Does the Meaning of the Bible Grow? Translation and all that Jazz

Extracted text from Gadamer_on_the_Event_of_Art_RP.pdf:

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

Gadamer on the Event of Art, the Other, and a Gesture Toward a Gadamerian Approach to AvantGarde Jazz Abstract( Several prominent contemporary philosophers, including Habermas, Caputo, and Bernasconi, have at times painted a negative picture of Gadamer as not only an uncritical traditionalist, but also as one whose philosophical project fails to appreciate difference. Against such claims, I argue that Gadamers reflections on art exhibit a genuine appreciation for alterity not unrelated to his hermeneutical approach to the other. Thus, by bringing Gadamers later works on our experience of art into conversation with his philosophical hermeneutics, we are able to better assess the viability of his philosophy in contemporary discussions of difference and alterity. Sections twofive are devoted to (1) explaining key concepts in Gadamers account of our experience of art and arts dynamic ontology and (2) highlighting how difference and the others enigmatic dimensions are upheld and integral to Gadamers account. In section six, I gesture toward a Gadamerian approach to avant-garde jazz, which underscores Gadamers openness to new expressions of art and alterity. KEYWORDS: Gadamer and alterity, Gadamers hermeneutical aesthetics, Gadamer and avant-garde jazz, hermeneutic identity, arts dynamic ontology, tarrying with a work, Gadamer on contemporaneity, Gadamer and tradition

!

1

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

I.(Introduction( While appreciative of Gadamers contributions to philosophical hermeneutics and what we might call hermeneutical aesthetics (Nicholas Daveys term), several distinguished contemporary philosophers have at times painted a somewhat negative picture of Gadamer as not only an uncritical traditionalist, but also as one whose philosophical project fails to appreciate difference. For example, Jrgen Habermas and John Caputo depict Gadamer as nave regarding the role of power and distorted discourses in forming and maintaining traditions and institutions. Caputo, for example, suggests that Gadamer belongs among those philosophers who cannot tolerate the ambiguity of the flux.1 Robert Bernasconi argues that Gadamers understanding of dialogue and the analyses he tends to foreground have the common feature of diminishing alterity.2 With these critical claims in mind, I aim to show how Gadamers reflections on art exhibit a genuine openness to and appreciation for !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 John D. Caputo, Radical Hermeneutics. Repetition, Deconstruction, and the Hermeneutic Project (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987), 263. See also, Jrgen Habermas, The Hermeneutic Claim to Universality, in The Hermeneutic Tradition: From Ast to Ricoeur, eds. Gayle L. Ormiston and Alan D. Schrift (Albany: SUNY Press, 1990), 24572. 2!Robert

Bernasconi, You Dont Know What Im Talking About: Alterity and the

Hermeneutical Ideal, in The Specter of Relativism, ed. Lawrence Schmidt (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1995), 17894, here 180.!

!

2

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

alterity not unrelated to his hermeneutical approach to the other. Thus, by bringing Gadamers later works on our experience of art into conversation with his philosophical hermeneutics, we are able to better assess the viability of Gadamers philosophy in contemporary discussions of difference and alterity. The bulk of my essaysections two through fiveis devoted to explaining key concepts in Gadamers account of our experience of art and arts dynamic ontology. Such concepts include the play structure of art, hermeneutic identity, tarrying with a work, and contemporaneity. However, I do more than elucidate these important themes. In addition, I draw attention to the various ways in which difference and the others enigmatic dimensions are upheld and even integral to Gadamers account. In section six, I gesture toward what a Gadamerian approach to free or avant-garde jazz might look like. In so doing, I hope to make clear that a Gadamerian approach to art ought not be characterized as part of a larger traditionalist hermeneutical project that silences the voice of the other. Rather, Gadamers philosophical project takes seriously the others alterity and creates the possibility for the other to come forth, address, and even transform ones world.

II.(Play(and(the(Play(Structure(of(Art( Play or the structure of play is central to Gadamers account of both hermeneutics and the ontology and phenomenology of art. In his analyses of the play structure of games as well as the play of art, Gadamer emphasizes the active engagement of the spectator or auditor. That is, not only do the players

!

3

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

play the game, but also the audience plays along and thus participates in the movement or life of the game. Whether this takes the form of a mother watching her children toss a ball back and forth or a baseball fan jumping out of his seat to see whether the batters hit cleared the outfield wall, there is genuine sense of playing with on the part of those observing the game or playful activity. The audience member, in other words, is not a distanced spectator but an active participant, who, like the player, both contributes to and is simultaneously caught up in the games life. Similarly in the play of art, the viewer or listener engages in a back and forth movement or active interplay with the work, which, in the case of art, allows the work to emerge in a communicative event. As Gadamer observes, in the play of art something comes forthsomething that is, on the one hand, intended as something and, on the other, its meaning is not reducible to concepts nor is its activity coordinated for some utility function.3 Moreover, the

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3 Hans-Georg Gadamer, The Relevance of the Beautiful. Art as Play, Symbol, and Festival, in The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays, trans. Nicholas Walker and ed. Robert Bernasconi (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 24. (Hereafter, RB.) [Gadamer, Hans-Georg, Die Aktualitt des Schnen. Kunst als Spiel, Symbol und Fest, in sthetik und Poetik I: Kunst als Aussage, Gesammelte Werke Band 8. Auflage. (Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1993), 115. Hereafter, GW8.

