[Kevin Drum] If you hate the culture wars, blame liberals

You said it much better than me, Slaves would still have a purpose even to run the machines.

Also sharecropping was a form of slavery.

 

This should be interesting, if he even answers you.

He has said several times he does it for the "reaction".

 

It's very possible that if the Confederacy survived that slavery could've existed for a very very long time but as a major means of production in a modern economy it was doomed because it couldn't compete. The vast majority of slaves were involved in production of agriculture and household slaves were considered a different class. It's possible those remain slaves but given the small numbers a successful institution might've been difficult to maintain.

We know that sexual slavery is still widely practiced and that probably persisted but given attitudes regarding miscegenation it likely would've remained underground.

Just to emphasize in my view even if the Confederacy had voluntarily given up slavery doesn't meant that things would've been fine between the races. Racism was the norm among not just white Southerners but also White Northerners. Freed slaves still would've had many restrictions on them and exploited in other ways. There still would've needed to be a civil rights movements if the CSA had survived.

 

I read the original article, not the slippedisc post, and nowhere in it does it call classical music racist. What it does say is that composers like Beethoven benefited from the power of Europe in promoting and giving prominence to those composers over other composers of different cultures. This is not a controversial idea.

 

You should read the links in the slipdisc that's where I got it from.

 

Is Beethoven embraced by today's white elitists? Who is saying that? Who is making this assumption? I don't know how I feel if someone who is not white makes an assumption about white people that from my experience is patently untrue. It becomes a talking point that people just take as fact. How many white even listen to Beethoven? Do you think rich white people really care about the arts? We can't even get funding for anything. We are so behind other countries in this regard its not even funny. How many times have republicans made it harder for musicians? The person who did the most for the arts was Obama. Covid hit us harder than most people in the country. I lost 85% of my income in an instant as there were no more performances. Last I remember rich white people were talking about how much the restaurant industry was suffering because it makes them money to talk about. The arts were left for dead specifically by rich white people in power and not even so much as mentioned. I certainly didn't see any of them embrace Beethoven. And this is what we get after all of that. I am always willing to hear and learn from people of different backgrounds and opinions but I think turning assumptions about another race of people into fact like this is dangerous.

I grew up in the piano competition scene. The room was mostly Asian the majority of the time. When I went to my conservatory, in the classical program my year, it was all Asian and one white guy from Amsterdam. If you are white, you are most definitely a minority in these kinds of circles and there is nothing wrong with that. Asians have some of the best interpreters of Beethoven in the world. Do you know the kind of relationship Chinese have specifically with Beethoven? Do they think he's a symbol of white elitists? Every conservatory in the United States offers courses in African music, Indian music, Brazilian music etc. Look it up. It just so happens that a lot of people, and not even close to all of them are white, are very passionate about music in a specific time period in history and they go to conservatories to study exclusively that. There is nothing wrong with that. There is also nothing wrong with white parents wanting their children to learn Beethoven sonatas.

Regarding the professor. This was a very big thing in the community. People were obsessively talking about it for days. I saw with my own eyes a lot more than just accusations of racism. The kind of vitriol was uncalled for. I have friends who turned on him and interestingly enough, none of them were black. There is a reason he filed a defamation suit.This is specifically the kind of rhetoric I have problems understanding.
Professor Ewell certainly has a right to express his ideas. He labels as a “virulent racist” the great music theorist Heinrich Schenker. By extension, he argues, modern music theory is institutionalized “racism” and those who teach and defend Schenker are “whitewashing” music theory.

