In regarding the historical information pertinent to this piece of music, both George Harrison and The Beatles must be regarded. It is well known that at this point in the Beatles career (1968), the members of the Beatles were writing independently and merely using each other as studio musicians for the sake of recording. I will focus the majority of my historical analysis on George Harrison, as he is the composer of this song. However, I must give some historical background on the Beatles, as they are the vessel that allowed George Harrison to obtain the level of notoriety that he did.

The Beatles were a rock and pop band from Liverpool, England that formed in 1960. The band comprised of John Lennon (guitar, vocals), Paul McCartney (bass, vocals), George Harrison (guitar, vocals), and Ringo Star (drums, vocals). The Beatles went on to become one of the most critically and commercially acclaimed bands in the history of popular music. The Beatles have sold over a billion albums internationally as well as having the most number 1 singles in the history of the UK charts. Ultimately, the Beatles broke up in 1970, and all members went on to successful solo careers. During their decade as a band they released thirteen classic studio albums (of course there are many more variations on albums/compilations/alternate takes). The principal songwriters of The Beatles were Lennon/McCartney who wrote much of The Beatles catalog. George Harrison also wrote for the band. While he may not have created the volume of material that Lennon/McCartney produced, many of his songs achieved critical acclaim.

George Harrison (25 February 1943 – 29 November 2001) joined The Beatles when he was 16; he was by far the youngest member of the group. He gained guitar experience as The Beatles grew in Hamburg and ultimately broke out with their first single, “Love Me Do”, in 1962. Eventually obtaining international success, The Beatles filmed their first full-length movie, A Hard Day’s Night. It was on the set of this film that Harrison met his future wife, Pattie Boyd. By 1965 and the Rubber Soul album, Harrison was developing into a musical director as he led the others into folk-rock, via his interest in The Byrds and Bob Dylan, and into Indian music with his exploration of the sitar. Harrison’s musical involvement and cohesion with the group reached its peak on Revolver in 1966 with his contribution of three songs and new musical ideas. By 1967, Harrison’s interests appeared to be moving outside The Beatles, and his involvement in Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band consists mainly of his one song, “Within You Without You”, on which no other Beatle plays, and which stands out for its difference from the rest of the album.

George Harrison

During the recording of The Beatles (White Album) in 1968, tensions were present in the band; these surfaced again during the filming of rehearsal sessions at Twickenham Studios for the album Let It Be. Frustrated by ongoing slights, the poor working conditions in the cold and sterile film studio, and Lennon’s creative disengagement from the group, Harrison quit the band on January 10th. He returned on January 22nd after negotiations with the other Beatles at two business meetings. Relations among the Beatles were more cordial (though still strained) during recordings for the album Abbey Road. The album included “Here Comes the Sun” and “Something”, which was later recorded by Frank Sinatra, who considered it “the greatest love song of the last fifty years”. Harrison’s increasing productivity, coupled with his difficulties in getting The Beatles to record his music, meant that by the end of the group’s career he had amassed a considerable stockpile of unreleased material. Harrison’s last recording session with The Beatles was on January 4^th, 1970.

Something was originally written in mid-1968 on a piano in Abbey Road studios during a break from work on The Beatles (The White Album). Although the song came together rather quickly and was ready to be released on The Beatles, it was postponed for a later release because The Beatles already had quite enough finished tracks. George was unsure if it was quite ready for release, as he comments, “I just put it on ice for about six months because I thought ‘that’s too easy’ . . .” He comments on how quickly the song came together for him. It seemed contrary to the way in which he thought a great song should be written, with great deliberation and planning. The song was revisited in early 1969 as backing tracks were recorded. The original 13 takes were then scrapped and recording began again with 36 takes in May of 1969. “Something” was then intended to be part of the Let it Be sessions, but ultimately did not make the final cut. The final take (take 39) ultimately ended up on the album Abbey Road (Released September 26^th, 1969). Let it Be was released after Abbey Road, which is regarded as The Beatles final studio album. However, in reference to the chronology of work, Abbey Road was the last album the group worked on as a band.

Modern Day Abbey Road

The final take that appears on Abbey Road is adapted from an early eight minute demo version (available on Anthology 3) contained a new verse with a counter-melody placed where the instrumental break occurs on the official take. It was wise to omit these lines since they’re superfluous and don’t really add any meaning to the song. “Something” was released prior to Abbey Road as the A-side to a single (B-side: “Come Together”). It was the first time in the history of The Beatles that a Harrison composition was released as an A-Side.

The year in which “Something” was released was a hot bed for political, social, and artistic changes. The U.S was still involved in the much controversial Vietnam War. Many American youths led demonstrations and protests against the U.S involvement in Vietnam. Controversial president, Richard Nixon becomes the 37^th President of the United States. The Stonewall riots in NY mark the beginning of the gay rights movement. The US, still battling Russia in the space race, fulfills JFK’s promise of putting a man on the moon. 1969 also saw the tragedies of the Manson Family as well as the beauty of the Woodstock festival. Society was stirring with fear, anticipation, frustration, and hope of a brighter future. All of these feelings fueled the budding musical movement of the time.

1969 is considered the summer of love, because it was a culmination of “hippie” movement’s ethos of free love and peace. The pinnacle of this was at the Woodstock festival in upstate New York, where dozens of top artists performed to hundreds of thousands of fans. The crowd lived together in a peaceful community for the three days of the festival. All of their communal peace and free love is underscored by the acid culture of the later 60’s. On the other side of the coin, at a Rolling Stones concert, in 1969, a fan was stabbed to death by a member of the Hells Angel who had been hired to work security. Some believe that this violence may have begun the end of the hippie movement.

Little known fact…George Harrison, as a child, was actually a little asian girl who enjoyed singing. Here is the only footage:

Step Two – Open Listening:

Watch this video to hear “Something”

I am immediately confronted with a pounding drum fill, which invites the soaring chromatic guitar line, which will become a motif (or main lick) of the song. I am instantly settled into a calm but contemplative major sonority. I am then drawn to the lyrics. A man’s inner dialogue attempting to understand why he feels the way he does for a woman. The constant question is, “what is it about her that draws me in”. Then the entrance of organ marking the pulse changes the mood from contemplative to minor yearning. The vocals echo this by mentioning not wanting too leave her. The main motif then pulls us back to the contemplative state. Here we experience a more lush introspective experience framed by the prominence of flowing strings. We then return to the minor yearning with the addition of strings, which create an even more dramatic representation of the narrator’s desire. The main motif returns but shockingly sends us into a new major key. The modulation creates an lifting effect similar to the feeling in your stomach when you go over the crest of hill on a roller coaster; a momentary weightless feeling. This new section is layered with anger, frustration, and intensity. The vocals echo a sense of frustration. The narrator is unable to see what the future will bring with his feelings and displays frustration of the woman’s need to know. The vocals almost take on a screaming quality underscored by sharp pizzicato strings in the background. A descending bass line takes us back to the original key, where the guitar solo enters. The guitar solo is laced with passion and longing. It nearly more expressive than the vocals at conveying a desire to move forward while remaining grounded in the present. The main motif takes us back to the verse. This time a close harmony line compliments the vocals. The verse is grounded in a delicately intricate bass line, which gives a rolling gradient to the foundation of the song. This bass line has been present throughout the song; it seemed to peak through slightly more in this verse. We then hear the main motif again, which has more time to ring out than usual. The elongated motif is then followed by a repeat of the main motif with a slight rubato that leads to the end of the song.

Step Three – Syntax

See the Score of “Something” to follow along with the analysis

Something is in the key of C Major with a bridge in A major (major VI). It is in 4/4 time.

The instrumentation is: Harrison: double tracked vocal, lead guitar, handclaps. McCartney: backing vocals, bass, handclaps. Lennon: guitar. Starr: drum kit. Billy Preston: Hammond organ. Uncredited: 12 violins, 4 violas, 4 cellos, and 1 double bass

The form is:

Intro | Verse | Verse | Bridge | Verse (instrumental) | Verse | Outro |

The Song begins with a pickup drum fill that sets up the main melodic hook (motif). The main melodic hook is played by the guitar and consists of five notes starting on A with embellishment and then moving up chromatically Bb, B, and then to C. This establishes the tonic of the song as C Major. The harmony below the guitar hook also converges on C major but in contrary motion to the hook by moving downward from F major to Eb major and then to the dominant chord G. The bass follows the harmony until the dominant chord where a D is played under the G chord, creating a V6/4. The intention here is to create a smoothly descending bass line from F to C. Thus creating contrary motion between the highest and the lowest voice.