!

4

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

movement involved in the play of art is not completed in a further, external goal or purpose outside itself.

III.(Hermeneutic(Identity(and(Tarrying(with(the(Work( The play structure of art as well as the spectators active participation in arts unfolding constitute essential moments in the event of art, which is another way of speaking of arts dynamic ontology and temporal structure. In section four, I discuss arts temporal structure and how Gadamers notion of contemporaneity describes arts unique temporality in relation to the spectators participation and comportment. To prepare for these topics, I turn first to Gadamers analyses of arts dynamic ontology, paying special attention to his notions of hermeneutic identity and tarrying with a work. Hermeneutic identity claims that the works identity necessarily involves difference and thus always entails an openness to future possibilities, which allow for multiple presentations or enactments of the work over time.4 More !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4 On Gadamers notion of hermeneutic identity, see Donatella Di Cesare, Gadamer: A Philosophical Portrait (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2013), esp. 5960. As Di Cesare explains, [a]ny new identity that comes to light is an identity that forms itself only in difference. Thus difference becomes indispensable for identity (ibid., 60). See also, Gerald L. Bruns, Ancients and Moderns: Gadamers Aesthetic Theory and the Poetry of Paul Celan, in On the Anarchy of Poetry and Philosophy. A Guide for the Unruly (New York: Fordham University Press, 2006,) 3354, esp. 359.

!

5

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

specifically, for Gadamer, the being of an artwork is inseparable from its presentations, as the various presentations bring out new dimensions of the works reality. Enactment or presentation is thus an essential feature of an artworks being. Phenomenologically speaking, art exists in presentation and performance. Thus, art as experienced requires others and is necessarily communal. The notes on the page are silent without a performer to give them life. Likewise, the musician, painter, or sculptor creates his or her work to convey something to someone, which is why the work is displayed or performed in a concert hall or an outdoor gathering. That hermeneutic identity is infused with difference does not mean that a performer or interpreter can simply impose random or arbitrary meanings on the work. To do so would be to silence the work or do violence to the works integrity or structure. In short, it would be to disregard the others alterity. Nor does hermeneutic identity mean that interpretations or performances cannot be judged regarding their quality. For instance, in the case of a poor performance of Rachmaninovs Piano Concerto No. 2, Opus 18, competent musicians or critics may judge the performance as presenting, albeit poorly, the structure (Gebilde) of Rachmaninovs work. If there is a true engagement with the work, every presentation has a relation to the works structure and, and Gadamer puts it, must submit itself [sich unterstellt] to the criterion [Mastab] of correctness

!

6

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

[Richtigkeit] that derives from it.5 At the same time, the work itselfits very beingis constituted by a built-in indeterminacy or openness to future possibilities enabling new dimensions of the work to come forth over time. However, that we can discern a failed presentation of a work does not imply that there is only one excellent or ideal way for the work to manifest. On Gadamers view, it is possible to have many correct, fitting, and even exemplary presentations, enactments, and performances of the same work. Here the notion of structure should not be equated with the original composition or entity, as if the original is the ideal or standard that future performances and presentations must copy. To the contrary, future performances of a work often bring out a depth and richness not manifest in the original. John Coltranes performance of the popular Broadway tune, My Favorite Things, is one such example. In Coltranes version, the standard and rhythmically simple three-four waltz time is transformed into a polyrhythmic and densely textured six-eight (and beyond) time. In addition, Coltrane adds lengthy improvisatory solos and complex harmonic textures to the original composition. In both the 1959 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 5 Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, 2nd ed., trans. and rev. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall (New York: Continuum, 2004), 122. (Hereafter, TM.) [Hans-Georg Gadamer, Hermeneutik I: Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik, Gesammelte Werke Band 1, 4. Auflage (Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1975),116. Hereafter, WM.]

!

7

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

Broadway performance and John Coltranes performance, the work emerges and a common structure is discerned; yet Coltranes performance displays a level of harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic complexity not present in the original.

A.(The((Performed)(Work(as(Reality(Not(Copy(( Gadamer also argues that through presentation (and performance) an increase in being [Zuwachs an Sein] occurs.6 In order to understand his claim, one must examine his account of the complex relationship between Bild and Urbild. If presentation (Darstellung) is the artworks mode of being, how does a symphonic performance or a painting present the work? For Gadamer, a presentation or a performance of a work is not a copy of some original or more real entity, being, or object. The defining task of a copy is to reduplicate as closely as possible the original. Thus, its essence is self-erasure or selfeffacement; it points not to itself and its particularity but away from itself to what it copies. [I]ts nature [Bestimmung] is to lose its own independent existence [sein eigenes Fr-sich-sein aufzuheben] and serve entirely to mediate what is copied.7 A copys self-effacement indicates its function as a means, not an end. Its independent existence serves this very purpose of self-erasure. In contrast, a pictures essence is not self-erasure, nor does it function as a means to some other end. The picture points to itself and how it presents its subject-matter. In other words, one is not simply directed away from the picture to what is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 6 Ibid., TM, 140. Italics in original. [WM, 133.] 7

Ibid., TM, 138. [WM, 131.]

