of art or the downfall of man, or is it in the process of surviving itself and becoming a comic distortion, a travesty? What’s your opinion?
Learn more about Bjørn Sverre Kristensen at his website here.
