Critical Thinking Essay...

Hello to all readers...The text below is an essay I wrote as part of the coursework in my Final Year of my Creative Music Technology course.
The task was to debate the assertion of a Mr. Taruskin (A music analyst supremo) That "20th Century art is obsessed with regression to old concepts rather than progression and development of new concepts".



MU3043
Critical Thinking III
Essay II

The assertion that late-twentieth century music has created a regression because of adhering to old concepts is both correct and incorrect.

There have been musicians who have unashamedly purloined the techniques and musical ideas of artists from the past, without changing any of its aspects or adding their own vestige to it; often resulting in dull music and typifying the regression Taruskin describes.
However, there have also been artists and bands that have borrowed traits, techniques and patterns from the musicians who influenced them and appropriated it in such a way to create something new and innovative. By using elements of music past, (a seemingly rear-guard approach) these artists were able to add their own inflections, talent and creativity to produce something original and thus form part of the vanguard in their respective genres.
Here, I aim to demonstrate that when a musician decides to rework an old concept; the amount of reworking, talent and clever use of past material (be it a musician's riff or their method) are some of the factors that will determine whether their adaptation is pioneering or simply reverting to old ideas without contributing anything new. I will also discuss the subjectivity inherent in the question as well as querying whether the avant-garde actually exists.

In the case of Pete Rock, Taruskin's assertion is incorrect.
Pete Rock is a hip-hop producer who started gaining recognition for his inventive production techniques in 1991. He was one half of the seminal rap duo, Pete Rock & CL Smooth; where he handled the production and CL Smooth did the rapping (though Pete Rock does rap too).
His work on their albums, All Souled Out, Mecca and The Soul Brother and The Main Ingredient are hailed as some of hip-hop's best moments, largely due to Pete Rock's blend of musicality and cunning in the samples of old records he used.

Though most hip-hop of this era was relying almost solely on creative manipulation and application of samples, Pete Rock was one of the producers who stood out in the field because of his deft use of jazz, funk and R&B samples.

I believe that this is also largely due to, (alongside other pioneering hip-hop producers of the era), Pete Rock starting out as a disc jockey with a great love for the music he sampled. As a disc jockey, playing for street parties in New York; he gained an appreciation for all the soul, jazz, funk and r&b records he would play. This appreciation combined with a knack for arranging and skilful sampling resulted in what hip-hop lovers affectionately described as "fresh".

His approach involves meticulous attention to detail and (what would become) a trademark hazy sound (Often as a result of sampling his material directly from vinyl recordings). By cutting the samples he uses into smaller parts (for easier re-arrangement), filtering (affecting the texture of sounds) them and carefully layering them in his chosen arrangement, he has transformed several old concepts, riffs and patterns into some of hip-hop's most revered music.

His most renowned piece is arguably They Reminisce Over You (T.R.O.Y.), where he used a bass-line and a saxophone phrase from "Today" by Tom Scott; leader of jazz-fusion band L.A. Express. By using these two elements as the groundwork for the track, Pete Rock creates a drum beat (with several variations and embellishments executed flawlessly) from individual hi-hat, bass drum and snare drum hits, creating the basic track for his cohort CL Smooth to rap over. The combination of Smooth's fluent delivery and topical rapping merged with Rock's expert fusing of the aforementioned components resulted in a piece many critics have nominated as one of the best hip-hop songs ever.

Rock's selective sampling and tasteful manipulation of samples placed him at the forefront of introducing funk breaks and jazz samples into hip-hop. Alongside groups such as Stetsasonic, (Talkin' All That Jazz) and Public Enemy (Caught, Can We Get a Witness?); Pete Rock was a substantial force in the hip-hop vanguard of the time.

The interesting issue here is that Pete Rock is relying on what appears to be a rear-guard tactic while simultaneously propelling the vanguard of hip-hop music. This shows that one can still use or refer to prior material, while still being on the cutting edge of their chosen discipline. Almost as if commitment to old concepts was a legitimate path to crafting avant-garde music. (As we know, musicians have been using this approach or one similar to it many years prior to the birth of hip-hop.)

Pete Rock continued to use this method of making his music, searching for obscure samples to fit alongside his drum patterns; resulting in numerous imitators but also influencing a great number of highly regarded hip-hop producers (such as J Dilla and Hi-Tek, both of whom display clear tendencies of Rock-esque sampling) that would emerge in the years that followed, an influence that continues up to the current day.

This dependence on old music might cause one to suggest that Taruskin's assertion applies here. That is to say, Pete Rock pioneered a movement (vanguard action) but then continued to pursue this methodology ever since, which could be interpreted as a transformation to the rear-guard. However, it could also be argued that he did not alter his approach as the music he has produced was continuously of a high calibre and received several plaudits from fans and critics. Hence, as mentioned in the introduction, his talent, creative acumen and selective ear have prevented his once-pioneering music from stagnating or becoming a mere imitation of the music he sampled.
Therefore, Pete Rock's groundbreaking effect on hip-hop relied heavily on old concepts; but proved that this did not necessarily result in a transformation of the avant-garde into the arriere-garde.

In the case of Eric Clapton, I feel that Taruskin's assertion applies more.
Eric Clapton is one of the most highly-rated guitarists of all time, but his style relies almost exclusively on electric Chicago blues music. His recognition spawned from the fact that he became a supreme player of music that had already been established. His obsession with obtaining a distinguished level of proficiency in a style of music that was developed almost three decades prior to his emergence as an 18-year old prodigy with The Yardbirds (1963), fits the part of Taruskin's statement that declares that twentieth century art is committed to an 'old concept of the new'.
Clapton had absorbed most of his playing by learning songs and licks note-for-note from blues legends such as Big Bill Broonzy, T.Bone Walker and Robert Johnson. While this may seem like ideal material to cover as a blues guitarist in training, my opinion is that in Clapton's case, it has resulted in replication rather than innovation. I feel he is the most well-known example of a guitarist who has practiced to attain a mastery of the blues, but has not infused anything original to it.