I've heard that modern music theory is institutionalized racism way more times than I have patience for at this point. First of all, a lot of the highest forms of modern music theory come in the forms of modern jazz and avant garde jazz. This is an inherently BLACK art form. All of the mixed meters and polyrhythms many composers use came from African music and Indian music. Minimalist musicians have long said that they flat out borrowed and expounded upon theory in African music. Modern music theory is increasingly rhythm oriented and White Europeans were very far behind Africans and Indians in this regard for generations. If you want to talk about the advancements of purely European music theory, (which started with Pythagorus. Are we canceling math now?) how can you ignore someone like John Coltrane and the massive implications his work has on theory in this day and age? John Coltrane was an instrumental figure during the civil rights movement. Is he racist? A lot of his work was taken from the theorist Slonimsky who was Russian and then expounded upon. Charlie Parker completely changed the way many people view theory and he was influenced by Europeans like Hindemith. Miles Davis is considered the cubist of music and he was directly influenced by Ravel. European music theory is so racist that black people have heavily shaped it and made it better leading into the 21'st century. These are all some of the greatest musicians to ever live and they were black. They ALL easily stack up to Beethoven. They helped create "America's Artform" in jazz using theory from both classical music and African traditions. There are free jazz concerts all over New York City. Why is it that audiences are overwhelmingly white? Why is it that jazz departments all across the country are littered with white students who want to learn a black art form? If Black people think it makes sense to minimize white traditions to make room for other types of music, why don't they even support their own music?

One of the best music theorists alive today is an American of Persian descent. Also Vijay Iyer, an exceptionally bright Indian-American man is now running the show and overseeing the music theory department at Harvard. Are these people part of institutionalized racism?Muhammed Fairouz is probably the most recognized young classical composer coming out of America right now. The curator for the Kennedy Center is a brilliant African American man who came from Houston. Not only will he go down as a very important figure in music history, he does a tremendous amount of activist and political work through the Kennedy Center. We should all be extremely proud he's from Houston. This is a guy who wrote the score for Selma. Classical music has been doing a lot of activism in general. These are liberal institutions by nature. And these are the people we want to go after?

When people say cancel classical music for whatever reason, A.you are attacking people who have had a very rough time this year and B.they are extremely misinformed as to what classical music is right now. Do you know how many Black composers there are now and throughout history? How many composers from all over the world? We should cancel them too or just the white ones? Why would Black people turn their backs on their own? There is a lot of black history intertwined with classical music. Why erase your own history? There are so many eras in this music just like in painting. We should just cancel all of it or just the periods that had more white musicians? Do we need to cancel Picasso too? There is already plenty of debate about racism in fine art for many of the same reasons. Should we call Rembrandt or Michelangelo or Van gogh overrated because of the time period he lived in? Are they symbols of white elitists? Is it ok for white people to have their own symbols and heroes? What exact factors makes a white person or art form elitist to begin with?

And regarding theory - if modern music theory is "racist" I have trouble understanding what made it that way or in what way it is racist. Has it hindered minorities from working in music theory or have minorities been dissuaded from joining orchestras or schools in any way? I'm not even sure if conservatories are predominantly white. The few instances of orchestral players saying anything inflammatory toward minorities on social media have been stamped out and promptly fired from their positions as they should be. Does that mean we scrap music theory? And replace it with what? Its a lot like republicans trying to replace Obama care because it was "evil" yet there was nothing to replace it with. Music theory in this day in age is tied to a concoction of different cultures not just white music from the 1700's. Canceling something like that would be like canceling the metric system. How does anyone play music without theory? Do we not want orchestra or band in schools anymore? Do you know how much theory is needed for Gospel music to function? What about all of the music teachers around the country? They just don't matter?

I honestly have no problem with what Professor Ewell said. He is entitled to his own opinion. People have constantly had spirited debates in academia for as long as we've had institutions. What I don't need is the vitriol that comes with cancel culture influencing a debate between two academics. A bunch of people on Twitter who don't understand any nuance in what makes music theory exist or care enough to learn music history past a cursory knowledge, if that, ultimately telling me and my peers how to think. I didn't want to make this forum into a discussion about music. I don't think I'm better than anyone else and I'll probably never bring it up again outside of this thread. I'm already comfortable knowing that classical music is not in the mainstream or that the issues aren't mainstream. I'm fine with it but why do people in the mainstream think they can tell me how to think? I'm not cherry picking things to get upset about, these are issues I encounter constantly in my field. The thing that makes me sad above anything else is that this kind of thing whether warranted or not has been festering in me for weeks to the point that I have to vent on a basketball forum because I'm too afraid to speak out for what I'm passionate about outside of anonymity. That is wrong.

