art/music and the eonic effect…//‘The War on Music’ Review: Songs Without Listeners – WSJ

The question is complex and we have addressed it here many times: one part of the answer relates to the dynamic of the eonic effect and the way that ‘modern’/so-called ‘classical’ music (from ?Monteverdi to twentieth-century at the outside) is directly correlated with the latter half of the modern transition, peaks near the ‘divide’ ca. 1800 plus/minus with e.g. Mozart and Beethoven and then starts to damp out but with major great work with Verdi to Puccini, then that’s it. It resembles a car running out of gas. The correlation is so striking to a student of the eonic model that we see this is not coincidence and suggests that this music is jumpstarted by the larger ‘macro’ process and starts to damp out after the transition. It joins the flood of innovations correlated with the modern transition. This is incomprehensible without careful study of the ‘eonic effect’ as a whole. This creates a dilemma: to what degree is human creativity spontaneous and due to human autonomy? We should perhaps conclude that without the eonic macro effect modern music would never have happened, but that at one and the same time human talent and genius is essential and prior to a larger process that triggers its realization. Flowers are flowers but with fertilizer they thrive at a higher level. This case is invaluable because we can see what is possible for man outside the eonic sequence: viz. medieval to early Renaissance music, and dozens of global cases. There is a gap here which our model might be too crude to account for directly and the gestation of modern music as we call it has some earlier phase in the sixteenth century. That’s another fifty books added to the ten thousand indicated by the whole eonic effect, so this is a field of open study.
Thus we have one clue to the sudden waning of modern/classical music. But we should note that what follows is of value in its own right, by definition because it falls into the category of free agency next to the macro induction in the main phase. But it is also true that many simply dislike what follows in the realm of post-melodic atonal or whatever music.
We have lost the ancient Greek sense of the arts and their muses and while that is inevitable with a mythical polytheism of muses the Greeks did grasp that there is some larger process in the creativity of man. The point is directly evident at the start of the Iliad as Homer invokes his muse. That thinking won’t help here save to note that creativity is individual yet bound up in greater nature and more exactly with macro historical evolution.
Looking backward we see ominously how rapidly cultural tone can decay and enter a kind of equilibrium without creative energy. But if we have been there before ours might the first age that can reckon with its macro-dynamics and while I share a classic music fan’s feeling askance with recent work the actual state of affairs might conceal some prophecy of a future music at full human autonomy.
It is not clear why the genre of classical music should suddenly stop even with our larger explanation. It seems like the vein of music possibilities from which the Mozart’s draw should be infinite and yet we see the whole field suddenly abandoned for atonal, etc, experimental forms.

This won’t make much sense at first. This is a complex advanced example and it might help to study the overall eonic effect as outlined in World History and the Eonic Effect, or Decoding World History. World history has a mysterious design, and much of its great art, and much else, shows creative induction of some kind.

https://redfortyeight.com/?s=classical+music

Every concertgoer knows it: Most classical music written since 1945 ranges from boring to unendurable. What went wrong?

Source: ‘The War on Music’ Review: Songs Without Listeners – WSJ

Guernica and Bucha 

In 1937, the most famous artist in the world – a Spaniard from Málaga — made a mural sized painting depicting the recent destruction of Guernica by German Luftwaffe bombers. The painting was controversial. The Communists thought it too abstract; they wanted socialist realism. The liberals thought it was too political; they wanted beauty. The fascists and Nazis thought it was degenerate; they wanted it burned. But following its initial exhibition at the Spanish pavilion of the Paris World’s Fair of 1937, the picture’s stature and renown grew.

Source: Guernica and Bucha – CounterPunch.org