One could also argue that Clapton's emergence (especially with Cream) in the rock scene of London in the late 1960's made Chicago electric blues popular again. Cream are noted to have influenced Jimmy Page to form Led Zeppelin and similarities can certainly be traced between Clapton's power-trio and the groundbreaking Jimi Hendrix Experience.
His playing with John Mayall's band, The Bluesbreakers, had also been influential in a string of groups who appeared on the scene trying to emulate their raw, blues-rock sound.
This could be interpreted as a regression to the rearguard, as Clapton was gaining popularity not by lending anything new, but by playing impeccable textbook blues. As this popularity rubbed off in the form of spawning imitators, there came a wave of bands reverting to playing similar material. This can be viewed as a transformation of the vanguard into the rearguard by virtue of Clapton's involvement in the aforementioned bands.

As is also mentioned above, Clapton was regarded by many as the best guitarist in the world; so much in fact that a now-famous graffiti writing saying "Clapton is God" became an iconic image in the UK and America; seeming to echo the feelings of most Clapton fans. While my opinion on Clapton (generally being one of dislike, bar a handful of Cream and Bluesbreakers songs) is an unpopular one, I have decided on it due to Clapton's expertise in replication of blues guitarists who influenced him often lacking soul and feeling in its delivery.
Thus far, in late 1966, not many UK guitarists even dared to match their skills to Clapton's; his ironic nickname of "Slowhand" denoting his remarkable dexterity and speed which many believed was unsurpassable. At the time, Clapton was enjoying one of the peaks of his career, playing with Ginger Baker and Jack Bruce in Cream and they were considered the band of the moment, as all three members had formidable abilities on their instruments and made an exciting combination.
At this point, a certain Jimi Hendrix arrived in London and was granted the chance to sit in with Cream at one of their performances. The overwhelming ability and passion of delivery in his cameo appearance floored Clapton. Very soon, fans, imitators and emulators had abandoned him with extraordinary fickleness. The scene quickly turned all eyes to Hendrix's musical ventures as his playing was considered more adventurous and entertaining.
I believe one of the key factors in this en masse change of heart was due to Hendrix playing virtuoso guitar in a very soulful manner; something I feel Clapton's playing does not often display.
One might argue that Clapton was a part of the vanguard as a part of Cream, with their undeniably different sound. However, even in what is arguably Clapton's most innovative musical setting; he failed to unearth anything new in terms of guitar playing. A good example is his basic use of the wah-wah pedal on "Tales of Brave Ulysses" by Cream. It is made to look unimaginative beside Jimi Hendrix compositions such as Voodoo Chile (Slight Return) and Machine Gun; where Hendrix moves through various positions on the pedal, thoroughly exploring its capabilities as a tone controller.

Given cutting-edge technology, Clapton only applied it in its most standard form; again an example of his retrogression to pre-established concepts. Being acknowledged as the best UK blues guitarist only showed that Clapton had become the best at playing the blues; even his original compositions were reinforcing the rearguard rather than contributing to the vanguard.
In conclusion, while both Rock and Clapton relied heavily on past music; Rock's jigsaw-puzzle re-arrangement style established him as a pioneer; Clapton's expert ability has established him as an expert blues player. As mentioned in the introduction, I feel (if an artist is to re-work an existing form) that creativity and skilful application of existing material can result in vanguard work (contrary to Taruskin's statement); which I feel is present in Rock's material. Clapton's enormous talent did not result in any significant re-working of the blues and as such, its can be argued that his work is not innovative or pioneering; but that he is a guitarist of exceptional technique.

Of course, one cannot fully examine Taruskin's assertion without questioning the fundamental issue of whether or not the avant-garde truly exists. This is a legitimate inquiry as virtually all music has been derived from something that already existed. Thus, it is debatable whether any artist or performer can be considered as an exponent of the vanguard when they are reliant on any quantity of previous material.

If one chooses to take the extreme view that any art form borrowing any elements or traits from any other art form or discipline cannot be considered avant-garde, then the vast majority of musicians cannot be described as pioneering or cutting edge. If one was to take a polar opposite stance, then every musician that added the smallest inflection of anything new would be denoted as pioneering. Both views are disproportionate, so it is often a question of finding a relative balance to help define what makes one part of the vanguard or part of the rearguard.
I have tried to recognize and highlight both the shortcomings and the achievements of both the artists mentioned, in an attempt to give a balanced view of their work. I have also tried to show that because so much of what the statement suggests is very subjective (with regards to one feeling that someone they respect or like is more deserving of the vanguard/rearguard title than someone's else's nomination), arguments can be made in favour of or against most artists, as most have appropriated aspects from other forms of art and life; and debating whether they have added any noteworthy new inflections or reverted to reproducing antiquated material is a matter of opinion. Hence, Asking a hundred subjects this question will almost undoubtedly result in a hundred different answers; due to its subjective nature, several variables and intricate details involved with labelling a piece of music as avant-garde or derriere-garde.

its aliiiive....

quasi.proto goes live... huzzahs all around!

"You motherfuckers don't have grit, you're all teenage poetry; martyrs without causes, move onwards to the pin with this ('test'), Motherfucker, did I sound abstract??, I hope it sounded more confusing than that..." - El-P