The verse can be divided into two sections. The first six bars constitute the verse proper. The next three bars act as a refrain, where the last bar is a reiteration of the intro hook. The harmonic motion in the verse proper begins on the I chord and ultimately moves towards the V chord. The harmonic motion in the verse proper is dictated by a chromatic guide-tone line. The C on top of the C chord moves to a B making the harmony a Cmajor7. The B then descends to a Bb making the harmony a C7, which acts as a V/IV. The Bb moves to an A as the secondary dominance is put into effect and the next chord is F major. The chromatic motion is then suspended in favor of setting up the dominant. The next chord is a D major which acts as a V/V, ultimately leading to G major the V chord. If the chromatic motion were to continue through the D chord, G would be the appropriate resolution in the following measure. Even though the continuity of the chromatic line is interrupted its effect is still evident as it resolves to G. During this section the bass is highly ornamented with sixteenth notes and melodic elements. Over the first three bars, instead of pedaling the C, the bass creates a I-V-I motion. For the rest of the verse proper the bass follows the harmonic motion, illustrating the roots, with consistent ornamentations.

The refrain of the verse comes from a deceptive resolution to the vi chord, A minor. In the refrain we notice the harmonic rhythm is doubled by chord motion occurring ever half bar. The chromatic motif is then repeated in this section, which serves as connective tissue tying both parts of the verse together. The A moves down to a G# creating a fairly unconventional chord to be used in pop music, A minor/major 7^th. Depending on where one places the root, this chord could also be regarded as a G# Augmented chord. The true function of the chord is unsure as the bass plays a sixteenth note fill that moves through chord tones. The fill implies neither the A nor the G# as a root. The chromatic motion continues as the G# moves to G creating the harmony of an Aminor7 /G chord. The G then moves to F# acting as the third of a D9 chord. The bass responds here with contrary chromatic motion, moving during the G chord from G to G# to A and then resolving down to D on the downbeat of the D chord in a V-I manner. This is the first moment of chromatic motion in the bass. The F# moves to an F which becomes the tonic of an F chord. This F chord becomes the same as the F chord in the intro and this bar recapitulates the opening hook. The harmonic, melodic, and bass interaction is the same as the chords move from F to Eb to G/D. The main hook resolves back into the second verse the same way it did at the start of the song.

The melodic content of the verse lives within a rather small interval of a sixth (G below middle C to E above middle C). Steps and thirds dominate melodic motion of the verse. The largest intervallic leap of a fourth occurs as a pickup to the second measure of the refrain.

The second verse contains all of the same elements as the first verse but with an increased presence of the strings, which adds thickness to the harmony by outlining the chord tones and providing melodic passages to connect the harmonic motion. However, there is a stark difference in the recapitulation of the main hook at the end of the second verse. This difference is used to set up the bridge. The contrary interaction of the bass, harmony, and guitar line remain the same, but the resolution is to A major instead of A minor. This sets up the new key of the bridge as A major or the Major VI of C major. The A major chord is allowed to ring out for an entire bar before the bridge begins. This makes the second verse have an uneven form compared to the first.

The form of the bridge is AA. The bridge consists of eight bars comprising of a general repetition of the first four bars. The bridge continues with the theme of descending notes to dictate the harmony. This time the pattern is diatonic instead of chromatic. Like the refrain, the harmonic motion happens at the half bar level. The descending motion is clearly illustrated by the bass, which assumes a simpler role in the bridge, marking time instead of filling. The A root moves to G# and creates a harmony of a C#minor/G#. The G# moves to F# creating an F# minor chord. The F# moves to E and acts as the fifth and root of A/E. The E then moves to D tonicizing a D chord. The descending motion is then suspended as the guide tone remains on a D as the harmony moves to a G major chord. In this moment of suspension the melody hits its climax by moving towards the G above middle C. After the G chord the guide tone continues and D resolves to the C# which is the third of A. The harmony stays on A for a full bar before repeating the four bar pattern. On the full bar of A major the bass performs a syncopated chromatic descending line, from A to E, to set up the second half of the bridge. The second half of the bridge repeats up until the last bar. The G chord in second half of the 3^rd bar acts as a dominant chord this time resolving to C major instead of A major. This moves us back into the key of the verse. Under the C chord, the syncopated descending bass line appears again. Instead of chromatically, it moves diatonically from C to D, skipping F. This descending bass line leads into the harmony of the verse.

This third verse is an instrumental verse featuring a guitar solo. The melodic content of the solo is completely different than that of the vocal melody. The guitar solo incorporates leaps of 4^th, 5^th, 6^th, and even 7^th. The rhythm of the solo is the most complex yet seen in the piece. It incorporates syncopated sixteenths, triplets, as well as a few very quick bends through thirty-second notes. The solo ultimately concludes by returning to the main lick, which subsequently leads back into a final verse.

The final verse is similar to the first two. The main difference is the entrance of a higher vocal harmony line. The harmony generally follows a third above. This time through the verse there is some rhythmic variation in the melody as well. The verse progresses through the refrain as expected and ultimately leads to the outro. The main hook at the end of the final verse is allowed to ring through a full bar of A major. This alludes to the bridge modulation to A major, but does not follow through with a full bridge. Under the A major, the bass does an ascending straight sixteenth line from A up to E. This E acts as the leading tone to the F major chord. Here the main hook is repeated one last time with the bass up the octave from its normal position. The hook resolves on a final C major chord, which is the final chord in the song.

Step Four – The Sound-in-Time

TU1: 0:00-0:06: The song begins with a six note drum fill. This is followed by an ascending six-note guitar melody line, which is grounded in descending consonance. The guitar line moves forward.

TU2: 0:06-0:26: The guitar line moves towards a place of consonance. On top of the consonance, the vocals enter with a seven-note statement. Underneath the melody is a bass line rich with rhythmic and intervallic activity. The drums maintain an equal four beat pulse. In the background is a misty consonant rhythm guitar. There is space between melodic statements roughly equal to the melodic element preceding the space. The space is filled with a drum fill. The vocal melody continues to make statements and leave space. The bass makes an ascending nine-note statement.

TU3: 00:26-00:38: The harmony descends and a new section is marked by the entrance of the even pulse of an organ double that of the drums in TU2. The harmony now moves at twice as fast of a pace. Here the melody maintains a more consistent flow punctuated by three or four note guitar lines. The bass maintains its complex intervallic and rhythmic role. The section ends with the return of the six-note guitar melody seen in TU1.

TU4: 00:38-01:00: is a return to TU2. The marked difference is the presence of strings providing an outline for the harmony.

TU5: 01:00-01:15: is a return to TU3. Again, the only marked difference is the presence of strings. At the end of this section the six-note guitar melody re-enters. This time it resolves up to a new key center. The bass plays sixteen notes in rapid succession while the strings crescendo, this moves forward. A drum fill sets up a new section.

TU6: 01:15-01:24: A quicker pulse is initially established with a busier drum part of fast six beat clusters and upheld by the bass marking the original pulse. The strings swell around the pulse as well as some of them plucking along, punctuating the pulse. The vocals gain intensity and reach a higher point of pitch than yet noticed.

TU7 01:24-01:28: The vocals leave space in which the bass, keys, strings, and guitars come together to move in a dissonant but rhythmic descending line.

TU8: 01:28-01:38: Is a repetition of TU6 with lyrical variations.

TU9: 01:38-01:42: Again the vocals drop out to leave space where there is a similar descending line to TU7 except this time it is more consonant and resolves to a lower note. The resolution seems to establish the original key center of TU1

TU10 01:42-02:14: We reenter the context of TU2; instead of vocals there is a lead guitar. The guitar plays a quick three four-note pattern and then leaves space. Then there is a similar line of six notes but reaches a higher apex followed by space. The line then climbs even higher and continues to move without leaving space. It reaches an apex and then moves back down only to climb higher again. The higher it climbs the more time it takes to reach its apex. As the lines climbs higher the rhythmic variation increases. Ultimately, the solo ends with the repetition of the original six-note melody from TU1.

TU11: 0:2:14-2:36 We return to the overall place of TU2. This time there is the addition of a second vocal line above and moving parallel with the first.

TU12: 0:2:36-2:44 is a reiteration of TU3 with lyrical variations.

TU13: is a restatement of the six-note guitar line of TU1. This time it resolves upward as it did in TU5. Underneath the higher key center the bass moves with a quick succession of sixteen ascending notes. However, instead of remaining in that key like it did before it quickly returns to the six-note guitar line and ultimately resolves in the original key ending the song.

Step Five – Representation

Lyrics to “Something”:

Something in the way she moves,
Attracts me like no other lover.
Something in the way she woos me.
I don’t want to leave her now,
You know I believe in how.

Somewhere in her smile she knows,
That I don’t need no other lover.
Something in her style that shows me.
I don’t want to leave her now,
You know I believe in how.

You’re asking me will my love grow,
I don’t know, I don’t know.
Stick around, and it may show,
But I don’t know, I don’t know.

