Gaia: The Integral Pod - Chapel Perspicacious - Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://DouglasRWallack.gaia.com — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:51:19 GMT

Great discussion Guys,

Bruce/Kerry,
Thanks for the link to the Multiplex thread. (I posted this there also)

Just wanted to point to a very interesting book/talking book I recently read called "This is your Brain on Music" by Daniel Levitan. He's a musician, turned recording engineer/producer, turned neuroscientist.

It's a fascinating read about evolution, music, brain/mind states, etc.

Dan,
Thanks for the Shakti link...love them.

Cheers,

Doug

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:35:27 GMT

A related conversation on Integral Music is underway at the Multiplex. Thanks to Kerry for the heads up...

Best wishes,

B.

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://drs1958.gaia.com — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:54:54 GMT

John McLaughlin Shakti ~ East meets West

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrrBtAahALU

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:08:20 GMT

Modern nondual teacher and musicologist, Jean Klein, articulated a theory of sacred art that is worth considering -- at least as one element -- in an Integral theory of sacred music.

Here's an excerpt from one of his writings, A Conversation on Art:

"Inquirer: For some time now, I've been waiting to ask you both what you think art really is. Is it an amorphous collection of human expression or can we say more precisely what it is?

Philosopher: Ultimately all objects are pointers to truth and beauty but there are objects which, par excellence, bring us back to truth and beauty. These are works of art.

Inquirer: Does all that we generally call art have this power?

Philosopher: Art which strikes the senses and brings us beyond them to a timeless state could be called sacred art. Decorative or experimental art leaves us in the senses and in this sense can be called secular. Those great ‘sacred' works which have the symbolic power to eject us into the impersonal realm are quite rare.

Inquirer: Let us talk about these works of art. What do you mean by saying they strike the senses and take us beyond them?

Artist: Is it not that aesthetic joy I sometimes feel when I am so taken by a work of art that it is no longer present as an object? There is only a feeling of wonder, delight and expansiveness where I forget space and time and am no longer in my senses, as you say.

Philosopher: Exactly. In aesthetic joy we come back to ourselves, close to our primal being. The delight of great works of art is that they have the power to point us to what we are, to that nakedness and playfulness of simply being, free from thought and self-consciousness.

Artist: Yes! When reading certain poems or listening to Beethoven's Quartets or when standing before certain sculptures by Henry Moore I am no longer in the everyday world but in a feeling of oneness and tranquility. It is a feeling of being free from boundaries, from the routine of daily life and what I habitually call ‘myself.' It is akin to those moments of wonderment I vaguely remember as a child.

Inquirer: Do you remain in this feeling or do you come back to the object?

Artist: I go back to the details to see what it is that delights me. The coming back is spontaneous, it is the desire to make the work my own. I explore the composition, recreate it point by point until there is nothing left to observe and then again I let myself be taken by joy without the presence of the object.

Philosopher: Yes. One returns involuntarily to explore a work because the senses are not yet completely integrated into the whole, the feeling of oneness, and are full of desire to be so. When we explore the details of a work point by point, the global feeling remains as the background and each detail is spontaneously referred to it. Attention thus remains expanded and in it the senses lose their objectivity and unfold. This time, however, they are integrated consciously into our awareness, so there is no immediate desire to come back to the details, the object part. That would be a reduction of the feeling of oneness. It is the marriage in gratitude of admiration and appreciation.

Inquirer: But eventually we long to hear or see the event again. Why is that?

Artist: When the senses are so exalted and transformed it is normal to want to be delighted again. We are creatures of the senses and aesthetic joy is the sensation of the gods. Great works of art are a source of inexhaustible delight.

Inquirer: Could we say that aesthetic fullness is fuller after the integration of the senses?

Philosopher: Fullness is then more grounded in the wholeness of life. Without the integration of all the elements, the feeling of oneness remains nebulous like a mystical experience. It is important that body and mind are integrated, that objective knowledge is not denied but incorporated in the wholeness of knowing as being.