!

8

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

represented. Rather, the presentation remains essentially connected to what is represented [Die Darstellung bleibt vielmehr mit dem Dargestellten wesenhaft verbunden]indeed belongs to it.8 Again, instead of a self-cancelling existence and purpose, the pictures being is autonomous; its being brings out something new in the reality which it depicts; thus, the picture is more than a mere copy or reduplication of an original; it belongs to the being of the original and expands its being.9 To illustrate further, consider again Coltranes version of My Favorite Things. Coltranes performance of the piece is the reality or end to which we are directed. That is, his performance is not a self-effacing copy, nor a sign pointing beyond itself to the original. Rather, Coltranes version gives us the reality of the work in a new keythat is, new possibilities of the work come forth, and we encounter dimensions of the work that did not exist previously (for example, more complex rhythms, harmonies, improvised solos etc.). Yet we identify the performance as a performance of My Favorite Things. Coltranes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 8 Ibid., TM, 139. [WM, 132.] 9

The discussion here pertains to non-abstract paintings in which some

resemblance relationship with another object(s) can be discerned. Even so, Gadamers point is that the traditional model of art as representation does not capture the essence of what art is. In modern, abstract paintings, the notion of representation has been abandoned, and the artists themselves, as it were, show Gadamers point.

!

9

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

intention was never to merely reduplicate the original, but to enact his version of the work, which has its own independent existence while remaining connected to the original and extending, as it were, its life. In short, a works being is increased in the event of arts unfolding over time in various enactments that bring forth new articulations of the work.10 The work lives, as it were, only in its presentations, performances, and interpretations. Thus far I have established that even though the same work is repeated in each new enactment, the subsequent enactments are not mere copies of an original and thus are not understood as ontologically inferior imitations. Instead, Gadamers hermeneutic identity shows itself in a phenomenon of repetition in presentation that harmonizes structure and freedom. Hermeneutic difference thus describes a dynamic yet discernable identity. On the one hand, hermeneutic identity is ever and always infused with difference and open possibilities; on the other, it speaks of an identifiable structure that emerges in the communicative event of arts appearance. As Gadamer puts it, [t]o understand [Verstehende] something, I must be able to identify it. For there was something there that I passed judgment upon and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 10 Gadamer says that his notion of a works increase in being through future performances is analogous to the ontological relation that characterizes an emanation of the original in Neoplatonic thought. See TM, 140. [WM, 133.]

!

10

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

understood [verstand].11 Stated otherwise, the works identity consists in its presence before me as other, in its being there as something addressing me. The work asks to be understood; it issues a challenge that requires a response.12 Here again the emphasis is on the active, engaged listener or spectator. That is, in order to experience a work of art as a communicative event, one must actively participateone must play along with (mitspielt) it.13 The listener must comport herself to the work as other expecting something !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11 Gadamer, RB, 25. [GW8, 116]. The English translation deletes the scare quotes in the German text around the word verstand. Since Gadamer placed the scare quotes in the original and likely did so to emphasize the openness and non-exhaustive character of understanding, I have included them in the English translation. 12

Gadamer, RB, 26. [GW8, 11617]. See also, Daniel L. Tate, The Speechless

Image. Gadamer and the Claim of Modern Painting, Philosophy Today 45 (2001): 5668, esp. 5961. Tate provides a helpful analysis of Gadamers view that even the most abstract modern art manifests a unity in tension capable of addressing us (ibid., 60). 13

See also, Bruns, Ancients and Moderns, esp. 356. Bruns highlights the

similarities between Gadamers theory of our experience of art and our experience of play, noting the emancipatory aspects of each. In both experiences we are caught up in the self-presentation of the work or the game, and we also actively participate in the event.

!

11

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

meaningful to come forth. If the viewer or listener approaches the work having already decided that the work has no value and thus nothing to say, the work will remain silent. Art is a dynamic, communal event; its happening or occasioning can be thwarted or foreclosed when we comport ourselves to the other in an attitude of closedness. The same is true of our hermeneutical encounters with otherswhether texts or human beings.

