"Woke" Musicology

 I have in the past discussed something I called "new" musicology exemplified by the feminist musicology of Susan McClary. Now we have a new phase that we might call "woke" musicology exemplified by Philip Ewell. I think it is important, if you disagree with this methodology, to not simply dismiss it out of hand as some have done, but to take it seriously enough to examine the problems. Here is a positive statement of Ewell's position: Philip Ewell: Erasing colorasure in American music theory, and confronting demons from our past.

In the history of American music theory, and American classical music, Whiteness has consistently erased nonWhiteness from existence as unimportant in a process I call colorasure, which I based on Kate Manne’s useful concept of herasure when the same happens with women.1 In order to shine a light on notable colorased Black musicians, every February morning I sent out a tweet of a Black African musical figure, usually American, who has been colorased by American music theory—this list of 28 figures appears at the end of this post.

Anyone familiar with Thomas Sowell's book A Conflict of Visions will immediately recognize the nature of this tactic as stemming from the unconstrained vision of society. I recommend examining his book for a full presentation of the two basic visions of society and culture.

But as regards classical music we have a very direct way of countering these kinds of claims: they are always non-specific, that is to say collective and generalized. Ewell is claiming that black composers and theorists have been erased in favor of white ones and then provides a long list of examples. This sort of argument from the statistics of oppression is hard to answer on the face of it. But it contains a deep flaw: it avoids specifics. Instead of claiming, for example, that Zenobia Powell Perry (1908–2004) is as significant or more significant than a white composer such as Dmitri Shostakovich (1906 - 1975), the blanket claim is made that "Whiteness has consistently erased nonWhiteness from existence." The strained jargon is a typical giveaway. There is an agency problem, of course--"Whiteness" doesn't do anything, it is a mere abstraction. There is also a causality problem: what does it mean to "erase nonWhiteness from existence"? Something that obviously did not happen as Prof. Ewell was easily able to produce the names and biographies of twenty-eight black composers and theorists whose erasure was obviously unsuccessful.

But the basic issue is even more fundamental: significant music is produced by highly atypical individuals, not by generic possessors of this or that skin color. As soon as we ask whom do you advocate as a composer on the level of Mozart, Bach or Beethoven, the argument collapses into absurdity. If you have someone of that stature, simply name them. Ah, but then we come up with some figures like Scott Joplin or Miles Davis who are fine musicians, each in their area. But of a different significance than Bach or Mozart. So this really isn't a new argument after all. Just a new tactic to win illegitimate tactical points. And, not incidentally, as a nice hook to hang a career on.

The claim used to be made that only if the music of such and such a composer were more "available" then they would finally be appreciated as they deserved. But now everything is available on YouTube. This is Homage for piano by Zenobia Powell Perry, a pleasant enough piece, but...