 

There was well documented music from all over the world during Beethoven's time. Many composers of other cultures did very well in their own cultures during this time period. How come we don't hold other cultures to the same standard when it comes to diversity? There were way more black people in classical music than whites in african music, or indian music, or chinese music, or brazilian music. Is it not ok for white people to have anything that they can be proud of or can relate to culturally? I'm having trouble seeing what the problem is.

 

What is "white people"?

Italian? Irish? Scandinavian?

I think the point is that European powers colonized and suppressed these regions you mentioned in Africa and Asia limiting their oppurtunitues to be as influential as someone like Beethoven. If India invaded and colonized Great Britain, we would be speaking of allowing Saxon music to be more prominent.

 

I definitely see your point there and it is completely valid. I would argue that there were musicians at that time in other cultures just as influential as Beethoven. We can't think of music in those times through strictly the lens of publicity and exposure. External factors aside, people wrote music in all parts of the world in these times and its documented and learned from today. Was it given importance by Europeans later than it should have? Sure, but cultural differences were much greater back then. That goes for all cultures. And even among Europeans look at how much classical music was given importance centuries later like Bach for instance who could be argued to be the greatest composer who ever lived. It wasn't a perfect society. The stuff about suppression of artists didn't just happen outside of Europe. What about all of the Russian composers who were actively stifled and muted by the Soviet Union and still found a way? Shostakovich wrote music in prisons as a political prisoner. What about someone like Olivier Messiaen who spent his life in a German concentration camp and wrote his masterpieces in extreme conditions? Do you think those figures were for the most part instant success stories in their lifetimes?

I'm very glad you asked what is "white people" because its exactly my point. There was almost an arms race in music at that time between countries. Every country had a different school of thought and different pedagogy. All of these countries were trying to elevate their own because it brought their country pride. Whether that's right or wrong, this stuff happened 2 to 3 hundred years before segregation in schools even. It doesn't mean any of these people are invalid and even if they were I would be open to understanding why. The argument just needs to have more substance than he's white or he's black.

 

It means they would have been slaves longer, but there would have been a legal end to slavery, no civil war, and 6-700,000 fewer dead people (and millions fewer wounded). We would also not have trashed the rule of law and set a precedent that if a state decides to go its own way, the Feds just invade them and burn down their cities to bring them back in line. The very foundation of the United States was that if you feel oppressed by the government in control of you, you can be independent instead. Less than 100 years later, that idea was cast aside in favor of do what we say or else.

Most likely there would have been significant manumission at the individual level followed eventually by the freeing of all remaining slaves en masse through legislation or constitutional amendment (a la the 13th Amendment). Like happed in Brazil.

 

Yes, that is what I did, if you can show me where in the guys argument he makes the claim classical music is racist please do as I could not find it.

 

Also forgot to mention, Beethoven lived and produced a significant amount of his work in Austria under Napoleonic rule. He is exactly the kind of person you would would advocate for in your response. "Flying into a rage, the composer shouted: 'So he is no more than a common mortal! Now he, too, will tread underfoot all the rights of man and indulge only his ambition; now he will think himself superior to all men and become a tyrant!" It was only later he "admired" Napoleon and dedicated a masterpiece to him in an effort to be heard, and not be as artistically stifled or even imprisoned. Napoleon was all about French culture. Not Austrian culture. It should also not be forgotten that Beethoven wrote a significant amount of master works after going completely deaf. I would argue he achieved greatness despite the most incredible odds. He was completely deaf and his country was invaded and colonized and despite all that he was still great. Do you think he was privileged? Do we forgot how much Europe constantly invaded itself? Or did all white people have the same privilege in early 1800's Europe? Do we just assume all whites of the past were privileged regardless of circumstance? People like Napoleon invaded countless other countries with artists living in them. Remember that.

One other thing about Indian music. They have a highly complex and extensive music language that has been around for 6 thousand years. I'm sure getting colonized sucks just like it would have sucked for Beethoven. I'm not sure why they would care at all about what Europeans thought of them. Why does anyone even care what Europeans thought?