B.(Tarrying(as(Ecstatic(Participation( Another important theme in Gadamers reflections on our experience of art is his notion of tarrying or lingering with a work. Here the idea is that one is so intentionally absorbed in a work of art that one forgets oneself. As one attunes herself to the work and becomes wholly captivated by it, she is able to see beyond her projects, concerns, and cares; she exists ec-statically, that is, outside herself. This ecstatic way of being should not be understood as a mere passive or private condition; rather, as Gadamer explains: being outside oneself is the positive possibility of being wholly with something else. This kind of being present [Solches Dabeisein] is a selfforgetfulness [Selbstvergessenheit], and to be a spectator [es macht das Wesen des Zuschauers aus] consists in giving oneself in selfforgetfulness to what one is watching. Here self-forgetfulness is anything but a private condition, for it arises from devoting ones full attention to

!

12

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

the matter at hand [denn sie entspringt aus der Zuwendung zur Sache], and this is the spectators own positive accomplishment [Leistung].14 Thus, when one actively enters into a condition of self-forgetfulness, the occasion for the event of art to emerge in a communicative address becomes viable. As the work comes forth, it makes a lasting claim on the spectator or listener. In other words, the experience of arts address is not a fleeting aesthetic pleasure wherein one anesthetizes oneself momentarily only to return to ones world unchanged. To the contrary, ones world and way of being-inthe-world-with-others is affected and at times radically so. Once again, the emphasis is on an engaged, rather than detached spectator or auditor. As one intentionally and with great effort and commitment tarries with the work, one experiences both a self-forgetfulness due to ones fully-being-there with the work and a self-enrichment by way of a worldexpansion. As Gadamer puts it, What rends him from everything at the same time gives him back the whole of his being [Was ihn aus allem herausreit, gibt ihm zugleich das Ganze seines Seins zurck.]15 Thus we see that the spectators absorbed engagement with the work allowing the work to come forth is an achievement; it takes effort to be wholly with something else. As Daniel Tate explains, [t]he being present proper to the spectator is therefore the ecstatic !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14 Gadamer, TM, 126. [WM, 119.] 15

Ibid., TM, 128. I have slightly modified the English translation. The italicized

word indicates my modification. WM, 122.]

!

13

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

condition of being entirely immersed in the work. This genuine way of being in the moment is the disclosive comportment proper to the spectator as one who lets the work present itself.16

IV.(Contemporaneity(and(the(Works(Full(Presence(and$ Nontransparency( It is not by accident that Gadamer employs the term claim, which Sren Kierkegaard developed in conjunction with his theological reflections on contemporaneity. As observed earlier, a claim is not fleeting but lasting, enforceable, and is concretized in a demand.17 For example, when the Gospel is preached, the hearer is presented with a claim of faith and must respond. Here the words themselves, in a way analogous to the sacraments, bring the reality of the past into the present such that the one who receives what is given is transformed, renewed, or challengedhis world and his view of others is altered. However, the hearer of the Gospel message is not a mere passive recipient. He receives the word; yet he must translate and apply the message of salvation to his particular situation. This type of translation, application, or, as James Risser puts it, concretization of meaning that defines the present !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 16 Daniel L. Tate, In the Fullness of Time: Gadamer on the Temporal Dimension of the Work of Art, Research in Phenomenology 42 (2012), 92113, here 104. 17

Gadamer, TM, 127. [WM, 120.]

!

14

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

enactment,18 is what Gadamer means when employs the term, Anwendung, which is often translated into English as appropriation. That is, when Gadamer claims that every interpretation is an Anwendung, he draws attention to the performative or Vollzug dimension of hermeneutic experience. Anwendung is thus a form of practice,19 in which one learns how to properly listen to voice of the other so that the others claims can be made to bear meaningfully in the present. The result is not, as Gadamers critics suggest, to consume the other,20 but to allow the others claims to come forth so that my world, practices, and ways of being might be enriched, challenged, or perhaps radically altered. Gadamers emphasis on play, arts address, and our being drawn in and even arrested by the work can be understood as aspects of his critique of the over-subjectivization of aesthetic consciousness; yet his critical remarks should not be interpreted as denying the subjects experience or, as we have seen, her contribution occasioning the works emerging. In his explication of arts address, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 18!James Risser, Hermeneutics and the Voice of the Other. Re-Reading Gadamers Philosophical Hermeneutics (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997), 103. ! 19

Ibid., 105. See also Rissers discussion of the crucial differences between

Gadamers hermeneutical project and Ricouers (1025). As Risser observes, Gadamer, unlike Ricouer, does not claim that every interpretation is an Aneignung (103). 20

See, for example, Caputo, Radical Hermeneutics, 115.

!

15

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

Gadamer repeatedly underscores the artworks ability to address us directly. Here the immediacy of our experience of art is stressed. Importantly, the works ability to address me in a communicative event is not dependent upon my knowledge of the particular social and historical factors in which it first emerged. As Tate observes, the artwork exhibits a paradoxical temporality.21 That is, its temporality is marked by an immediate presentness in time and at the same time by a rising above time.22 This ability to come forth in the present and communicate meaning in different historical periods should not be equated with timelessness or denial of arts social and historical conditioning. Artworks (and texts) are historically shaped; they arise, participate in, and belong to various traditions.23 However, arts being as enactment (Vollzug) means that in future presentations and performances, the reality of the work itselfnot a copy or !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 21 Tate, In the Fullness of Time, 99. 22

Hans-Georg Gadamer, The Artwork in Word and Image: So True, So Full of

Being! in The Gadamer Reader. A Bouquet of the Later Writings, trans. and ed. Richard E. Palmer, 192224 (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 2007), 196. 23

For an instructive explication of Gadamers understanding of tradition as an

event of repetitive disclosure, (81) see Risser, Hermeneutics and the Voice of the Other, esp. 6581. In chapter two, Risser engages Caputos (and to a certain degree Habermas) concerns regarding Gadamers alleged conservatism and backward-looking orientation.

