so I just read in a Schoenberg book, on page 6, (I read such books very slowly, for when they end… the fun is gone, so of course, draw it out…)
“promotes the advancement of INFERIOR TONES.”
that of course shows a bias not unbefitting classical harmony of the olden days,
a bias towards things making “sense” in the old sense, and in traditional hierarchies, sort of like gender roles, or any other system of judging people’s worth by how they compare to “some other” people, or worse, how well they “conform” to some “system.”
fyi, fuck such things.
MY POINT is the following thought, is my reaction to that quote from Schoenberg, WHICH IS:
regarding the advancement of inferior tones, or superior ones, or even the labeling of tones as superior or inferior,
on the notion whether advancing an inferior tone is some kind of bad thing unless done in a certain context…(grrr, my anger is barely beneath the surface, for many reasons…)
on whether you wish to
1. submit to the system, defining yourself by it
2. work within the system, albeit a bit less subserviently than option #1
3. gradually move to change the system, or
4. DESTROY IT, or, at least,
4a. NOT USE IT and use SOME OTHER SYSTEM more fitting to YOUR NEEDS AND FEELINGS.
this reminds me of a quote, I think….. no, just a saying, from some book, which said that debate on the following subject had raged since “EMMERSON.”, R.W. (off hand, don’t even know without google when he was…)
“what do artists owe society, and what does our society owe artists?
that’s not the quote, only sorta…
I’m partial to options 4 and 4a, myself.