Something in the way she knows,
And all I have to do is think of her.
Something in the things she shows me.
I don’t want to leave her now.
You know I believe and how

It is clear that Harrison is demonstrating the inner dialogue of a man smitten with love. The narrator is in conflict with his feelings. It seems as if signs are telling him to move on. The relationship may be experiencing hardships. However, his feelings are telling him that this woman is special and that he cannot let her go. In the second verse he states that not only does he have trouble letting her go, but she knows he doesn’t want to let her go. In the bridge, the narrator speaks in frustration. I can hear the girl asking him the question, “well, if you don’t love me now, in six months, will you?” The narrator is frustrated because he is very aware he doesn’t know what the future will bring for his feelings. If she wants to stay and see, then it may come true. The bottom line is that he doesn’t know what the future will bring, but would like her to be there with him.

Many people believe that “Something” was written about Harrison’s ex-wife Pattie Boyd. Who, after their separation, went on to be with Harrison’s good friend and fellow rock-star, Eric Clapton. Pattie Boyd is often considered a Rock n’ Roll muse because she inspired Clapton to write the rock hit, “Layla”, as well as the more subdued “Wonderful Tonight”. Chronologically, the meaning of this song aligns to Harrisons’ and Boyd’s relationship. It was written around the time when they began to split. “Something” could very well be expressing Harrison’s internal conflict of his failing marriage. Boyd had commented that Harrison had told her that the song was written for her. However, Harrison insists that it was the media that turned the song into something about Boyd. Rather, he just wrote it. His only inspiration was envisioning Ray Charles singing the lead vocals. (Ray Charles eventually covered the song)

Pattie Boyd and George Harrison

Step Six – Virtual Feeling

The song begins with a flurry of thunderous toms which fill into the downbeat of the first bar. The main guitar line enters and in a sighing manner, which wafts up a minor third and back down, only to chromatically and markedly climb up to the tonic. While the guitar line climbs the harmony descends in a drooping manner, as if one is lowering their shoulders in frustration. Vocals enter here. There is melody, but its small intervallic leaps make it seem more spoken. Behind the vocals is a rhythm guitar which, due to its effect, takes on the presence of a swirling harmonic vortex. Underneath the bass loops and swoops, like a stunt airplane, through the chords. The variation of rhythm in the bass seems to be in conversation with the melody. As we enter the refrain of the verse all instruments drop out on the third beat, except the strings. The strings move upward in quarter notes to create a ramp into the refrain. The space left by the other instruments serves to build anticipation. The listener can anticipate that something is going to happen.

As we enter the refrain we are suddenly in a minor key with a downward pull. The organ makes its entrance here marking quarter notes in a march like style. In the two beat gap between the vocals on the Aminor/major7 chord, the bass swoops up with a dramatic high note and a descending 16^th note fill. The conversation between the melody and the bass is maintained by making such a statement in the melodic gap. We then descend from the darkness into the familiar place of the main guitar line. The main line at this point is very uplifting in contrast to the mood of the refrain. The main line takes us directly back into the verse

Verse two marks the lush entrance of the strings. The strings flow and occasionally catch the wind the way a sheet does when it’s hung out to dry. Occasionally catching a gust of air, the sheet of strings billows up with crescendo, and as the wind dies, so do the strings fade. In the second refrain the strings catch a slowly building gust of wind that reaches its peak at the main lick. Like a sailboats sail full of wind, the strings pull the song forward and into the modulation of the bridge to the major VI chord. This modulation inspires the bass to engage in an intricate ascending sixteenth line. The shifting ground of this line has the power of saying we are moving somewhere new.

The bridge instantly strikes the listener with its strength. Here the drums and the bass trade roles. The bass marks time with straight eighth notes. While the drums engage in a flurry of polyrhythmic toms. The intricate drum work, although at the same tempo, creates the feeling of moving faster. The strings separate, some play short staccato pizzicato while others create a colorful underbelly of harmony. The vocals soar above with a new found voice of certainty. A climax of intensity is reached at the “I” of “I don’t know”. The climax is quickly followed by a dramatic chromatic descent by all the instruments. The past four bars repeat, but by no means get old. There a sense of organized madness existing between the instruments. Then the descending line repeats, with more intention, as it resolves back to the original key.

Here begins the guitar solo. The first phrase is calm and smooth. The second phrase remains calm and moans up to the sixth before returning to the third. Over the C7 the guitar makes a strong confident statement that climaxes on the major seventh of the F major chord. Two short three note phrases follow in an unsure manner, as if they are saying, “I don’t know, I don’t know”. This line resolves to the fifth of the D major chord. The next phrase is extremely confident with great direction. It ascends upward for two measures reaching its climax consisting of two three note phrases over the G7 chord. The first of these climax phrases uses distinctly dissonant altered sound to descend from the #11 to the 11 to the #9, while the second phrase offers resolution of such altered sounds by consonantly moving from the sixth to the fifth, chromatically. The phrase that begins over the minor refrain of the verse sounds unsure and uncertain in contrast to the phrase before. The final phrase is calm and smooth and full of motion as it soars to the 9^th above a D major chord. Ultimately it resolves into the main lick which takes us to the final verse.

In the final verse we are given the addition of the vocal harmonies. The harmonies serve to brighten the color and make the music seem wider. A dramatic drum fill asserts its presence by ending with a shattering crash. The swirling guitar seems to be more prominent and choppy. The final refrain lacks the addition of new colors but continues to provide the downward pull that propels the piece towards the main lick. The main lick shockingly moves to the major VI key. It feels rather abrupt because of the proximity of the Eb chord to the A chord. The relationship of a tritone is unexpected. The Major VI key is suspended for a moment with a rippling bass line underneath. The bass line compliments the suspension and also pulls forward towards what one would expect to be a reiteration of the bridge. Rather, the movement to the major VI is just an allusion to the bridge. It immediately takes the listener back to that moment of intense frustration in the bridge. The rippling bass pulls to the final statement of the main lick. This time the main line resolves on the original tonic.

Step Seven – Onto-Historical

Thus far in the eclectic analysis the referential meaning of “Something” in the form of virtual feelings have been confident and unsure, calm yet frustrated, nostalgic yet future oriented. All underscored by a strong sense of passion. Ontologically, we will see how these feelings can re-create the world of the composer when he created the piece.

“Something” is layer upon layer of internal conflict. The main lick embodies this by the way in which the melody reaches upward and the harmony moves downward. The composer seems to be at a place of conflict where he isn’t sure to move forward to the future or to move backward and stay grounded in the past. It is possible that moving forward and moving backward are the same thing, meaning that the future will be more of the past.

The world of the song is clearly an internal argument or conflict that all men have experienced. One can be uncertain of their feelings, specifically romantic. One is also unsure of how his decisions will affect his future. The tendency to examine one’s consciousness is a product of the times in which the song was written. In the late 60’s, there was a great interest in Indian and eastern philosophy. One of the main tenants of these forms of philosophy was examination of the consciousness. I believe that Harrison is attempting to illustrate the internal dialogue that he learned during his eastern studies.

In the verse we encounter a very nostalgic tone that is clearly pointed towards the past, and the beauty the past possessed. The refrain is darker, more cynical, looking towards the uncertain future. Here we see both sides to the argument, and as the listener, are engaged in the conversation with self.

In the bridge we hear a real sense of frustration with the inability to predict the future or know what lies ahead. There is anger here because the decision would be simpler if one knew what the future was to bring.

In the guitar solo we are put in a nostalgic and calm place. The melody of the solo makes confident statements only to be followed with statements of uncertainty. The greater the confident statement the greater will be the following uncertainty. This clearly illustrates the way that a mind in conflict goes back and forth. Love is a very difficult thing to rationalize. Love has the power to lure one into making wrong decisions. Love can make one battle with themselves because the right choices may be clouded.

The onto-historical world that I have observed in “Something” exists within the mind of a man who is at the crossroads of a relationship full of love. This crossroads creates a whirlwind of emotions that must be sorted. Moreover, I believe that this man exists specifically in the late 60’s because of transcendental nature of examining the consciousness, which became westernized in the late 60’s. While my latter assertion may very well be conjecture based on my previous knowledge, the former most certainly holds true.

Step Eight – Open Listening

Listen again?

In this open listening I will be allowed to hear “Something” on all levels of musical significance. In contrast to the open listening in step 2, I will have all of the information collected from steps 3-7 to guide my perception. Instead of focusing on one element at a time, I will allow all of them to weave together and interact.

There is so much drama evident in the main lick. That lick standing alone could represent the nature of this song. Which is why, I assume, it is repeated more than any other element. This element embodies the song but the song also embodies this element. The conversation between the bass and the melody in the verse compliment the internal conversation of the narrator. The drum beat serves as nothing more than a keeper of time. Like a clock, it confirms that time is always passing. Although one’s conflict may exist internally, it is not immune from the passing of time. The pulse of the organ in the refrain reiterates the tick-tock of a clock. This creates a sense of stress over the passing of time. One must find resolution before time runs out.

The bridge is dramatic in the way it abruptly appears and the content it contains. The melodic climax is reached it is when the vocals say “I don’t know”. This may express that the crux of the conflict rests in uncertainty, or maybe that uncertainty has caused the conflict. Immediately following the climax is the descending bass line, which creates a falling effect. As if one is being sucked under by one’s own uncertainty and anxiety of the future.

