The Hazy Dawn of New Age

Much time has passed since innovations presented in this book were done. They are still waiting to be truly continued. The future is now, said JM Jarre once. But the world Oxygene envisioned actually didn’t come yet. Instead of it came cyber-punk, and than blank disoriented world. The development of electronic music until now has been one prolonged slow-motion caption. One of the reasons for that is, a big mistake being made recently by youngest generations of musicians. Those among them who are interested in experimenting with electronic music, are dreaming about making some new revolutions of theirs own, trying to repeat that 1970s experimental feast – to create some out-of-the-blue, shocking pieces. What they seem to misunderstand, is that time of such musicians has already past with mid 1980s. There will be – there need not be – no more electro-pioneers. New generations – not by theirs fault – are not aware of importance of 1970s electronic revolution; they see it almost as some gimmick on a pop market that can be repeated. But it was a far more grandiose affair: those were deep musical innovations and a unique metamorphoses of musical art, and that can not happen again, that should not happen again. By trying to bring some new “revolutions” again, musicians are doomed to produce nothing. Everything “new” and “shocking” is evolution of past, and no wonder then that techno generations, that were either trying some new revolutionary music either doing dance-floor music, were finding that, in musical terms, electronic music is not moving anywhere.

Everything has already been done in electronic music. Jean Michel Jarre, 1993

And as long as experimentators of 1970s don’t become a sort of a canon, it will continue standing still. As Kant said:

Originality must be exemplary.

So todays musicians, instead of being bothered when recognizing that some new piece is in a way evolution of 1970s electronica, should take that as an indication that they might actually have something important in theirs hands, rather than saying “but this is what JM Jarre was doing decades ago”.

The product of genius must establish a model for others to follow and standards for evaluation. Immanuel Kant

It is time those discoveries to be deepened and en-richened; greater maturity and refinement to become a priority now, and not sheer novelty – time of raw invention is behind us. This raw experimental music, as interesting as it is, didn’t show just how angelically beautiful universal music can be. Three main drawbacks of expression until now were: the static character, lack of change (muzak, background quality); overtly-sentimental, sweety, emotionally banal (cheesy); and finally cold, inhuman, too aggressive (“synth excess”).

All the music of XX century suffered from similar shortcommings. But despite this, XX century on the whole wasn’t too kind towards it's composers. It was fast to note everything that was lacking in modern music, but skipping to note stunning originality that certain composers have shown. Stubborn and monotonous commenting aimed at two established scenes – classical and pop – left everything that didn't fit in there out of speech. Instead of delight with novelties that XX century brought, much more often there was silence, or even violent reactions. While XX century brought more individual musicianship than ever, that same century shamefuly left even the most fascinating composers without public admiration, respect and love that an artist deserves. This greatly lowered enthusiasm for continuing with the musical work that began in this period.

Simply, professional musical circles of XX century in large degree closed themselves into a cathedral with some concerns of its own, separate from outside world. They weren't anymore promoters of new musical pieces of highest value. And it is very important music of highest value to be publicly praised. On that way, wider fashions are directed towards universal values, or at least precluded from destroying them. While most people don’t feel great enthusiasm about finer music, they do respect what is considered to be higher art by those socially chosen to be arbiters, musical authorities. Authorities give to music universal respect and so energy to musicians to continue. If this respect is not there, musical beauty will not be made anymore.

What's even worse, somewhere starting with the end of XX century music was growingly seen as diversionary in character, and not a spiritual and emotional experience. Instrumental music especially so; it was not thought of as something that communicates, that excites; it was presented as music for relaxation. During 1990s all instrumental music was supposed to serve for relaxation only, and there was chill-out etiquette, meaning music that accompanies discharge after an exciting party.

With time, the term 'ambient' became associated with that background quality. I recall an anecdote involving one of my friends, who was one of those with “I don’t understand how anyone can listen to this” attitude towards modern orchestral music. He became tired with heavy metal and Iron Maiden and came to my place one day, wanting to hear something “ambiental”. Since I don’t have much acoustic wallpapers on my shelves, I decided to play him Caverna Magica from Vollenweider that opens with a long sounds-only passage. He relaxed and said contently: “Yeah, ambiental…”. But the tricky thing is, Caverna Magica soon starts becoming melodious. As the whistling sound was hinting more and more melody, his enthusiasm was dropping. When finally the melody entered, he just made a slightly irritated face and immediately lost all interest. Obviously, he was not put off with background quality of the music, but exactly the opposite - with the fact that it was not background. On this way, it was the least background and least repetitive part of electronic music specter that was most obscured. Brian Eno with his intentionally background ambient acoustic wall-papers will become almost an icon in pop circles somewhat later, but more melodious output was marginalized. Doomed on lack of public acclaim, authors lost motivation and wish to compose anything of depth.

More recently even acclaimed academic artists are suddenly rejected. Philip Glass, glorified during 1990s, was called a “crazy idealist” by Peter Conrad in The New Statesman in an article on 2 of April, 2007:

We keep our ears pricked for the voices of angels, or the chiming of the crystalline spheres that were once supposed to regulate the cosmos. Yet what we hear could just as well be our electrical appliances mumbling to themselves. Does Glass, for whom music is a holy art, ever worry that he is most gainfully employed as a provider of reassuringly monotonous muzak?

