tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1590276773297960446.post517554296589229505..comments2024-01-27T06:40:07.056+00:00Comments on Zone Styx Travelcard: Music and theoryUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1590276773297960446.post-67493867664910411122009-11-04T13:45:14.675+00:002009-11-04T13:45:14.675+00:00Sorry Anon, I meant to reply to your post ages ago...Sorry Anon, I meant to reply to your post ages ago, and now some spam has come between us. Agree entirely that socio-historical analysis is not anti intellectual. And the common lightning rods for criticism within theory (eg Yale school deconstruction) cannot simply represent the whole... but in my experience any number of materialist theorists can elicit sceptical eye-rolling too, not just Foucault but Bourdieu, Adorno, Habermas... <br /><br />Re the Kodwo Eshun quote, More Brilliant than the Sun is a deliberate polemic turn to formalism, formulated in response to a critical norm which took no account at all of the sensory, phenomenological nature of those areas of dance music. It's partly a rebuke to journalism at a level local to the time and place of 90s dance music writing, and partly to the wider historical problem of black music culture being discussed reductively as products of an environment: blues as a metabolism of plantation/Depression misery, Motown and civil rights, hiphop as informed by the crack epidemic of the 80s/90s... So there's a critical balance to be restored, to prevent the object of study becoming society, with the music as a lens through which to study it. What about the music itself, in all its strange, incommensurable richness and complexity? etcSam Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03256521398930476465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1590276773297960446.post-48607670897676567142009-10-16T17:34:51.773+01:002009-10-16T17:34:51.773+01:00not sure how writing "socio-historically"...not sure how writing "socio-historically" is anti-intellectual; indeed, it just isn't. being anti-"theory" (by which theory dudes mean an extremely narrow part of the intellectual spectrum - foucault has been taken down pretty comprehensively, e.g. by historians who tend to care about his use of evidence) is not necessarily anti-intellectual. <br /><br />but you nail the problem with "precisely". is it a zizekism? he uses it a lot, anyway. "is it not precisely...?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com