!

16

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

lesser derivativecomes forth. The new performance is the work in its increased or expanded being. As noted previously, the structure of the work manifests an integrity and autonomyan othernessthat resists my attempts to force arbitrary meanings upon it. Such a move would amount to remaking the work in my own image and thus silencing the others voice. To interact with it in this way is to do violence to the work and would amount to a monologue rather than a dialogue. For Gadamer, a proper aesthetic experience with a painting or a musical work is dialogical and thus by definition requires that the voice of the other be heard. I must allow the others voice to sound in and against my own (dynamic) horizon in order for my world and presumptions to be challenged or expanded. As I linger with the work and open myself to its address, what formerly appeared strange may become more intelligible, remain enigmatic, or a combination of both. Nonetheless, as I abide with the work and allow it to come forth, it addresses me in a communicative event that requires my participation and response. Thus, to mute the others voice would result in a failed hermeneutic and aesthetic experience. Stated otherwise, Gadamers notion of an event-ful experience of art, poetry, and the like expects and even invites dissonances to sound and to remain. Along the same lines, one need not conclude that a genuine encounter with art requires exhaustive understanding without remainder. On this point, a musical insight proves helpful. Harmony itself and especially complex or extended harmonies require the differences of the notes to sound in their fullness. To eradicate or remove dissonance (i.e. ! 17

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

difference) from musical works would render them dull and monotonous. Analogously, an authentic or harmonious hermeneutic or aesthetic encounter neither demands that the other become fully transparent nor reduced to my unison voice. On the one hand, we have Gadamers stress on the independent presentness (what he calls absolute presentness) of the workthat is, the artworks ability to build bridges that reach beyond the enclosure and space in which it originated.24 On the other, we ought not interpret the works ability to present itself in its fullness over time as a denial of the artworks historical conditioning or (re)emergence from a particular tradition. Here it may be helpful to return to the notion of achievement and discuss how it relates to contemporaneity. As Gadamer explains, contemporaneity means that when a particular work of art presents itself to me it achieves full presence [volle Gegenwart], however remote its origin may be. Thus contemporaneity [Gleichzeitigkeit] is not a mode of givenness in consciousness [eine Gegebenheitsweise im Bewutsein], but a task [eine Aufgabe] for consciousness and an achievement [eine Leistung] that is demanded [verlangt wird] of it.25 In this passage, Gadamer repeats his claim that the reality of the work is fully !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 Gadamer, The Artwork in Word and Image, 199. 25

Gadamer, TM, 127. [WM, 121.]

!

18

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

present in its various enactments and presentations over time; the enactments are not derivative or lesser realities, nor is the initial presentation the standard by which all future enactments are judged. Then he adds that contemporaneity is an achievement, not a given; it is something that the spectator or auditor must actively bring about. Thus, the co-productive, participatory activity of the spectator, listener, or interpreter is necessary for the works coming-intopresence. The spectators or auditors achievement of making a past reality fully present here and now marks the distinctive temporality of contemporaneity. Here historical distance is not a barrier to the reality or truth of the work shining forth; what comes to presence through spectatorial, auditorial, and performative cooperative activity can be re-contextualized and repeated over time. Before I close this section, I want to comment upon Gadamers understanding regarding the works full or absolute presence. Although the language is somewhat misleading, he does not mean that when the work is fully present, every aspect of the work is at that particular encounter transparent or able to be exhaustively understood. In Yo-Yo Mas multiple and masterful performances of Bachs cellos suites; the works are both fully present and actualized for him and for the attuned listener; yet for both the musician playing the piece and the listener, something new and unexpected emerges in each performance. In this sense, the reality of the work is fully present in its various presentations and performances; yet its being is not exhaustively grasped in my experience of and participation in it here and now. In other words, the works absolute presentness and my being present with the work ! 19

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

can (and does) readily coexist with the notion of an ongoing interplay of hiddenness and manifestation or, in Heideggarian terms, concealment and unconcealment. That something is genuinely or fully present does not mean that I can or will ever grasp all that it is; my encounter with the reality of its presence might in fact be too much for me. In such a situation, we are both fully there, as the event of art unfolds. However, it is often the case that the work qua other speaks meaningfully to me, yet I am unable to comprehend its totality.26 In short, Gadamers understanding of art and our experience of arts alterity not only permit, but also expect and affirm the works opaque and enigmatic aspects.