Regardless of how actually good the commented composition was, it is obvious from the sound of his sentences that this writer – who is just an example of a rule – would not be receptive towards anything that is modern music. He has little idea of what it is about and “music of the spheres” and similar phrases devoid of meaning are the only thing that comes to his mind. Academic institutions themselves, not only audiences, started loosing passion and admiration of their’s own art - to use again the same source we gave above:

Philip Glass, who turned 70 in January this year, has his ears attuned to frequencies too high-pitched for most of us: he seeks to eavesdrop on what earlier ages thought of as heavenly harmony, and strains to hear the distant music of the spheres. … But George Bernard Shaw called music "absolutely unmoral" - incapable of distinguishing between soul and body, as happy giving vent to our carnal vices as it is appealing to our nobler natures. For me, Glass's hypnotically repetitive scales and shimmering arpeggios have a sensuous enchantment that precludes any profounder meaning.”

One can feel from these lines that academical authorities did not anymore look as protectors of musical art. This is not too surprising thought, since the end of XX century brought the growing mediocrity in all the spheres. This was long ago predicted by philosophers. Nietzsche depicts what he called “ultimate men” – today we could say “mass-men”:

Behold! I shall show you the Ultimate Man

‘What is love? What is creation? What is longing? What is a star?’ Thus asks the Ultimate Man and blinks.

The earth has become small, and upon it hops the Ultimate Man, who makes everything small. His race is inexterminalbe as the flea; the Ultimate Man lives longest.

“We have discovered happiness”, say the Ultimate Men and blink.

They have left the places where living was hard: for one needs warmth. One still loves one’s neighbor and rubs oneself against him: for one needs warmth.

Sickness and mistrust count as sins with them: one should go about warily. He is a fool who still stumbles over stones or over men!

A little poison now and then; that produces pleasant dreams. And a lot of poison at last, for a pleasant death.

They still work, for work is entertainment. But they take care the entertainment does not exhaust them.

Nobody grows rich or poor any more: both are too much of a burden. Who still want to rule? Who obey? Both are too much of a burden.

No herdsman and one herd. Everyone wants the same thing, everyone is the same: whoever thinks otherwise goes voluntarily into the madhouse.

‘Formerly all the world was mad’, say the most acute of them and blink.

They are clever and know everything that has ever happened: so there is no end to their mockery. They still quarell, but they soon make up – otherwise indigestion would result.

They have little pleasure for the day and their little pleasure for the night: but they respect health.

‘We have discovered happiness”, say the Ultimate Men and blink.

And here ended Zarathustra's first discourse… for at this point the shouting and mirth of the crowd interrupted him: “Give us this Ultimate Man, O Zarathustra’ – so they cried – ‘make us into this Ultimate Man! You can have the Superman!”

This is the ultimate man, that in Nietzsche's time, by the end of XIX century, was still not quite born, and Nietzsche must had have needed a lot of effort to visualize him. Today, you need no effort - just turn on the TV, look through window or visit Internet pages. Or the most simple way, recognize it in yourself. In The New Statesman, Peter Conrad continues in his article “Crazy idealism”:

Philip Glass believes that music is an agent of change. He is expecting too much of himself.

Hose Ortega y Gasset writes on noble life:

For me nobility is the synonym of life spent in constant effort of overcoming oneself, of going beyond what one presently is and tries to reach what is set as a higher goal. On this way noble life is in contrast towards common life, apathetic life, which sluggishly closes into itself, doomed on eternal stand, as if no force makes it step out of itself.

What thus awaits the ultimate man, is feeling of purposelessness. If our spirit and soul are unstimulated and undirected, we live a senseless life – and even what seems as the greatest biological delights suddenly disappears, paling into boredom. Ultimate men believe only in biology; but while what we call biology is a base of our being, it is not our whole being. Alas, as I write this, many still continue to doubt.

The Hazy Dawn of New Age

Instead of the bright sunrise, XXI century brought a hazy dawn of new age. This age, at its beginning, Jose Ortega describes with following words:

People who live today believe that their's lives are of greater value than any lives of other times, although in the same time they consider theirs time as the beginning of something but they are not sure of what, because they doubt that theirs time as some sort of an agony._

The arrival of XXI century was celebrated throughout the planet. Jean Michel Jarre gave a concert at Egyptian pyramids in Giza. This concert - same as the era which it was supposed to open – suffered from many problems. Egyptian authorities forbid the ritual of crowning of the great Khufu pyramid, that was to be one of the main moments of the concert; fog and rain that happened on the day of the concert spoiled the visual aspect of the spectacle, and JM Jarre himself had problems with being threatened before the concert as a “Zionist”, and after it for “projecting masonic symbols” on pyramids.

Yet in one moment of the concert, disappointed Jean Michel Jarre reacted on some goofing in the crowd on a way that could be said to have comprised the spirit of XX century music:

Despite the fog and despite the rain we are all together, waiting for this first sunrise.