The guitar solo in itself embodies the overall meaning of the song. It is full of statements and retractions. Thoughts and counter thoughts. The guitar solo is arguing with itself, but seems natural and quite beautiful as a whole. In there lies a lesson. An internal conflict might be quite distressing; having seemingly endless arguments with your self. As a whole the process is natural and rather quite beautiful. It is only humans that can examine their consciousness at all.

Step Nine – Performance Guide

Many people have covered “Something”. It is currently the second most covered Beatles song after “Yesterday”. However, I have yet to hear a cover that surpasses the original recording. In honesty, I don’t think that is possible with this song. Regardless, since I have analyzed “Something” on many levels I must be able to offer suggestions to those who wish to perform this song.

My first suggestion would be careful not to omit any part. You may change the instrumentation, but the song works as a whole because of the sum of its parts. It is the careful conversation between the bass and the melody that allow it to speak in the way it does. It is the swirling rhythm guitar in conversation with the pulse of the drums that create its presence. Although James Brown did his own thing with it, and well it kind of works. It is completely different from the original.

Of course in a singer songwriter situation, many parts would be omitted. In that case one must pay careful attention to the intention of the lyric. In the verse proper, keep in mind that the sentiment is nostalgic and in the verse refrain the sentiment is uncertainty. There must be clear dynamic change when arriving at the bridge. The bridge must scream frustration and borderline anger.

If one is attempting to condense the instrumentation to a single acoustic guitar, for a singer songwriter situation. I would advise them to pay close attention to the drum part for cues on how to play the chords rhythmically. Specifically, there should be straight 8ths in the refrain to emulate the organ. I would also highly recommend integrating some of the string lines into the guitar part. George Harrison pulled it off acoustically, but well, it is his song. It still sounds distinctly more folky to me in this stripped setting.

Of course this is an issue with pop songs. Often when they are performed they are reduced to a single chord instrument and voice. The instrumentation of classical music is usually honored in performance. However, accurate instrumentation does not mean a quality performance. I am sure I can find countless videos of bands murdering this song, but that, I will not subject you to.

Step Ten – Meta Critique

The drawback of the analysis I have just performed is that I have much prior knowledge about The Beatles and George Harrison. It was very difficult for me to suspend my prejudices. I already had an intimate relationship with the song “Something”. My knowledge affected my analysis most notable on steps six, seven, and eight. I have read many interviews, books, and magazines. I already thought I knew the intention of the song. Granted, I ultimately ended somewhere different than I had planned. My observations were not without bias.

I also feel that the presence of lyrics, with clear intention, pushed me down a certain path. Would I have come to the conclusion of inner conflict without incorporating the text of the lyrics? I do not know.

I think it might be wise, in the case of a pop song, to hold off on step five until after step seven. Then after virtual feeling and onto-historical have been addressed you can see how your conclusions respond in conversation to the text.

and now a little victory dance…because i just finished this analysis!

Watch the video to hear “Treefingers”

In order to better acclimate myself with the methodology of a strictly referential analysis I decided to choose a piece that was rather minimal in nature. The piece I chose is Radiohead’s “Treefingers” off of their album Kid A. Due to its minimalist nature there are less sonic elements to focus on. Hopefully, I can use this to my benefit to get a better grasp of addressing sound-in-time.

Referential Analysis: 

The first sonic element of the song is a blanket of consonant synthesizers that wraps the listener up in its analog warmth (lower synth pad). The blanket of sound undulates and sways as if it is caught in the wind like a flag. Above the flag there is a brief shimmer of a bell-like sound. There are distinct temporal units (TU) that are marked by the blanket’s ability to rise and fall to different tonal levels (my attempt of saying harmonic motion, without referencing syntax). The emergence of the second temporal unit is marked by the approaching of higher pitched yawn, which fades in and quickly dissipates.  In TU3 the blanket of consonance soars slightly upward and is followed by the shimmering of two distinct bell-like sounds of ascending pitch. The blanket floats higher in the fourth temporal unit in which we hear the return of the synthesized yawn pass by and ultimately plummets with a distant duck-like splat.  TU5 unit feels as if we have returned to the pure consonance of the ground level established at the beginning. Here we spend a considerable period of time being able to observe the undulation of the synth uninterrupted itself before we encounter some passing electronic scratching that brings the “yawn” back in. TU6 and TU7 are repetitions of TU3 and TU4. Both TU3 and TU4, recapitulate the overall upward motion of the lower pad as well as the upper elements of the bells, yawn, and ultimate plummeting yawn.

      The next unit marks the beginning of larger temporal unit, which I will call TUII. Here we feel as if we are on ground level as in unit 1 and 5. However the adornment of the upper structure is greatly increased. We hear several bells and then the approaching of a great distant dissonant screech that bends towards consonance as it approaches and fades away. Immediately following the screech we hear the very prominent twinkle of one consonant bell. We then enter the TUII2. This is marked by a descending of the synth pad to a level lower than we have yet heard. (TUII3) Suddenly, the ground drops out and the blanket separates into threads. On top of these threads there is an abundance of electronic scratches and glitches mixed in with consonant yawns and bells. The synth pad re enters and moves back and forth, up and down, in a breathing manner underneath the chaos. The pace of this breathing is faster than anything we have yet observed with the lower pad.  The back and forth feeling of the breathing is disrupted when the pad descends one level lower and then remains stagnant underneath the consonant chaos above. The lower pad ultimately moves down slightly lower and at that exact moment all of the chaos above abruptly stops with a slight echo. Thus marks the end of TUII

            The beginning of temporal unit III begins with a sense of peace in comparison to the chaotic ending of TUII. Here we again experience the lower pad alone for a period of time. The pad moves upward (TUIII2) with the melodic element of two ascending bells. For the first time in the piece the bells are maintaining the presence of a consistent but misty melodic element. Three variations of two ascending bells provide melodic material in TUIII2. The fourth variation of the two note bell pattern comes with a drastic upward leaping motion of the lower pad (TUIII3). On this higher level there are some faint twinkles of bells ultimately followed by the repeat of the ascending two note bell pattern. The lower pad moves again (TUIII4) as we hear another pair of ascending bells. The pairs of bells ring four more times until the fade into the swirling mix. AS the bells fade away the chaotic elements that defined TUII3 re emerge and dance on top of the lower pad. At this moment we experience the lushest complexity of lower pad and upper activity. This moment comes to an end with the ringing of a prominent bell and for the first time a descending bell after. All upper activity stops and the lower pad quickly fades out, thus ends TUIII as well as the largest temporal unit that is the piece itself.

Meta Critique:

While this was certainly the most enjoyable assignment yet, it certainly lacks context. I cannot deny that it was pleasurable and peaceful to listen to “Treefingers” over and over again. Through this analysis I did actually learn a good deal about the composition within it. I had always perceived the song as one element, beginning to end. However, while examining it on the referential level; I was able to divide into three unique movements each comprised of several sections. The scarcity of melodic material increased the relative importance of it when it was offered. Most notably the only instance of descending bells in the entire piece marked the end of the piece itself, rather interesting compositional note.

 In reality, this analysis lacked context. It is important for me to ground my referential analysis with data from syntax and sound-in-time. Otherwise I run the risk, which I tried to avoid, of entering a fantasy world. It is very easy to go on and talk about this song putting you in a prairie, or in a forest, or in deep space. I did my best to try to avoid fantastical comments like that. Of course, my analysis would be more substantial if I were able to put it in reference to a syntactical and phenomenological analysis.

I will leave you with a video of Radiohead doing a live on TV version of one of my favorite songs, “Nude”. Enjoy

Stevie Wonder

Stevie Wonder is one of the most prolific R&B artists of the 20^th century. Setting a record for any solo artist in history, Stevie Wonder Has won 25 Grammy Awards. In addition, 34 of his singles and 12 of his albums reached the top ten in either the US or UK Billboard Charts. While, much of his work, in his “classic” period, embodied the sounds of the 70’s, his music has the ability to transcend the 70’s and remain timeless. This is supported by the constant sampling/covering of his work by contemporary rock, hip-hop, and R&B artists (Red Hot Chili Peppers covering of “Higher Ground”, Coolio adapting “Pastime Paradise” for his song “Gangsta’s Paradise”, and Tupac Shakur sampling “That Girl” for his song “So many Tears”)

Stevie Wonder was born May 13, 1950 in Saginaw, Michigan. Stevie Wonder has been blind his entire life due to complications of a premature birth. Throughout a turbulent childhood, Stevie Managed to become active in his church choir as well as master the piano, harmonica, drums, and bass all by the time he was 10. By age 11, Wonder was discovered and signed to Motown Records. By age 13, he had his first major hit with “Fingertips pt. 2”

The years of 1972-1976 are largely considered Wonder’s “classic period”, which started in March 1972 with Music of My Mind. Unlike most previous artist LPs on Motown, which usually consisted of a collection of singles, B-sides, and covers, Music of My Mind was an actual LP, a full-length artistic statement with songs flowing together thematically. Wonder’s lyrics dealt with social, political, and mystical themes as well as standard romantic ones. Musically, Wonder began exploring overdubbing and recording most of the instrumental parts himself. Wonder followed up in a fast pace with several more landmark albums; Talking Book in 1972, Innervisions in 1973, Fufillingness First Finale in 1974, and the 1976 album Songs in the Key of life which hit #1 the US Billboard charts as well as becoming a 10x multi-platinum (diamond) album. The albums that Wonder released during this period have been enormously influential. The 1983 Rolling Stone Record Guide said that these albums “pioneered stylistic approaches that helped to determine the shape of pop music for the next decade”.