Inquirer: You said that the object is full of desire to be integrated into oneness. What attracts the object?

Philosopher: We could say, like Plotinus, that it is an emanation of God and a return to God. Or we could simply say that the object is drawn towards its home ground, wholeness. In multidimensional attention where the senses are released the object loses its rigidity and unfolds in you, an unfolding that your mental interference hinders. At a certain point the last residue of objectivity is suddenly absorbed in the magnet of global awareness.

Inquirer: What exactly is it about these works of art that gives them the power to eject us into timelessness?

Artist: It is the perfect composition and balance of colour, form and sound which reveal the fundamental elements, light, space, and silence. In short, the work must be harmonious.

Inquirer: Could we say that the harmony of the work echoes in us reminding us of our own harmony and this remembrance is the feeling of wonder you spoke of? Wholeness is thus common to the work and the observer; otherwise, how could we be reminded of it so strongly?

Philosopher: Yes, indeed. The fundamental elements are common to all. Art is a reflection of the harmony we are in common with all things. It contains globality within itself. Nature is harmonious and the human being is part of nature.

Inquirer: When we use the world ‘harmony' what do we mean exactly? It cannot be anything to do with symmetry since nature is anything but symmetrical.

Philosopher: Harmony is the whole wherein everything exists without conflict. It is the same as beauty. Our real nature and the real nature of the work of art are one and the same. The work of art is a manifestation, a hint if you like, of this oneness.

Inquirer: So when we call a work beautiful it is because it reminds us of, and points to our own beauty. Is beauty then subjective in some sense?

Philosopher: Not at all. In wholeness there is no subject or object, so how can there be subjectivity or objectivity? Beauty is one though its expressions are many. In beauty there is no object so how can there be a subject?

Inquirer: Though beauty is not relative or comparable because it does not lie in the so-called object, we could still say that certain works inspire beauty by their own beauty. But when we look at the variety of things that inspire our wholeness, our godliness, it is difficult to see any thread running through them all. Our artist said that it was the composition which revealed the fundamental elements but this does not really help me. What more precisely about certain objects gives them their symbolic power to point beyond the senses to our real nature?

Artist: The composition is such that it sets free beauty and harmony. It does not emphasize the objective or material part so that you are not held in the anecdotal but are taken straightaway by the fundamental elements to which the composition points. Great works by different techniques call you to the spatial, timeless dimension. Volume is conceived in such a way that it liberates space, colour liberates light, sound liberates silence..." (Jean Klein, 1988, Who Am I?)

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:40:54 GMT

fascinating, K! Thank you so much,

Nicole

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://jikishin.gaia.com — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:35:57 GMT

Yes, thanks for that link Nicole!

Since reading the interview I'm rethinking some of what I began to respond with to Mr. Teacup's post of last week. It's beautiful to me how that the more I look the more I see.

I'd begun to write on possible implications of a study I'd done years ago (btw, thank you for bringing that link to Genevieve's recording here). The study was a sequential listening to music, Renaisance through current, in chronological order, with attention to where throughout my body the particular piece resonated. I was calling Tellemon and Percel cerebral centered and recalling that I detected a recovery of thorasic resonance (heart, solar plexis) in J.S.Bach and continued in some instances in Motzart, and certainly through the Romantics.

I was tracing a developmental re-embodiment, positing an earlier 'ascent from' the aesthetics of the lower chakras and a gradual reclaimation of their value, in mainstream music, over the last several centuries.

In the interview Wilber seems to place Bach at "sort of sixth or seventh chakra". ( Rethink #1.)

Then I found myself in closer agreement with Gebser - "...to communicate this atemporal... in a temporal way..." - in regards to what I once called 'chronocentric expression' , than with Ken's further granularities of discernment. ( Rethink #2.)

I'm loving the way this thread, you folks, are helping me to clarify things I've begun to care about again.