V.(Gadamers(Openness(to(Modern(Art(and(a(Coda(on(Tradition( When it comes to contemporary and avant-garde art, Gadamer is aware that many artists repudiate or seek to redefine traditional accounts of beauty, form, and proportionality. It is precisely here that Gadamers position shows its relevance in its ability to listen to the voice of the other and thus to move us beyond the previous horizon-al limits of arts ontology. For example, toward the end of his introductory remarks in his essay, The Relevance of the Beautiful, Gadamer poses a series of questions along these lines and expresses a genuine interest in taking seriously the works of modern artists. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 26 Perhaps this is something akin to Jean-Luc Marions idea of the bedazzling event of the saturated phenomenon. See, for example, Jean-Luc Marion, Being Given. Being Given. Toward a Phenomenology of Givenness, 1st ed., trans. Jeffrey Kosky (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), esp. 199247.

!

20

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

How can we understand the innovative forms of modern art as they play around with the content so that our expectations are constantly frustrated? [] How are we to understand what Duchamp is doing when he suddenly exhibits some everyday object on its own and thereby produces a sort of aesthetic shock reaction? We cannot simply dismiss this as so much nonsense, for Duchamp actually revealed something about the conditions of aesthetic experience.27 Gadamers phenomenological reflections on art are not focused on what particular artworks as such meanthat is, how one ought to understand and interpret their content. Rather, his aim is to analyze the conditions or structures of aesthetic experience and to clarify how aesthetic experience is both involved in something larger than itself and, indeed reflects (speculum) that larger actuality within itself.28 Before transitioning to my gesture toward a Gadamerian approach to avant-garde jazz, I want to say a few words about Gadamers notion of tradition. That we are situated within and shaped by traditions does not mean that we are unable to oppose, challenge, or alter our traditions and the practices and norms they embody. As complex, socially constructed human artifacts, traditions !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 27 Gadamer, RB, 22. [GW8, 113]. 28!Davey,

Nicholas, "Gadamer's Aesthetics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/gadamer-aesthetics/.!

!

21

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

exhibit a dynamic stability. That is, they can and do congeal for certain periods of time and thus manifest a staying power; yet they are not rigidly fixed. Rather, they change over time, as new infusions from other voices expand and alter what in an earlier phase were standard practices and established norms. In my consideration of free jazz that follows, I discuss specific ways in which this process of transforming musical traditions and practices occurred in the transition from bebop and hard bop to avant-garde jazz. Here I mention briefly one element of tradition-transformation, namely, the creative application of other musical voiceswhether voices of past or present musicians in ones own tradition or voices of those outside ones own tradition. For example, jazz luminaries such as Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, and John Coltrane creatively applied musical insights from earlier jazz masters, 20th century classical music, and Afro-Cuban and Indian music in order to go beyond (trans-gress) jazz norms and develop new practices and musical styles. Such creative uses (Anwendungen) of others voices are not understood as violent or consuming acts. Quite the opposite, they communicate a profound respect for the others achievements and contributions to the tradition(s). Thus, by dwelling with the (musical) other in order to learn the others language and style imitating it and yet creating something newthe voice of the other continues to sound into the future, acting as an ongoing tribute to the others greatness while also expanding the tradition beyond its previous limits. As Gadamer himself explains, tradition means transmission rather than conservation. This transmission does not imply that we simply leave things unchanged and merely ! 22

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

conserve them. It means learning how to grasp and express the past anew. It is in this sense that we can say that transmission is equivalent to translation.29

VI.(A(Gadamerian(Approach(to(AvantMGarde(or(Free(Jazz( By way of review, one of the key features constituting our aesthetic experience is the spectators or listeners active participation. Also significant are Gadamers notion of art as an event, tarrying with a work, the play-character of art, arts communal dimensions, and the primacy of arts address. In the paragraphs that follow, I highlight how these fundamental aspects of Gadamers account manifest in free jazz. In light of my analyses, I conclude that a Gadamerian approach to free jazz allows the voice of the other to sound in its alterity and thus demonstrates an openness to the other that creates the possibility for self and world questioning and even transformation. Free jazz, also called the New Thing, burst forth on the jazz music scene in the late fifties and is frequently associated with names such as John Coltrane, Ornette Coleman, and Cecil Taylor. An adequate definition of free jazz is notoriously difficult, as each group and musician now recognized as a pioneer or exemplar of free jazz instantiate diverse expressions of the genre. Even so, Ekkehard Jost highlights a point of agreement among free jazz groups, namely, they sought to subvert and even negate signature practices and norms of traditional jazz that carried over into bebop and hard bop.30 In particular, free !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 29 Gadamer, RB, 49 [GW8, 139]. 30!Ekkehard

Jost, Free Jazz (New York: De Capo Press, 1994), 9.

!

