Explorations in Adorno and Musical Modernism

305 Pages·2017·17.08 MB·English

The ‘Speculative Ear’:
Explorations in Adorno and Musical Modernism

Sophie Boyd-Hurrell

ORCiD 0000-0002-0984-0132

Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
June 2017
Melbourne Conservatorium of Music
The University of Melbourne
Abstract
Theodor W. Adorno continues to cut a controversial figure through the discipline of
musicology. Against the substantial discourse that has built up around ‘what’s wrong
with Adorno’ (in which his thinking tends to be presented as rigid and ossified,
inadequate to the demands and complexities of contemporary music scholarship), this
thesis presents a ‘speculative’ account of Adorno’s music criticism and philosophy. By
both using Adorno’s aesthetic theory in speculative ways, and highlighting the
speculative, open-ended qualities within his thinking, this thesis argues for the
continued relevance of Adorno’s work for musicology.
The thesis’ early chapters focus on musicology’s ‘Modernist problem.’ These chapters
respond critically to the musicological reception of Adorno’s understanding of
structural listening and aesthetic autonomy, and consider the place of Modernist music
and aesthetics within musicological discourse more generally. Though structural
listening and aesthetic autonomy have been widely debated within the literature, many
of the nuances of Adorno’s concepts have arguably been lost. I respond to the critiques
advanced by thinkers such as Rose Rosengard Subotnik, Susan McClary, Richard
Taruskin and others, arguing that Adorno has been straw-manned, and unfairly tarred
with a formalist brush.
The thesis’ central theoretical concerns are laid down in the middle chapters. ‘Purely
Instrumental’ considers Adorno’s formulation of the dialectic of autonomy and
mediation. Noting Adorno’s inheritance of, and departures from, the aesthetics of Kant
and Hegel, and by tracing the particular historical developments that surrounded the
emergence of the idea of absolute music, the chapter argues that Adorno’s formulation
of aesthetic autonomy proves an essential grounding for the modern (and especially
Modernist) understanding of the work of art. Two companion ‘Killing Time’ chapters
consider the place of time and temporality in Adorno’s aesthetics. Adorno’s reception
of the ideas of Kant, Walter Benjamin and Henri Bergson are explored, and Adorno’s
prohibition against musical repetition is considered in light of his understanding of the
mimetic faculty (arguing that Adorno’s demand for musical non-repetition operates in
tension with his understanding of mimesis). Furthermore, the ‘Killing Time’ chapters
argue that a coherent critique of musical temporality underpins all of Adorno’s music
criticism, with time operating as an important (and under-explored) unifying motif
ii
through which his most negative musical assessments unfold. ‘Adornian Mode’
considers the place of ugliness, dissonance and pleasure in Adornian aesthetics. The
chapter argues that Adorno’s concept of (Modernist) ugliness stages a radical reversal
of traditional aesthetics, whilst preserving the Kantian desire for universal assent. For
Adorno the universalising promise of beauty and harmony have been revealed as states
of domination, and he proposes that it is through dissonance that the only remaining
domain of universal human agreement finds expression: suffering.
The final chapters illustrate the tangible uses of Adorno’s aesthetics for music analysis
and interpretation. These chapters show the flexibility and applicability of Adorno’s
aesthetic categories, and offer a riposte to that pervasive criticism that Adorno failed to
‘prove’ his aesthetic theories via concrete analysis. First, the special place of Arnold
Schoenberg’s Erwartung (1909) in Adorno’s work is considered, and the earlier
argument for a reappraisal of structural listening is revisited. Second, Milton Babbitt’s
Philomel (1964) is considered in light of the theoretical exploration of ugliness and
dissonance, and the complex question of the political significance of the depiction of
suffering and violence in art is examined. Finally, the possibility for using Adorno’s
aesthetics for the interpretation of Postmodernist, non-score based works in explored
through via the analysis of Eliane Radigue’s Transamorem/Transomortem (1973).
Time, repetition and the role of the mimetic exchange are considered with reference to
the work, demonstrating the enduring relevance of Adorno’s aesthetics.

iii

For my parents.