My silence on this thread over this last while was mostly due to not finding supporting documentation for a few 'What Ifs' that have caught me, and that I'm following.

Be well all,

K

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:23:25 GMT

Wow, thank you for pointing this out, Nicole. That's really a great resource to refer to as we continue this conversation. I will read the interview more carefully a second time once I'm off work, but just skimming it, I would say that Wilber didn't really say anything that I wouldn't have been able to piece together myself based on his discussions of related topics, but it's nice to have it all in one spot. I'll comment further in a later post.

Best wishes,

Balder

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:48:17 GMT

have you read the interview between michael garfield and ken wilber on integral and music? See here.

i found it very interesting, and would like to know what others more familiar with wilber think...

thanks!

nicole

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:45:21 GMT

Genevieve Guimond plays solo Bach on cello

Ok, ok, I admit I am not one little bit objective about this 17-year old girl, who happens to be the daughter of my closest friend, but listen to her for yourself, the poise, the mastery and tell me if she isn't really one of the most talented young cellists to emerge on the scene today... She doesn't just have technical excellence but plays with soul and beauty. She has had very good teachers - for most of the past years, Yuli Turovsky of the renowned i musici de montreal.

Peace,

Nicole

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://singerseeker.gaia.com — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:30:46 GMT

You tube's most viewed guitarsolo

An ingenious meld of the famous Pachelbel Canon and electric guitar riffing...

Gotta love it as a lover of classical music and guitar mastery,

nicole

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://DouglasRWallack.gaia.com — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 04:27:26 GMT

I saw Andreas & Co at the University of Arizona in mid 1980's...
Just love this music.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69O-xB_tnCw

And this from Shadowfax http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7d6V7FJajWE

Cheers,
Doug

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://mrteacup.gaia.com — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:28:56 GMT

Here's an analogy: you know how there's kind of a cultural convention to ask someone in reference to their husband or wife: "What do you love about them?" and in reply, to recite certain qualities or characteristics of the person. This implies that the qualities of the other person cause love to be aroused in us, but actually, its the other way around. It is the love that makes the other person's qualities seem wonderful, because without love, you wouldn't perceive anything good about the person, no matter how unique or special their personal characteristics were.

So I argue the same is true with sacred music. It's tempting to analyze the structure of music to derive some attribute that renders it "sacred", and then to find music that has more of it than others, but this is a reductionist exercise. Just as love can't be reduced to personal qualities, the experience of sacredness in music can't be reduced to its formal components, i.e. the UR quadrant features. For me, the formal, structural or mathematical features of music are less relevant than the immediate, enacted and embodied experience of it, but at the same time, I can see how it could be otherwise for other people.

In a way, it's the difference between the 1st and 3rd faces of God, but the difficulty for me is that 3rd face practices have a tendency to be quite naive and partial. This brings to mind a quote from Theodor Adorno: "A successful work of art is not one which resolves contradictions in a spurious harmony, but one which expresses the idea of harmony negatively by embodying the contradictions, pure and uncompromised, in its innermost structure." There's a sort of naive formalism that embraces symmetry without ever realizing that symmetry is deeply engaged with asymmetry, if only in the negative space it creates. I suggest that the possibility of a shadow element is very strong here, just like codified morality introduces a massive black canvas on which to project the Other. Behind the order, structure and harmony is a dogmatic rejection of disorder, chaos and dissonance, and is ultimately an Amber artifact. On the other hand, the dominant mode in the culture is 1st face perspective, but also naive and infected with narcissism and egoism. And for the sake of completeness, there's music as a 2nd face practice, which in its naive form, only seeks to pleasantly entertain or soothe or superficially connect.

There's a book called The Mysticism of Sound and Music by a Sufi mystic, that was brought to my attention because it inspired one of my favorite artists, Deep Chord. It's on my reading list, but I have concerns that it's coming from Amber, and Deepchord were reading it through a Green lens -- the old Green-Amber axis, where Green looks cross-culturally at Amber features and romantically re-interprets them stripped of their dogmatic and oppressive features.