Stevie Wonder’s full discography can be accessed here:  Stevie Wonder Discography

The following years were considerd Wonder’s commercial period (1979-1990). It was in this phase that Wonder began to commercially reap the rewards of his legendary classic period. The ’80s saw Wonder scoring his biggest hits and reaching an unprecedented level of fame evidenced by increased album sales, charity participation, high-profile collaborations, political impact, and television appearances.

In Wonder’s current career (1990-present), he has continued to release new material, just at a markedly slower pace. Wonder remains active in the music community by continuing to tour/perform. He is constantly collaborating with other artists and lending his trademark sound to conetmeporary albums. Wonder continues to use his fame and influence for altruistic, charitable, and political means. This can most recenty be seen with his support of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

Here is a video Wonder at an Obama Rally, Michelle Obama leads him by the hand, but not well enough, as he slips and falls of the stage. He suffered no injury.

The piece being critiqued, “You Haven’t Done Nothin’”(which can be heard in the youtube window above), was released during Wonder’s “classic period”. “You Haven’t Done Nothin’” was first released as a single in 1974 and eventually added to his album Fufillingness’ First Finale. The song featured backup vocals by The Jackson 5. Much of Wonder’s music during his “classic period” is marked by the pressence of the Hohner clavinet and the use of the newly developing technology in synthesizers. The underlying feel of the bulk of his music, specifically “You Haven’t Done Nothin, is the funk that was being developed in the late 60’s and early 70’s by artists like James Brown and Sly and the Family Stone. Funk music was a departure from the rock music of the 60’s in the essence that it de-emphasised the features prevelent in european music and put more emphasis on features that were largely African-American.  In the late 60’s and early 70’s, assosciations with “Africanness” via funk were largely perceived as being politically aggressive. In addition to the politacally active funk prevelent in “You Haven’t Done Nothin’”, the lyrics also acted as a tool to target current political frustration.

The text of, “You Haven’t Done Nothin’”, is clearly tied to the cynical frustration prevelent in America at the height of the Watergate Scandal. It is generally understood that the “voice” of the text is meant to address African American’s general frustration with politicians and specifically that of Richard Nixon. Only two weeks after the release of the song Nixon was forced to resign due to the Watergate Scandal. While this song was clearly targeted at Nixon it was also meant to address the growing political unrest of the African American Community. In the mid 1970’s many African Americans were unsatisfied with the progress of redressing racial and social inequities. Much of this frustration stemmed from: 1) the post-1968 leadership vacuum in the civil rights movement. 2) By the advent of “urban renewal” programs that threatened to eliminate many black urban neighborhoods. 3) By the erosion of the newly emerging black middle class, and by the systematic dismantling of Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” that was already underway.

Nixon

While “You Haven’t Done Nothin’” may be Wonder’s most targeted political attack, much of his work his laced with political and social undertones. In many ways, Wonder used his affluence as a famous songwriter to communicate political and social messages to the audience. Similarly, visual African American visual artists were using art as a means of bringing awareness to the African American social and political struggle. The style of abstraction was used as a medium for expression, which can be seen in the works of African American painters; Frank Bowling, Sam Gilliam, and Richard Hunt. While continuing their struggles for the progress of the civil rights movement, many African Americans saw the 70’s as a time of commercial and critical success. Just as with Stevie Wonder, this proved that African Americans were capable of overcoming racial obstacles and earning their rightful place in the contemporary art world.

Frank Bowling, Self Portrait

Meta Critique:

There are clearly limitations to the isolated use of a historical analysis. Through historical analysis, the analyst is capable of providing pertinent details about the composer and the socio/political state of the world in which the piece was composed. All of this information is critical to pursuing a thorough analysis of the piece. However, through a historical analysis alone, little is actually discussed of the piece itself. It as if a historical background is the scenery for a play. Without the scenery, the performance of the play would have no context and no setting. Moreover, scenery without a play is merely a stagnant backdrop without any clear artistic message. It is only through the dialectic conversation of the play and the scenery that artistic meaning can be conveyed to the audience. 

It is clear why Ferrara intends for a historical analysis to be the primary step in the eclectic analysis. The historical analysis illustrates the context on which many of the later stages of analysis are based. By understanding a piece’s historical significance it can most certainly impact the way one perceives the piece. This knowledge would be beneficial for a referential approach, but would need to be suspended for a Husserlian phenomenological approach.

Personally, my first listening to “You Haven’t Done Nothin” focused on the interaction of the rhythm and the melody. Following my historical analysis, I was clearly focusing on the lyrics to hear the targeted political message.

A historical analysis alone is inadequate to accurately address all levels of musical significance. It is only when a historical analysis is used in conjunction with other methods that it can properly lend its knowledge to address all levels of musical significance.

I will leave you with a beautiful portrait of Stevie in the 70′s

***

Works Cited

Hughes, Timothy S. “Groove and Flow:.” Diss. University of Washington, 2003.

Richard, Powell. “African American Art.” African American Web Connection – Best web resources for the African American community. Apr. 2005. Oxford University Press. 10 May 2009 <http://www.aawc.com/Submission_Art.html>.

Wikipedia. 10 May 2009. Wikipedia. 10 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevie_wonder>.

(NOTE: this majority of this summary is paraphrasing if not directly quoting Ferrara. I am doing this for my own edification and comprehension of the eclectic method so that I, as an analyst, can properly utilize it. It’s nature as a method requires me to adhere to its parameters as described)

The goal of the eclectic method is to demonstrate responsiveness to the multiplicity of levels of musical significance.  The responsibility of the listener is to maintain openness to any level of musical significance.  The analyst must attempt to suspend prejudgments about what a piece may mean, while remaining open to what it might mean. As shown through Husserl, it is impossible to suspend all prejudgments. With the eclectic method these prejudgments must be subject to change.

All questions must have a clear set of direction. It must be clear whether they are focused on a phenomenological, hermeneutic, or conventional level.  Perhaps the questions are targeted at the interaction of all three methods. The listener must allow any level of musical significance to penetrate its question and add to the analyst’s database.  The analyst must ask questions of the work as well as respond to questions posed by the work

All inherent rules and logic of each system will be left intact allowed to operate autonomously from the others. The underlying directive of openness is therefore double-edged: the analyst remains open to any level of musical significance and concomitantly remains open to the requirements and autonomy of the individual systems of musical analysis that comprise the operational structure of the eclectic method (Ferrara 180).

A practicing analyst will operate much like a scientist in that they will not question the underlying presuppositions of his methodological approach. Analysts should seek to accomplish the tasks designated by their methods. Therefore, the musical significance will always be limited by the scope and details permitted by his method.

Within the eclectic method there must be a meta-critical orientation in which the analyst can evaluate their respective strengths and the impact of the method on the analysis.

The Eclectic Method

Step One: Place the piece under study within a historical framework. This should be done through:

 1) Establishing both a social and musical time line.

2) What are the style characteristics of this period of music history  (influences).

3) How significant is the composer.

4) What were the trends in other art fields during that period.

 5) Social-Political climate in which the composer wrote.

If other questions should evolve regarding historical situation they should be included in this part of the analysis. This part of the analysis should be presented n narrative form.

Step Two:  An open listening.  This is an orientation process with the piece. Analyst may report any insights into sound, reference, or syntax. One should suspend a comparative analysis of this work with other works.  Step two is used to gather preliminary data that can be used as seeds for further development in later steps.

Step Three: Conventional analysis. One should attempt to suspend the collection of phenomenological and hermeneutic data. The style of language used by the listener/analyst should be literal and direct. One can use signs, graphs, or present the results in narrative form.

 Step Four: Phenomenological description of the sound-in-time.

Since Ferrara does not provide a clear method using phenomenology as a analytical tool, I looked at his analyses in the following chapters to gain a better grasp on a strictly Husserlian phenomenological analytical approach. Language can become more poetic. This section will provide a smooth transition to the language of the next step. The language used in Ferrara’s analysis of Bartok at this step reminds me of that of a radio basketball announcer. His goal is to follow every move of the ball (or in this case sound) but when he can he throws in colorful quips to describe the action so that others envision it. One should suspend all syntactical and referential data during step four to whatever degree is possible. I noticed that Ferrara consistently uses music theory language as in naming the notes, pitch and intervals. He does steer clear from using conventional terms for rhythm and harmony. One can address “temporal units” that may be shown to combine into larger units termed “temporal structures. ” These descriptions should be strictly Husserlian, in that they avoid reference.