 

Again, I think you are arguing a strawman here - no one is suggesting to cancel classical music or cancel anyone. So I am not sure what you are arguing against.

As for Schenker, here's what one article wrote:

Schenker was outspokenly hateful toward non-German peoples and their music. For example, he compared the music of Turkey and Japan to “the babbling of infants,” sometimes charming, but devoid of meaning. He also didn’t think much of non-German Europeans and their music. Furthermore, he insisted that his political/racial beliefs were inseparable from his music theory. He saw the dominance hierarchy of notes and chords in music as mirroring the natural dominance hierarchy of the world’s peoples.

https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2021/who-is-heinrich-schenker-and-why-should-you-care/

It seems to me that Schenker by his own admission was biased in his view of people and by his own admission it affects his view of music. If he is the father of music theory then yes, it does appear that the field was founded on a structure that was inherently biased for certain people over another. I always found it strange that Indian music - which is phenomenally complex and thousands of years old - has never been celebrated much by many western scholars as sophisticated and inherently valued music.

I can't see how one can say that western music theory is applicable to music all over the world by the way especially given that many other cultures don't even conform to the same scale and spacing of notes. But I'm not an expert here.

 

Schenker is definitely not the father of music theory. Not even close. He had a theory but its not really even a popular one. I'm not a fan of Schenker's work but it is absolutely worth learning regardless of what the man behind it said. Its like not using a kind of math because of racism. Western music theory started with Pythagoras but it was really Bach who borrowing from 16th century Italian and Flemish traditions became the father of music theory we have today.

Indian music is the trend these days. Especially in Jazz. You can't play all styles of music with Western music theory. There is no way you could play Indian music with west theory. You can't apply Indian systems to classical music either. They are entirely different languages with often different instrumentation and tunings. Western music was further ahead in harmony and counterpoint, while Indian classical music is leagues beyond Europeans in understanding rhythmic systems. The cool thing about music these days in both classical and jazz is that people have been creating music mixing 3 languages. European, African and Indian. I believe Indian music came into jazz later in part because it is just so freaking hard to wrap your head around the complexity of it all and jazz needed enough time to develop. Cultural exchange of ideas is a beautiful thing. As a jazz major a lifetime ago, I was required to learn Indian music and African music. I even studied privately with an Indian music teacher as we were encouraged to do so.

As I said before I could definitely be overreacting. Its hard when it feels personal. Not personal because I'm white but because I care about these art forms. Being a musician is a hard life even for the successful ones especially in this country and I just don't appreciate "is it time to cancel Beethoven" titles or the numerous "cancel classical music?" titles. All you have to do is type these phrases in google and look at the hits. That rhetoric just doesn't sit right with me in any capacity and I hope you can understand that. Now I'm not gonna go full commando thinking my music is going to be erased. The rest of the world wouldn't allow for that. However this is a very weird time in America to say the least and if Americans want to turn their backs on their own history as well as all working musicians and teachers in the US I find it immensely sad. I don't in large part have a problem with cancel culture when it is used for good but these kinds of musicians are for the most part sensitive people in their own worlds not bothering anyone. Is there even the possibility of overreach in cancel culture? I want to know why people are upset at classical music or think that all of these composers were privileged, in part so that I can do better if something is not right. I want to know how white people think of Beethoven as a power symbol when no white people I know outside of my community even listen to classical music at all and the Chinese herald him as a hero. So what if he was white? Is it possible that people in the mainstream don't fully understand the nuances behind something that was never in the mainstream? Can people from another race just make blanket statements about what white people think without asking opinions of a white person or what someone at least informed in the subject thinks? Why can't specifically black people acknowledge all of the modern day black composers and musicians in orchestras, let alone embrace the brilliant musicians that gave them their history in the fine arts. Is it really assumed only whites are in the fine arts? If we gave up classical music jazz would be gone too and a significant portion of our collective history as people. We all just got through covid together. Lets be nice to each other and try to understand each other better without making assertions that cannot be debated. I appreciate you all for letting me speak my truth even if it is flawed in some way. We need to be able to converse openly and sadly that is something I feel I cannot do outside of a basketball forum. Am I wrong for feeling that way? If Beethoven is really a power symbol for whites, why do all black schools and schools all over the world use Beethoven in graduation ceremonies? More curiously, why do we continue to get married to a song written by a Nazi?