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://brucealderman.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:11:21 GMT

Yes, thank you for the introduction to Sigur ros. They have an interesting sound and their videos are quite arresting. I will look into them further.

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://onesight.gaia.com — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:02:57 GMT

Yeah, it is good to remind someone of that indeed. I don't know if you have heard of Sigur ros (but i do think that they are producing integral music (or at least are cognitively integral).

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://jikishin.gaia.com — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:16:10 GMT

Hey Brent,

Reading your post I was reminded that the flow states that musicians can, and often do, achieve has likely been occuring at any stage of consciousness for millenia.

In fact, I would credit the intersubjective grooves of alot of the usual intensively social holons (like bands, crews, and teams) with the acceleration of our collective development.

I think that an integral music is going to have the Stage going for it, as well as the group samadhi thing of States.

Maybe that is obvious but I like to keep that in mind while scanning for exemplars.

K

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://onesight.gaia.com — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 09:35:23 GMT

Great topic Balder. You may have come across Sigur ros and one might veer away from calling this sacred music (I Think it is (to at least a degree that is uncommon in most of the more popular bands out there) and integral at that). Why sacred- what i can ascertain is that these guys get into somewhat profound altered states when preforming. (The drummer from the band Orri: "There is this kind of mode we all get into. It's really quite a nice feeling." and Jonsi the vocalist: "On good days when theres good sound and everything is feeling right. You just kind of float and its just like the best feeling ever to sing for people and it's just like you don't even know your singing its just totally empty and your just kind of floating there." (From the Hemia DVD) Why integral there is a quality of experimentation and merging of what seems to be varied genres into a sound that is there own (the many available musical sounds into a unified personal sound that is both very autonomous and collective). Moreover, referring back to classical music. Although these guys would probably be labeled prog . rock there are classical builds to there songs.

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://jikishin.gaia.com — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:52:18 GMT

Thanks Sandra,

...for the prompt. I reached David and in his reply he acknowledges your friendship, of course. In my email to him I linked to this thread.

Your instigation is appreciated.

K

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://sandrajensen.gaia.com — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:57:24 GMT

Seeing that hang drum clip I begin vicariously playing it

ditto and I'm not even a musician! And I want a Cymascope...

I have not experienced this, but I know that David Hykes has performed in public using some way to make the soundwaves visible, and that he was continually researching and developing his own methods to do this. He was originally an experimental filmmaker. -- Kerry, I'm sure he'd be interested in connecting with you.

Sandra

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://jikishin.gaia.com — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:46:31 GMT

excellent! Bruce,

Seeing that hang drum clip I begin vicariously playing it, flashing on a tabla lesson, and resizing it mentally, extrapolating possibilities...

A few years ago I imagined (and wrote about for a few months) a membrane with a speaker beneath it, foot and knee controls for amplitude, and speaker movement...

and this was for a visual art.

The membrane would also be a shallow pan holding a slow drying clear acrylic into which various materials, including wet acrylic paints and any manner of pigments in any state... to basically paint with sound. The mobility of the speaker (with its center magnet) could also manipulate metal dusts... meanwhile, prior to whatever point in drying, the materials would be maniplulated in several ways from above...

About a year later I met the British accoustic engineer John Reid when he unveiled his invention, the Cymascope, which was basically a membrane with a speaker beneath it.

I was amazed at the similarities and eventually showed he and his assistant my notes.

As it turns out Reid's pattent doesn't impead my idea, nor mine infringe on his. ( s'more to the story, another time) It's just another one of those way back burner things.

K

Re: Integral Frontiers of Sacred Music

http://eugene.gaia.com — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:22:32 GMT

Cool drum! I wonder how long it would take a non-musician like myself to learn how to play.