Ah so maybe Badiou won’t have the typical obnoxious relation to Wagner
Already at the age of 17 I was a proponent and champion of this music that was often reviled.
Thing about Badiou is, I never know what to expect when I start reading one of his books, I just know he’s going to show me a new way of seeing the world
I think music has played a very important role in eliminating the aesthetics of distinction. I call ‘aesthetics of distinction’ aesthetics holding that there are potentially intelligible, rational boundaries between art and non-art
Seems true. Out of all the arts it’s probably at the forefront of relativism.
White guys who listen to rap “music” ahahahHAHAHA their crude taste typically extends to politics too.
Yes, this is true
this notion is under attack on all sides today in favour of what I would call an aesthetics of non-distinction
I often mock the sorts of POC novels included in “great books” list – music is more glaring in this regard. One might say it’s at the vanguard of leveling. Maybe simply because it’s easier to listen to than read a book.
Badiou calls it the democratization of taste. This Maoist has his Adorno-esque elitism that might surprise you. I’ll state it more bluntly than he will- there’s no point in communism if it’s all a bunch of morons who are equal to each other.
The postwar fate of Wagner, I didn’t know this, though could’ve expected
This is a fundamental alteration of the Northern religion. Forced conversion after war, in the truest sense.
I’m going to have to read this Musica ficta by this other Frenchman if he goes into detail about THIS
According to Lacoue-Labarthe, Wagner was the last great artist capable of defending the idea of high art and precisely in so doing he revealed outright that the contemporary world can no longer produce anything in terms of high art except extremely reactionary, dangerous, even secretly criminal political configurations.
This is the funniest. It’s so true- you’re a Nazi if you create high art. Thus any attempts to do so have to be extremely subtle to the point it’s almost secretly criminal. F U, I want “all the nice things”. When discussing this you can tell Badiou has his own reticences about this himself- he isn’t your typical leftist. They won’t publish a statement like my previous sentence in a book on him, that’s why I go out of my way to say it.
I love to be so far away from the democratization of taste that is America- one old European talking about an older European, gotta love it. Just something casual I do, that anyone else can do, and they don’t do it. Their taste is democratized, that’s why. Can you just do that yourself please? Find some random philosopher talking about some random artist – there is an aesthetic splendor to that. Raising the standards of the country is going to be a team-effort. This is boot camp you’ve been in.
Want to hear something disturbing about this reading of muh boi?
He upholds the project of high art, of totalization, of the idea of the poem as something distinct from prose; he in no way renounces the immediate form of the sublime and the sublime effect
Badiou seems to be hinting that the sublimity decreases as the democratization increases.
Next, he refers to the kitsch of waning empires, immediately bringing up Hollywood.
Oh great, this guy died in 1924, isn’t this sad to read
while Puccini he sees as someone trying to breathe a last gasp into high art but failing – and that’s it; after that it’s all over.
I’ve just drawn from the first of five lessons – you can read the others from Badiou here.