 

8 years of Bush (still shrugging off those forever wars and GFC hangovers). 4 of Voldemort.

Not sure why progressives are becoming more and more shrill and uppity aggressive...We had a black president in between. That was a great 2 1/2 years worth of legislative achievements.

Anything is possible!!

 

You've just proven the point that Ewell was making - that Western Music Theory doesn't work on other culture's music which is why it is biased towards western culture. That was his point! Math is truly universal. Schenker wasn't trying to make Western Music Theory, he was trying to make Global Music Theory and looked down upon foreign cultures as inferior, so created something that was centered around western music, and that has helped keep western music elevated above others. That's all he is trying to say.

Yes you are overreacting and it isn't personal. The titles of these articles are designed to get you emotionally revved up and pay attention to innuendo vs substance - that's the whole idea behind propaganda and you are falling for it. Notice it's not the left that is putting up "It's time to cancel Beethoven" but rather the right in DESCRIBING what the left is doing. That is the strawman you are following for. The right is trying to trick you into thinking the left is trying to cancel classical music, and you fell for it hook line and sinker.

Beethoven is a musical genius and everyone should listen to him, he should be played in schools. That's not what is being fought against. No one is suggesting otherwise. What it is being suggested is that great music doesn't just stop and Beethoven and there are people who push Beethoven as superior music because of whiteness - that's all.

 

Did you want to share your crush with the forum?

 

Ah, I see. Sharing content from a transgender person means I'm attracted to them. You're a deep thinker man. Should I assume Os wants to **** Turley too? Should I assume you'd be a power bottom for Trump? Should I assume tinman gets on his knees for Tesla? I guess so. We're calling each other GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY.

 

This makes some sense in a way and we are getting somewhere, buts its not necessarily true what you are saying. In order for me to explain this I'm going to need to explain a little bit more about what Schenker Analysis actually is, what and who it was intended for. Talking on Clutchfans about Schenkerian Analysis is such a bizarre conversation haha man. Bear with me here please because there is a lot to unpack. Schenkerian Analysis is used primarily as a tool. It can help conductors with german orchestral music among a few other things. It could help people to write in a german romantic stye although no one really does that anymore. Having said that it can be a useful tool in certain ways. I don’t care for it personally but it’s a tool. Schenker’s method was made specifically for analyzing German music. He didn’t make it with any other nationalities in mind. In those times all non Germans including every other European country was subhuman. The thing about Schenker Analysis is that its not meat and potatoes theory that you write music with. Its not used for composition rather analyzing composition. Schenker was able to highlight certain German works with his method in an attempt to bring pride to his nation. I'm not sure he ever tried using his method on other white societies because it wasn't intended for that and he had no interest in analyzing "subhuman" music. I've seen people argue that Schenker Analysis can be used on music outside of the German tradition however I think its a deeply flawed argument. Schenker is an overarching idea. It doesn't rely too much on notation, rather it tries to quantify specifically the concept of form in German symphonies. The reason people think they can try using it on other music outside of Germany is precisely because once you understand the ideas behind Schenker, there is a small overarching form you can follow through any kind of music. It is not really theory in this sense per se. It is, but its also just as much an idea or philosophy related to a certain time and place. I think the logical fallacy with people attempting to use Schenker outside of Germany is that you would have to assume that all cultures have the same inherent feelings about form and structure. Otherwise you are simply trying to impose a German philosophy on other cultures. Schenker was very nationalistic. He used this form to highlight German composers. He had no interest in using his theory toward any other culture outside of Germany. That to my knowledge came later in some academia which I always found to be extremely silly and misguided. I will say however, it is definitely "possible" to use Schenker Analysis on any music from planet earth, as long as the person is understanding of its limitations and value systems. The overarching idea behind Schenker is very simple. This simple idea is present in all tonal music to this day and not even that unique to Schenker. It is more related to the overtone series which is a literal science. If you want to analyze say a piece of music from India, the analysis can help you to understand form in Indian music. As soon as you try to understand that form through the lens of a German philosophy of music, this is where it gets dumb for me. I don't know that that's necessarily what academics tried to do though.