Step Five:  Musical Representation found in the meanings of a program or text. In the instance of program music, the analyst provides a report of the accompanying representation. If the work has a text, the analyst should adapt a suitable literary method for the analysis of text. Ingarden’s work is a good starting point.

Step Six: Virtual feeling.

Music can be expressive of feelings such as gaiety, pride, turmoil, struggle, humor, sadness, excitement, anxiety, etc. Using a hermeneutic approach show that music can be “expressive of” feelings but the music is not actually sad. One must not respond to the actual feelings and should demonstrate control over any proclivity to dominate the music by utilizing it for ordinary emotional release.  One must root his referential remarks in the syntax and sound in time. One should use data collected via step 2 and 3 to support and corroborate insights into musical expressiveness. Through rigorous grounding of musical reference in syntax and the sound in time, analysts can achieve these more acceptable levels of empirical adequacy and corroborability.

Step Seven: Referential meaning of the onto-historical world of the composer. Via Heidegger’s definition of art, one must respond to the potential in music to exemplify the onto-historical world of the composer. Just like step six, one must ground speculation into the ontological world of the composer in data collect via syntax and sound in time.

Step Eight:  A return to the open listening process. As in step two, any level of musical significance may be discussed. At this point in the analysis its very possible for the six strata of musical significance to interact in a dynamic polyphonic tapestry. All levels have been segregated for individual analysis, but through this listening, they are reunited.

Step Nine: A performance guide. The effective use of the eclectic method should provide the analyst with knowledge about the piece that could aid a performers interpretive performance.

Step Ten: Meta critique of the entire analysis. The principle focus in this step is the discussion of the impact of the inherent strengths and weakness of the eclectic method on the outcome of the analysis.

SUMMARY OF THE SUMMARY:

 I.       Historical Background

II.      Open Listenings

III.    Syntax

IV.    The Sound-In-Time

V.       Musical and Textual Representation

VI.      Virtual Feeling

VII.    Onto-historical World

VIII.   Open Listenings

IX.       Performance Guide

X.          Meta-Critique

Personal Reaction:

Finally it all comes together! What a eclectic method it is. 180 pages of head scratching and vocabulary expanding  later, we arrive at the method. I really don’t know if all of the philosophy presented was necessary to understand the eclectic method, but I actually really enjoyed the process. I find myself questioning the “isness” of a child’s drawing taped to the door as I type this.

Through Heidegger’s philosophy of art, that drawing is becoming and happening of the truth. A quick eclectic step 7 on “Crayola Marker Drawing on the Door of the 2^nd Floor Computer Lab at 34 w. 4^th Street”: 

It is certainly art because it was crafted and here I am preserving. The computer paper, which it was drawn on, and the water-soluble ink  (in thick primary colors) are the closed earth (materials). Oh but the ontological world it conveys is so beautiful. One can clearly see a young girl maybe six sprawling on the floor during arts and crafts time, markers everywhere. The blissful ignorance she has of the world that awaits her only several years away. The innocence she doesn’t even know she has. Ah, and yes, the inevitable fall from that innocence that is lurking in the future. There is certainly a rift design here. Heidegger would be satisfied. Wait….Now he would be (I just took a picture of the drawing with my phone, which I will subsequently email to myself and post in this very blog, the joys of technology). Now, the truth of historical being of this drawing will preserved by who ever reads this blog.

This is the beauty of knowledge; now isn’t it? My brain would have never navigated those channels of logic before embarking on this quest for the eclectic method. My preconceptions have been shaped to a point where it will be difficult to suspend them. It’s a good thing. 

In his later writing, Heidegger realized that his earlier attempts at deconstruction as well as his philosophical stance in Being and Time were trapped in the western method of observation that he was trying to shed. It became clear to him that after, Being and Time, that his only move was to leap out metaphysics if he wished to move his philosophy out of the Western tradition and into new ground. In order to do this, Heidegger decided to rediscover his roots in early Greek thinking where emphasis was placed on waiting for phenomena to so show themselves as such. Waiting upon demonstrates: 1) freedom to let things show themselves. 2) How one can be of service of things for their own sake. Waiting upon requires a releasement of the will.

In On Origin of the Work of Art, Heidegger contests that the artist creates the art yet making art is what defines him as an artist. Neither can exist without the other. However the third party, art itself, is a higher reality, which make the existence of the art and the artist possible in the first place.

Heideger concludes that the thingly element in art cannot be lumped into any of the other thingly categories he has so far demonstrated (thing as substance, the thing as a sum, and the thing as formed matter). He embarks on a meta-theoretical discussion of what things are in general. He uses shoes as an example. Shoes have a purpose, only when they are worn are they what they are. However, through art we can see the shoes within the framework of their usefulness. A reliable piece of equipment generates no though. Out of context of their normal use, a painting reveals the being of shoes, which then establishes the truth of the shoes. Heidegger’s notion of truth is envisioned as something that occurs in the work, that rises from what would otherwise be hidden (Ferrara 129). The virtual forms of art can be distinguished from the actual things they represent because virtual forms are marked by the happening of truth. An example of the happening of truth is the analyzing of a painting of shoes.

Since art can also be an actual thing itself (i.e a temple) and is not always the representation of the actual thing the previous explanation does not encompass all art. Heidegger posits that there are two essential elements in art: 1) the earth which is crafted by the artist to allow the dynamic character of the material to emerge. 2) the world of the artist. The artists work transforms his world into symbolic form.  Unlike Husserl, Heidegger’s concept of the world encompasses the historical epoch in addition to being the context within which human experience takes place. Heidegger notes, “World is never an object that stands before us and can be seen. World is the ever-nonobjective to which we are subject to as long as the paths of birth and death, blessing and curse keep us transported into Being. Whatever those decisions of our history that relate to our very being are made, are taken up and abandoned by  us, go unrecognized and are rediscovered by new inquiry, there the world worlds.” (Ferrara 132). Therefore art is not a static thing but something that unfolds and emerges in our experience of it (Ferrara 132).  Moreover, since works of art reveal the historical world in which they were created, when the world undergoes changes, so do the art works created within them.

When ordinary earthly material are made into artifacts an ontological world is exemplified by them. The materials transcend their original purpose and can enter the openness of the world. Because the artist is open to being then the work materials have the ontological potential. It is only through a work of art that earthly materials Open. A stone is just a stone, but a stone in a wall of a temple glitters and shimmers and draws you into the ontological world from which it was created.

The ontological world opens the earth on which it rests. Conversely the closed earth protects the world. The earth and the world are two different elements yet comprise the same work of  art. The lack of resolution to the strife between earth and world is  the decisive property of the work of art. Truth happens in the openness but only if there is a possibility of it being hidden. Thus, the openness that is presented in the work of art is in a dialectical relationship with the opposite (Ferrara 138). Truth in art happens because of strife intrinsic the rift design. Ferrara says, “The rift-design is set back into the earth. The earth takes the rift-design back into itself but simultaneously, the rift design “towers into the open.” Without the earth there can be no finished, Gestalt, no design, no outline.” (Ferrara 138). Finally a conclusion is drawn that specifies three functional and fundamental elements “at work” in art: earth (work materials); rift design (syntax); and the world (reference).

Heidegger places just as much importance on the art viewer as he does the artist. Without the preservation (appreciation) of art a work of art cannot Be a work of art. Truth only happens in art when an inspired person allows it to happen. Without taking into account the strife between earth and world, truth does not occur. Art is not a category for a collection of art works. It is the dynamic happening of truth as it occurs in the work of art (Ferrara 139). Heidegger concludes, “This art is: the creative preserving of truth in the work. Art then is becoming and happening of truth.”(Ferrara 139)

Heideger than posits that all art is poetry. Since language allows one to come into openness and experience its being-in-the-world. Poetry, the art of language, makes the ontological projection into Being possible. For Heidegger, poetry is the most “original” of all the arts.

In conclusion, art is the creative preserving of the happening of the truth of historical Being in the art work (Ferrara 141).

Personal Reaction:

WOW. This was a great chapter. I never thought I would get excited about a piece of philosophy in the same way I would a novel, but I honestly can’t wait to see what logical leap is developed next.

I have to admit I wasn’t totally captivated by Heidegger’s Time and Being. I kept waiting to see how it would relate to the eclectic analysis and was rather disappointed when it did not. Now I see where Ferrara was going with the last chapter.  It was a foundation that had to be laid to understand On the Origin of the Work of Art. I understand Heidegger’s approach but I am a little uncertain whether Heidegger’s philosophy of art will be used as the basis for referential analysis or a different field phenomenological analysis. It is obvious that Heidegger’s approach takes reference into account. Well, I sure hope this is all clarified in the coming chapter VII where the eclectic method is discussed.