23

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

jazz musicians were unsatisfied with the constraints of the harmonic, metric, and structural norms that constituted jazz up to hard bop. Although the harmonic elements of bebop and hard bop had become increasingly complex compared to earlier expressions of jazz, the structures of standard jazz pieces had become rigid and formalized. As Jost explains, in contrast to traditional jazz, where the primary purpose of the theme or tune is to provide a harmonic and metrical framework as a basis for improvisation. In free jazz, which does not observe fixed patterns of bars or functional harmony, this purpose no longer exists.31 Thus, both the form and content of free jazz pieces are highly particular, consisting neither in typical jazz harmonic sequences (II-V-I etc.) nor in common structural frameworks (for example, the AABA form). As a consequence, one cannot continue to recycle standard chord changes and simply write a new theme, which was a common practice until the New Thing began to challenge these accepted jazz norms. For example, even within the very same free jazz composition, the form itself can continually morph, as bar lines are porous and allow for new melodic, rhythmic, harmonic, and collective and highly interactive motifs to develop. Given this freedom from functional harmony and rigidified forms, the members of a group are forced to listen to each other with intensified concentration.32 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 31!Ibid.,153. ! 32!Ibid.,

!

24

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

Another aspect of certain expressions of free jazz is collective or group improvisation. When group improvisation becomes central, the motivic development of the piece is in constant flux as each player responds to and builds upon the ever-changing rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic elements of the work. This creates a dynamic composition in which collective conversation is foregrounded rather than traditional jazzs emphasis on a single soloist improvising over relatively stable chord-changes. Moreover, as is the case with works such as Ornette Colemans Sound Gravitation and Falling Stars, numerous free jazz pieces contain no traditional melody or theme.33 Rather, the works are compositions in sound that grow from the spontaneous interaction of [the] musicians.34 As one can imagine, such sonic happenings are risky and require not only intense, responsive-listening among the players, but also high levels of trust, openness, and vulnerability. Even when one does not fully understand what another member plays, one must listen and respond to the other anticipating and trusting that s/he has something valuable to say and worth the effort to puzzle through. Here one might highlight an ethical dimension !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 33!When no discernable melody is present, the musical piece exhibits the aural equivalent of an abstract painting. Here the sounds, rhythms, and aural textures and densities are foreground and in a sense become thematic, just as in a Kandinsky painting, line, point, and color are thematized. ! 34!Jost,

Free Jazz, 64.

!

!

25

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

involved in collective improvisation. That is, the trust and vulnerability required among the improvisers is not unlike Gadamers emphasis on the need for openness to the other in order for a genuine dialogical engagement to succeed. After all, Gadamers notion of openness implies not only that one listen attentively and expectantly to the other, but also that one approaches the other with respect and trust.35 Given that ones presumptions may be exposed as inadequate, misguided, or radically challenged, one entering a Gadamerian dialogue also takes a risk and makes him or herself vulnerable. Having sketched and discussed certain key aspects of some expressions of free jazz, I now turn to highlight socio-political factors that impacted the artists and their music. As many commentators and jazz historians have documented, jazz musicians in America were subject to racialized laws, customs, and practices both in society at large as well as in the more narrow confines of the music industry.36 Not only did such practices affect the personal !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 35!For a detailed discussion of the ethical dimensions of Gadamers hermeneutics, see Monica Vilhauer, Gadamers Ethics of Play. Hermeneutics and the Other (New York: Lexington Books, 2010), chapter 5. 36!See,

for example, Eric Lott, Double V, Double-Time: Bebops Politics of

Style, Callaloo, 36 (1988): 597605, Ingrid Monson, Freedom Sounds. Civil Rights Call Out to Jazz and Africa (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), and Ekkehard Jost, Free Jazz (New York: De Capo Press, 1994). !

!

26

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

and communal lives of the musicians, but also the music itself was impacted. For example, white club owners were by and large apathetic to aesthetic concerns. Driven by profit motives and operating on the basis of stereotypes of black musicians as mere entertainers rather than serious artists, they set up obstacles that free jazz musicians had to overcome in order to develop their music. For instance, in order to maximize alcohol sales, club owners frequently demanded three short performances with brief breaks in between.37 Such preset time frames calculated for monetary benefits rather than creating the maximal conditions for artistic exploration were not well suited for the New Thing. As noted earlier, free jazz musicians created pieces that neither conformed to the common time frames for a work nor to traditional formal structuresmuch less to predetermined sets established by club owners. Thus, in order to pursue their aesthetic aims, the musicians created the loft movement and performed their music in large loft apartments within their own local communities.38 In such a setting, the musicians were able to develop their art and to allow the music to carry them for as long as the group collectively agreed.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 37!John D. Baskerville, Free Jazz: A Reflection of Black Power Ideology, Journal of Black Studies 24 (1994): 484497, here 488. 38!Ibid.,

!

!