My mother Suzanne, and in memory of my father Mike.
The scientist and storyteller.

v
Preface

Sections of this thesis have previously been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Boyd-Hurrell, Sophie. “‘The Mirage of Eternity’: Adorno’s Critique of Wagnerian
Temporality.” Context: Journal of Music Research 39 (2014): 37-45.
vi
Acknowledgements

First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Linda Kouvaras for her advice
and encouragement. Linda has been an academic inspiration and a wonderful support.
Our walking supervisions were an absolute favorite; perhaps, unshackled from this
PhD, I shall now be able to keep up! You have my greatest appreciation.
To Michael Christoforidis and Elizabeth Kertesz for allowing me the freedom to teach
from the heart (as well the head), agreeing to disagree on all matters Adorno, and
introducing me to the wonders of Sicilian biscuits.
To Kerry Murphy, and all in musicology at the Melbourne Conservatorium of Music,
who have provided such a rich and stimulating environment.
To my dear friends and fellow travelers on the doctoral journey Ellen Smith, Anna
Varghese and Danielle Williamson. For your intellectual and emotional nourishment,
and enduring friendships, my heartfelt thanks.
To Maggie McCormick and Martin Brennan for being my ‘sparents.’ To Skruff, for
holding the family fort during the final push towards completion. To Christine and
Terry, Dan and Anca, Stephen, Simone, Clare, and the many friends who have gone
above and beyond. Without each of your support, I would not have completed.
Finally, to my partner Rob and our son Milo, my loves. Oh the places we’ve seen! Life
imitates art indeed.

vii
Table of Contents

Chapter 1
Thesis Introduction
1.0 Research Problems…………………………………………………………..…7
1.1 Method………………………………………………………………………..….8
1.3 Structure………………………………………………………………………..11

Chapter 2
On the Modernist Problem: Structural Listening
2.0 Introduction……………………………………….……………………………15
2.1 Adorno and Structural Listening………………………………………………17
2.1.i A Note on Method……………………………………………………….18
2.1.ii ‘Types of Musical Conduct’………………………………………….…20
2.1.iii The Faithful Répétiteur....................................................................24
2.2 Subotnik’s Deconstruction of Structural Listening………………………….27
2.2i The Cultural and Historical Particularity of Structural Listening………….28
2.2.ii Elitism, Reason, Universality……………………………….………….30
2.2.iii Purity and Autonomy………………………………………………..…32
2.3 Discussion: Structural Listening ……………………………...………………34

1
Chapter 3
On the Modernist Problem: Aesthetic Autonomy
3.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………….…….36
3.1 McClary on Autonomy………………………………………………………....37
3.1.i Autonomy and Authorial Intent………………………………………….39
3.1.ii Radicalism or Relocation?...............................................................41
3.2 Taruskin Against Adorno…………………………………………………...…45
3.3 Discussion – McClary and Taruskin…………………………………………46
3.4 The Institutionalisation of Radicalism
3.4.i Born, Boulez and IRCAM……………………………………………….46
3.4.ii Bürger’s Theory of the Avant-Garde……………………………………48
3.5 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...50

Chapter 4
Purely Instrumental: Autonomy and Mediation in Adorno’s Aesthetic
Theory
4.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..…52
4.1 Music as a ‘Special Case’: an Historical Perspective……………………….53
4.2 Modernism and Autonomy…………………………………………………….56
4.3 Theory of the Artwork
4.3.i Monad………………………………………………………..…………59
4.3.ii On Art’s ‘Double Character’: Autonomy and Commodity…………..…..61
4.3.iii Truth Content…………………………………………………………..64
2
4.3.iv Form and Material………………………………………..…………………67
4.4 Kant and Judgement (for Adorno)………………………………..…………..69
4.5 Hegel, Mediation and Immediacy (for Adorno)………………………………73
4.6 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...77

Chapter 5
Killing Time I: Key Influences and Concepts
5.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………..79
5.1 Kant on Time and Space………………………………………………………81
5.2 Bergson and Duration…………………………………………………………84
5.3 Benjamin and the Vulnerability of the Past……………………………….…86
5.4 Shudder……………..…………………….……………………………………90
5.5 Mimesis……………..……………………………………………..……………91
5.6 Repetition……..……………..…………………………………………………99
5.7 Conclusion……………..………..……………………………………………104

Chapter 6
Killing Time II: Time and Temporality in Adorno’s Music Criticism
6.0
Introduction……………..…………………………………………………………106
6.1 “On Jazz” and Popular Forms………………………………………………108
6.1.i Contextualising “On Jazz” ……………………………………….……109
6.1.ii Jazz, Time, Repetition………………………………………...………114
3