Germany was extremely nationalistic in those times. They were fighting in WW1 and WW2 happened right around the time Schenker died. Is it really a surprise that people were racist at that place and time in history? I have a lot of family in Europe and my older relatives still have a lot of hurt from those times. These racist attitudes were extreme in Germany and what cancel culture needs to understand is that Germans hurt everyone not just American minorities. Everyone was a subhuman to Germans at that point in time. A host of people and different ethnicities that we all just call “white” were targeted. It should be noted that Germany in this period had by far the largest amount of significant classical composers and it wasn't really close. Other "white" composers of this time made music during occupation. Some made their best work in concentration camps and prisons. The question I would ask is, were these people privileged and were they instant success stories? Even Beethoven was stifled to a certain extent by Napoleon and the French occupaton. Europe constantly invaded itself and people forget that and lump all of whites as one. Germans were racist in the USA too at that time. How many shops did they burn that were Greek owned, or Irish owned or Italian owned? Which nationalities were not getting attacked in America? There is your answer. The more I’ve thought about all of this, all of the people in the arts that would need to be canceled are Germans. I cannot think of very many, if any racist view points outside of Germans in music. Wouldn’t this kind of make sense though? We would have to just about cancel everyone from early 1900’s Germany.

And for what its worth music is most definitely a universal language. The problem back then was that there wasn't as much of an exchange of ideas between continents. Today western music theory has the capability to account for all of these things in Indian and African music. Western music theory is the staple that the entire world uses. You might think this could be racist but for someone like me who sometimes plays in other countries, it is important that I am on the same page as the musicians wherever that might be. In many ways its the same as how everyone around the world speaks English. The other reason behind it is that written music was developed primarily in Europe starting in medieval times with Hildegard. Although Indians have a ton of extremely complex theory, both African and Indian music was of the aural tradition. People learned by ear in these cultures and although Indians did have a type of simple notation, things were rarely written down. Some Africans actually adopted European notation at a certain point in time in the 1800's, but in large part, Africans had a very, very different way of using music in their culture. Also, western music theory is based on the overtone series which is a science developed by Pythagorus. This science can be applicable to all music. The only thing Pythagorus did not account for at the time was rhythm which had much more development in India. The thing about the overtone series is that even though it is a science, it is still being challenged. Not by race or cultural lingo but rather other forms of music science like microtonal music which actually has a little more in common with Indian music. Those are the debates I can get behind because it is science based.

 

[QUOTE="Spooner, post: 13614896, member: 44282"continued[/QUOTE]

I want to talk briefly about the concept of Western music being elevated and I hope this clears some things up. Let's take Beethoven's time for example since he was "elevated." People are looking for which composers or singular people who should be recognized from continents outside of Europe in these times. Do I have that right? Unfortunately without properly understanding African culture, people are not going to find what they are looking for. African culture was WAY different in its approach to music. Music in Africa was an every day, often ritualistic medium. Everyone was ingrained in this music from a very early age and everyone in the community took part in music. It was a HUGE part of African life and varied greatly from one geographical location to another. I don't believe Africans viewed music at that time how Europeans viewed it as "art." It was a lot more than that to Africans. It is a very sacred language that involves entire populations. Most of this language is through percussion instruments. The melodic information was for the most part a kind of pentatonic which is fascinatingly similar to Chinese music. That always mystified me. Anyway, those looking for Africans to elevate in these times need to understand that there are not singular voices, rather communities of people who made the music. That is a big distinction. The language was also entirely passed down by ear so there is no notation. It can be argued that outside of Africa, the west has preserved this language through a written medium and as a result it has been much more accessible to the world. The idea of a singular composer is a very western idea and that was not at all what Africa was about. The music was too sacred and vital to society for one person to be an "original." It doesn't mean it isn't complex. African music created polyrhythms and clave. Things that take a lifetime to master and the influence it has had on the world is astounding. There would be no Cuban, Brazilian or Jazz music without it for instance. Europeans could not even conceive of these things at the time because every culture was different and we should celebrate that. Now there were black composers in Africa who were versed in usually British traditions who are well documented as well as black musicians in Europe who were quite well known. Scott Joplin was born the same year as Schenker. He had massive success and is one of the most important figures coming out of the west imo. He mixed polyrhythms with classical music and this was the foundation of so much popular music we have today in pop culture. While people may disagree, after studying Joplin's music extensively I truly believe he is the father of jazz. I doubt Schenker liked him, but who cares? Joplin was recognized as a genius and I'm not sure how Schenker got in his way. The analysis actually works quite well for Joplin imo which is quite funny but he borrowed from a lot of white culture so I guess it makes sense.