27

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

The acknowledgement of musics socio-political conditioning is consonant with a Gadamerian approach to art, as Gadamers understanding of our historical conditioning, our belonging to various traditions, and our thrownness can be readily applied to the history of American jazz in its multiple expressions. Gadamer, for example, recognizes how cultural and sociopolitical narratives impact both a societies conception of art and its function, as well as how an artist views his or her role in relation to the society.39 These aspects are an important part of the works being, and knowledge of this history provides one with a fuller understanding of and appreciation for the work and the artists. Yet, given Gadamers understanding of art as a communicative event, a lack of knowledge of the works sociopolitical conditioning, neither silences the work nor prevents its ongoing increase in being.40 As an other with an independent existence, a musical work such as Coltranes Offering can address, challenge, and make a claim on me, even if I am ignorant of its sociopolitical history. Attentive, anticipatory, and ecstatic listening is thus demanded not only of the musicians but is also demanded of me as an active audience member. Here again Gadamers phenomenological analysis of arts play-structure proves helpful. Like the players in a game who lose themselves as the game plays them; free jazz similarly plays both the music-makers and the listeners, as each !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 39!See, for example, RB, 67 [GW8, 978].! 40!!However,

a lack of such knowledge would impoverish the listeners grasp of

the works extended horizon.!

!

28

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

are absorbed through their active presence in the unfolding movement of the piece. Lastly, just as the musicians themselves must be intensely engaged and committed to the risks of the (musical) game as they press musical norms and respond to the other players moves, so too my engagement with the work demands a commitment to listen even when I find aspects of the work disturbing and undecipherable. That is, a Gadamerian engagement with free jazz does not require that I fully comprehend every aspect or meaning that a particular piece expresses. Here the works otherness and enigmatic dimensions are respected. That is, a Gadamerian approach to art allowsand even expectsthe work to manifest itself and speak to me as other in its otherness. This comfort with the mystery of the other is, in part, what Gadamer means when he describes the seeming speechless [verstummt] language of modern art as nonetheless its own sort of speech.41

VII.(Conclusion( To sum things up, Gadamers stress on a works event-character means that not only is the work always open toward the spectator so that he or she is taken up in the dynamic of the works self-presentation,42 but the work also retains a hermeneutic identity that allows it to stand as an other with something to say. The works ability to communicate is neither dependent upon my !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 41!See Gadamer, RB, 83 and 88. [GW8, 313 and 319]. 42!Tate,

The Speechless Image, 59.!

!

29

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

knowledge of its socio-political conditioning nor upon my understanding exhaustively its being or meaning(s). Rather, as an other with an ever-unfolding life, it emerges and makes claims on me in the aesthetic event characteristic of all art. As is the case when I enter into dialogue with a human other, so too with the work of art I will never grasp all that the other is. In other words, Gadamers hermeneutical aesthetics is rather at home with the enigmatic and nontransparent aspects of human others, texts, and works of art. Furthermore, as I properly comport myself to the workitself an ethical commitmentI become absorbed in the work, dwelling with it and attuning myself to its language. My being fully present with it such that it reveals itself to me is completely consonant with its simultaneous concealment. That is, as I intentionally enter into the back-and-forth play with the work, certain aspects of the work come forth. However, at the very same time, other aspects and meanings are concealed and remain enigmatic. Given our finitude, this incomplete yet genuine experience of an artworks being and meaning is expected. In addition, my partial understanding of the work (or human other) is likewise unsurprising given the complexity and intrinsic opacity of the others being. That is, as Augustine might sayand Gadamer would agreewe humans are enigmas to ourselves. Our own self-understanding unfolds in time, over time, and in conversation with others, yet it never reaches a final clarity. Such is the human condition as well as our hermeneutical condition. That our dialogical encounters with others will also be of a both/and, dialectical, and unfolding character is completely consonant with Gadamers hermeneutical project. On ! 30

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

the one hand, when a genuine dialogue occurs, I come to understand the subject matter better, whether or not overall agreement occurs. If my dialogue is with a living human being, I may even come to understand him or her better. Yet, I will never come to an exhaustive understanding of him or her, even if we are lifetime friends and regular dialogue partners. A similar situation exists with great paintings, musical works, and poetry. As I return to contemplate such works over the course of a lifetime, I gain new insights, new ways of seeing the work. However, no single interpretation, nor all of my interpretations combined, will ever exhaust the works meaning. In closing, contra Gadamers critics, difference is not primarily a problem to solve or overcome; rather, both difference and sameness are equiprimordial. Although Gadamer does not thematize exploitative and oppressive social relations in which true dialogue never takes place and the goal is simply to eradicate difference, his philosophical project is in no way fundamentally hostile to difference.43 On the contrary, as I have attempted to show, Gadamers philosophical hermeneutics and reflections on art contain numerous instances in which difference and otherness are upheld. In its ideal Gadamerian expression, one might say that difference dances with sameness in an ongoing interplay where neither take the lead; instead, they tarry together in a community where !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 43 In his discussion of Gadamers notion of fusion of horizons, Bernasconi discerns a diminishment and even antagonism to difference. See, for example, Bernasconi, You Dont Know What Im Talking About, 187.

!

31

Dr. Cynthia R. Nielsen March 2015

moves and countermoves are reciprocally recognized, valued, and harmonized in the truest sense. ! !

!

32