Martin Heidegger

In Being and time, Heidegger addresses the question, “What is being?” In order to do this he must first examine the nature of human existence. Heidegger uses being to refer to being in the world. Heidegger proposes a character Dasein  that represents mans existence and he alone is always on the way to understand its being. It is through Heidegger’s discussion  of phenomenological method in Being and time, that he pushes in a radically different direction from Husserl. Heidegger states, “the meaning of phenomenological description as a method lies in interpretation…The phenomenology of Daesin is a hermeneutic in the most primordial signification of this word” (Ferrara 105).

Through the interpretation of the Greek roots, phenomenology, to Heiddegger, means letting things show themselves without overpowering them with linguistic categorization. Heidegger asserts that after the time of the pre-Socratic Greeks, Western man moved away from the primordial use of speech as logos. Western man’s conceptual thinking places a concept between the phenomenon and the knower, removing the phenomenon from immediacy (Ferrara 106).  Heidegger believes it was through Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”, that the shift from understanding truth about things in their immediacy moved towards correspondence to a thing represented as an idea or a form.  It is Heidegger’s goal through phenomenology to uncover the hidden meaning of things in their being.

According to Heidegger, Dasein’s being in the world must be understood as a place where Dasein occurs. Dasein possesses “understanding”, which allows the ability to comprehend his potential for being. In Dasein’s world there is equipment that serves. Like Dasein, the equipment is being. Unlike Dasein, the equipment cannot question its “equipmentality”. Heidegger’s hermeneutic model is marked by giving freedom to the phenomenon being studied in order to let it show itself as it is being. Heidegger later states, that truth is freedom. Heidegger notes, “The world of Dasein is a with-world. Being-in is Being-with Others” Man is not separated from the world but is in and with the world.

The Goal for Dasein is to live authentically in which he is transcending the present and anticipating the future. The ability to live authentically comes from one facing the nothingness that is death and understand it as the end of one’s “being there”. The authentic existence is marked by the “having been” (the past) arising from the future which releases from itself, the present. (Ferrara 112). “Fallness” is defined as the lack of anticipation of the future and the forgetfulness of the “have been”. “Fallness can be overcome by transcending the present and looking to the future.

Personal Reaction:

I am actually feeling a little depressed about this chapter. Heidegger’s world of Dasein is compellingly presented to the point where I empathized with him. I feel that I am not living my life authentically. Too often I am not looking towards the future. I feel that very often I may be in a state of  “fallness”. I often do not learn from my mistakes (my have been) and don’t always anticipate the future. Maybe I haven’t been in a state of nothingness yet where death is imminent. Regardless I still have the choice to be authentic or not, regardless of my situation. That is the essence of my “being”, that I always have the power to make choices. It is time to start consistently making the “authentic” choices.

I know this chapter is deeper than life-style and decision-making. My engagement with the text based on my historical preconceptions led to a more personal interpretation. Maybe I will try to engage the text again in a more Husserlian view. I will attempt to suspend my “baggage” and try to engage the text from a more pure point of view.

Although there were (and probably never will be) any firm conclusions about “being” the message on human existence was rather compelling. Heidegger’s move  away from the western notion of examining objects from their concept in favor in engagement of the thing itself reminded of a scene from John Carpenter’s film “Dark Star”. Apparently, it has already been floating around you tube as an example of phenomenology. However, I believe it to be closer linked to Heidegger’s concept of phenomenology than Husserl’s.

Edmund Husserl

Husserl states that the meaning of a thing is controlled by the consciousness that engages it. Meaning can only exist when an object is engaged by the consciousness. Husserl’s goal through phenomenology is to provide uncolored, unbiased and systematic descriptions of the objects of experience without resorting to either of the theoretical positions of realism or idealism (Ferrara 60).

Husserl’s description of internal Time consciousness uses the terms “retention” and “protention” Consciousness creates protends or anticipates that an object will still be the same object. Consciousness retains the immediate past appearance of the object. If a protention is congruous with a retention then the consciousness confirms it is indeed the same object. It is through the coming together of past present and future that illustrate the importance of internal time consciousness

Husserl’s concept of phenomenological reduction posits two discrete stages. The first being transcendental reduction where one must suspend all preconceived views, ideas and assumptions found in the natural attitude and allow the consciousness to examine itself and the world objectively and comprehensively. The second stage, eidetic reduction, can only be performed once one has obtained transcendental reduction. The goal of eidetic reduction is to discover universal knowledge about the structure of those objects. As one suspends the world around the object one can then observe the object part by part through eidetic reduction.

Husserl’s later philosophy examines the ego. He contends that one develops the ego first and then through empathy the ego can account for others. Once the ego can co-exist with “others” the cultural web of the life-world. Each person has his own version of reality, however, we are aware that these are just different viewpoints on the same world. Husserl discusses Galileo’s adaptation of pure geometry to be nothing but an approximation of shapes in life. If geometry isn’t real but there is a method of analysis, then there must be a method to approximate sound, color, and smell. Our immediate perception of things would be replaced by method. Husserl then returns to his original concept “of going back to the things themselves.”

Husserl ultimately fails to prove that a consciousness can overcome its own subjectivity. Even from an ideal point of view, if one were able to observe an object purely, the intrinsic biases of language would make it impossible to communicate the experience. Husserl tries to reach a middle ground between the objectivist (realist) ad idealist positions by undercutting them. He fails because he tried to work out the problems of both positions while remaining grounded in his own form of idealism (Ferrara 80).

Personal Reaction:

First thought. I need to read more philosophy. I’ve only read the required texts, which spoke to me here and there. But certainly, there is some incredible perspective changing material out there. I really enjoy the way the logic flows on top of itself and coagulates to create something totally different than the initial thoughts.

Was Tim Leary Inspired by Husserl's Reduction?

Phenomenological reduction sounded like something out of a Tim Leary lecture without all of the LSD. The concepts behind transcendent reduction have always my goal during performance, but I have never seen it in words before. I always aim to disassociate myself from any preconceived notions I have about my playing, life, or the world around me. I aim to suspend and transcend the world around me. Every so often I am able to achieve this during performance; it is a truly wonderful experience that is incredibly motivating. In these fleeting moments, I do not feel like I am playing the instrument, but that something is playing me. I can step back, observe, and purely enjoy the sound. I have spoken to Kenny Werner about this feeling many times. It was his book, Effortless Mastery, which showed me the practical path to take in order to increase my ability to transcend my playing.
Now, if we could figure out how to enter a similar meditative state while listening to music then maybe it could be possible to approach Husserl’s reduction. Of course even if we were able somewhat suspend all of our preconceptions, that experience would only exist for the one who experienced it. As Ferrara states, the intrinsic biases in language would make it impossible to communicate our observations in a pure sense.

At the bottom is a little video of Kenny Werner doing one of his clinics. He is essentially a modern day music philosopher who focuses on inspiration, practice technique, and musical freedom. In this video he improvises a short lecture revolving around his philosophical tenants. If you do ever have the opportunity to hear him speak/play live. Do it. It may very well change your life. ENJOY

Traditional methods of musical analysis, such as Schenkerian analysis or Roman Numerals, define their own analytical tasks based on the intrinsic strengths and weaknesses of each method. If methods of analysis are evaluated by how many levels of musical significance (sound, form, reference) they address. Based on this evaluation, tradition methods alone are not adequate. It is possible to develop an eclectic method that is an all encompassing system of analysis. One that allows independent methods of analysis to operate independently but still contribute to the overall understanding of a particular work.

According to Hans-George Gadamer, an analyst always approaches a musical work with a pre-understanding. It is impossible to engage in an analysis with a completely empty conscious. Without these “prejudices” experiences would be incoherent. The time and place in which an analysis occurs will shape the result of the analysis. The original meaning of the work is synthesized with what it can mean now, in the analyst’s present (Ferrara 35). An analyst may find musical significance that differs from what a composer intended even if they are from the same place and moment of history.

The attitude of the analyst effects whether the piece will be treated as an art object, utilitarian object, or an aesthetic object. Any object can be treated aesthetically but an object treated aesthetically is not necessarily an art object. An art object requires that someone worked on creating it.

Art object or Aesthetic object - You control it.

As with scientific study, the ability of control an analyst can exert over all elements within the study often effects the worth of an analysis. “All systems of musical analysis exert some level of control based on the nature of methodological tasks that are prescribed by the method.” (Ferrara 39). The controlled nature of a formal analysis makes it a fundamental step to move towards the eclectic method. However, philosophical inquiries into sound and reference based in phenomenology will be more responsive to areas of musical significance where syntax falls short.

Phenomenology can roughly be divided into two fields. There is Husserl’s descriptive phenomenology (phenomenological) and Heideggers interpretive phenomenology (hermeneutic). Husserlian Phenomenology is largely concerned with elements of musical sound and time and mostly disregards referential traits. Husserlian phenomenology is one of three areas of focus in the eclectic method.