I feel like a lot of frustration from people stems from not understanding something very simple. When advocating for great African composers to be heard in place of Europeans, I would implore people to understand that they are expecting African culture to follow European idealism. That in itself is as racist as trying to fit Indian music into Schenker. The United States is in the west. We have the same idealism as Europeans in this way and it greatly shapes our perspectives on life and culture. We just need to be cognizant that all cultures were not the same and perhaps exploring African culture in greater detail will help us understand why. It just seems to me that there are people who want to minimize people learning about European culture in favor of African culture. This is fine and I am all for a fair balance of ideas in schools. We should learn about African music as a whole and what it really was instead of looking for the undiscovered African rock stars. Indians had composers even though a lot of music was improvised. There were gurus that everyone revered and looked up to in the music. While it was also mainly an aural tradition, they did write things down. Regardless, I don't know a single Indian that complains about any of this stuff. In part I think because they have historical figures at those times that can be pointed to as a source of pride. They also have a highly detailed history of music that is 6,000 years old. I don't know that they care much what anyone thinks. Having said that, Indian music was improvisatory and the "composer" we think about is a very western concept. It seems to me that no one knows enough about culture and we are in a culture war. Most whites in America don't know much about their European heritage or African culture and it seems blacks dont know enough about African culture or European culture either. The arts is a window into CULTURE. If we are going to stir up history to change our course, it might be good to know about past cultures. My question to you is who pushed Beethoven because of whiteness? Keep in mind his country was occupied during the time he was alive. And what other singular composers at the time were there to supersede him? We live in a Western society in the United States. This shapes white peoples perspectives and black peoples perspectives. We celebrate classical musicians more because it fits better with our understanding and values as westerners. This goes for black people too. I can imagine the disconnect when black people were brought up and ingrained in a western society and then try to assign Euro centric beliefs to African culture. It is probably extremely frustrating to not have answers and I'm sure this extends well beyond just music. I think the fundamental problem is that we took black people as slaves and in effect displaced them from their own heritage. That is a really big deal and has massive implications. I really believe that is where a lot of these problems are stemming from.

Anyway back to my original point. Schenker Analysis is a tool. Its like saying a typewriter was made by a racist so we shouldn’t have Hemingway. Sure you can use a typewriter to bash someones head out, but that wasn't its purpose to begin with. How many of you use tools in your jobs that may have been made by a racist person in Germany during WW1? How would you even know that? The professor teaching this theory course is of Jewish decent.
He finds particularly German music fascinating and many people do. That is fine. To set aside what Germany did to his people in favor of the music that was created should tell people that a distinction can be made. There were no lyrics in the music Schenker analyzed. Just sound. Sound is not racist. If it was which is a ridiculous presumption, physics is racist as well. If you look at this specific time period, German music was the dominant music in Europe. Could it have to do with Europe constantly invading itself? We've established what was happening in African and Indian cultures. Could it be that Germany's racism toward the rest of Europe prohibited other whites from being heard? Most likely yes and a lot of composers from other parts of Europe were given value in mainstream circles later on. We don't really ask about the implications behind racist Germany and the rest of Europe and all of the white people who suffered and were stifled in those times.