A conventional system of analysis allows the analyst to be in control. A phenomenological study of sound built on syntax will increase understanding. Sound and syntax directly impact upon referential meaning in music. Conversely, a musical reference will impact the meaning of sound and syntax. What referential analysis lacks in objectivity it makes up in passion, insight, and vision.

In conventional analysis the method becomes a machine that separates the analyst from the work. A prescribed sign system in conventional analysis allows the analyst to control his method (control the machine), which in turn implies that the method is subjective. “The music under study is not allowed to show itself freely. Under the weights of this obscured subjectivism, the known is diminished the parameters of the shadow of a hidden but ever-present knower.” (Ferrara 45).
While conventional analysis is a dissection of music with tools, phenomenological and hermeneutic analyses of music use more of a metaphorical language and rely strongly on prose statements. It can be characterized as having a conversation with the musical work.

The dichotomy of a subject and an object cannot be dissolved. A subject who engages his object without the will to dominate it will give the object the freedom to show itself. Attainable objectivity exists only when the analytical methods support the freedom of the music to show all of its layers (sound, form, and reference).

Personal Reaction:

Things are finally starting to make sense here. I am so glad that Ferrara indulged the analogy of the doctor’s office. Prior to that passage, I felt like understanding the individual/combinative nature of the three methods were just out of reach. Reading from the x-ray to the physical exam was certainly a eureka moment for me. Its very scary the way that Ferrara throws down a 1000 piece puzzle at the beginning of this book. I thought I’d never put it together. Finally we at least have all the corners and edges. Now time to fill in the rest.

Big surprising turn in logic here. Conventional analysis is not objective. It’s Subjective?! It took me so long to understand why and how we arrived there. I read that page so many times. What helped me understand it was the concept of the conventional method being a machine that the analyst operated. Everyone learns how to operate the machine from the instruction manual, but eventually finds their own way of doing things. Therefore, everyone would ultimately operate that machine slightly differently. Furthermore, since we are all human we do not do anything perfectly. So, no one would operate that machine to its optimal capacity. Since there is no obtainable right way to use the machine and by nature everyone’s use is different then the result of using that machine must be subjective. That may have been more confusing in type than in my head, but well, it helped me figure it out.

To close, I started thinking of an analogy for the machine mentioned above. I decided a telescope could serve well for this discussion. You can follow all the directions to properly use a telescope and pointed it at the right place at the right time, to the best of your abilities. It is still uncertain whether or not you will be gazing upon the star you intended. Such small adjustments have such huge results. If ten people followed you, chances are you would all be looking at a different place in the sky. Even the most skilled astronomer could not obtain complete exact precision. Such it is with conventional analysis, our telescope pointed at galaxies rich with harmony and nebula’s pulsating in an alternating 2 measures of 13/8 and 1 measure of 7/4. I leave you with some awesome images from the Hubble space telescope. Excuse the obligatory new age music. You might want to turn the sound off. ENJOY!

At the beginning of this chapter Ferrara poses the question, “What does music mean?” Historically, attempts have been made to answer that question through two approaches: 1) Through conventional analysis of musical syntax (i.e. harmony, melody, rhythm, etc) 2) through a referential meaning. Ah, but what is referential meaning? Ferrara introduces us to Leonard B Meyer’s Theory of emotion and meaning as a jumping point for our look into referential meaning. Unlike the strict Formalist approach of Edward Hanslick, Meyer’s approach came from an extended formalist position. Meyer clarifies that during his time there we two broad approaches to musical analysis: formalism and absolute expressionism. Formalists state that musical meaning is intellectual. Any feelings felt by the listener are not relevant. Absolute expressionists believe that musical syntax can arouse emotional responses from the listener as a result of intrinsic processes. Meyer attempts to generate a theory of musical analysis that can satisfy both parties. He aims to explain how formal elements in music cause intellectual responses yet those same formal elements can cause emotional responses.

Through John Dewey’s theory of emotion, “ Emotion is aroused when a tendency to respond is arrested or inhibited”, Meyer makes a compelling connection to musical analysis. “The inhibition that music will move from one passage to another causes tension in the listener. This conception of tension (and release) is central to Meyer’s theory of emotion in music” (Ferrara 5). In a simple diatonic song the song flows along fairly with our expectations, according to Meyer this kind of music would have a neutral meaning. However, our expectations can be shattered by hearing intense tonal delay of a Wagner opera; according to Meyer this piece would contain poignant. Via Meyer there is a point of no return with this concept. If a piece of music is completely dissonant and without underlying structure it then loses its ability to have meaning. Without establishing norms there can be no expectation. This is what separates music from noise.

Meyer comments on the interaction of musical fragments, “It is pointless to ask what the intrinsic meaning of a single tone or a series of tones is…That is, one musical event has meaning (be it a tone, a phrase, or a whole section) because it points to and makes us expect another musical event.” Meyer’s link between syntax and emotion explains why a trained musician can both intellectualize the music through its form and also experience emotions through expectation and denial of expectation.

That was a rather long-winded summary of Meyer. Now back to the point. What is referential meaning? Meaning is referential when a symbol has its own meaning but acquaintance with the symbol causes one to think of something else. For example, independent letters (c, a, and t) have little referential meaning but when combined to make a word (cat) the referential meaning (a domesticated feline) of that word as a symbol is clear. One can understand the reference of the word “cat” because words as symbols convey a concept or an image. Since the concept conveyed by a symbol is purely based off each individual’s personal experience with that symbol, it is difficult to make referential analysis objective. This lack of objectivity and verifiability makes the application of referential analysis to music very difficult from a traditional point of view. The problems with referential analysis are clear. Insight can be offered through the works of Susanne Langer.

Langer states that music, like any other language, is a system of symbols. Unlike other languages, music cannot be broken down into rationality and system to achieve a full evaluation. Langer asserts that there are two different modes of language: 1) “genuine” language (English) 2) non-discursive systems (music, poetry). In English words have a fixed meaning, however, elements of music (non-discursive) can have many functions depending on how they are utilized in the music. Translation is possible in discursive languages (English to Spanish). One cannot translate music into a painting with the same precision as one can with a discursive language. Ordinary language projects its meaning of the thing it represents. Ferrara explains how music does this as well, “Music captures the form or concept of human life and feeling; it is the symbolic transformation of human feeling. Musical form resembles the logic of the dynamics of human experience…Music and life are related because they share formal properties.” (Ferrara 14). Music is therefore analogous to life. The music does not convey actual feelings; they are only the composers’ knowledge of the idea of the feeling.

Langer continues to prove the projecting power of music by relating rhythm to life. The cardinal characteristic of actual life is rhythm, which manifests itself as the patterns of the dialectic of “permanence and change” (Ferrara 15). Langer also specifies that music is purely an analogue for life, which creates an altogether new experience. One can experience and understand human feelings that are related to but not part of actual life.

Langer asserts that musical meaning is referential because its properties are analogous to actual life. Additionally, music is more accurate at representing human feelings than ordinary language. The morphology of feeling that music is able to capture separates it from discursive language.

Personal Reaction:

I will aim to keep this brief as I went totally overboard on the summary. Which leads me to my reaction. It is really hard, if not impossible, to condense these concepts and eloquent flows of logic into 1 page double-spaced. That being said, I currently take back everything I said about Ferrara regarding the introduction. Yes, the tone very academic, but rightfully so, the man is a genius. I found myself scribbling all over the margins of the book with ideas and reactions to the concepts. Several times I was in such awe of the ideas in a paragraph that my notes only read, “WOW!” The biggest wow moment for me in this chapter was when he moved to explain Langers’ concept of music’s power to be an analogue for reality. One of the things that drew me to music so strongly was rhythm. This is probably why I ended up a bass player. I have always felt a sense of rhythm throughout my life. Each day is the beginning of a new movement. I get to improvise my daily composition within general guidelines. Just like I improvise over a jazz tune. Each daily composition has a cadence where I do my nighttime predominant rituals and resolve to my bed. This is what I am trying to express through my music; I am trying to express my reality in a way that listeners can relate and say, “Yeah, I know what that feels like. I have been there.” You can use all the words in the world to describe how you feel, as Langer explains, music is a much stronger analogue for feelings than any ordinary language could ever be. Its funny, it feels as if I am talking about music the way that Star Wars treated The Force. But, like The Force, music surrounds us, and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together. Or at least that’s what Obi-Wan Kenobi said.

I will leave you with one of my favorite pieces of music emulating life. Here is a video of Pulitzer prize winning composer Steve Reich’s composition, “City Life”. Due to video length restrictions this video is only 10 minutes of the nearly hour-long piece. In this section, he integrates audio from everyday life in conjunction a live orchestra to create a very compelling analogue of the tension and uncertainty one can feel in the city walking home alone at night. Specifically, walking along a river. Enjoy