I'm on the road this weekend to record three new compositions in Minneapolis. I am extremely excited to work with Adam Maas (sax on my Spiral Suite) and Kale Olson-Reed (violin on Music for Unforgivable Thing).
Two of the pieces will be used for Hannah's upcoming short film, called Bliss Followed. One is a duet for violin and mbira. The second is a mellow jazzy piece for violin, sax, and acoustic guitar. The third piece, a Canon for Violin and Sax, is for my next record, I Am Sound, and there is a pretty good dose of dissonance.
I have a somewhat uneasy feeling with the use of dissonance (much like writing, it is easy to do badly yet appear 'intellectual'). With my Canon, I am using an old (yet powerful) western music architectural model that brings forth dissonance as a natural byproduct of two lines interweaving. I use a pretty exotic mode throughout. I can't wait for you to hear it.
Of course, many thanks to Andrew Carlson for use of his Dogtown Studios the weekend.
I will share all of this next week on Momentary I, at least in excerpt form. Wish me luck, and may the Muse spark a right-brained synapse explosion of your deepest Witnessed Light.
Suzi Gablik (author of hugely read The Reenchantment of Art) recently authored a new final chapter to the 2nd edition of her also widely-read Has Modernism Failed?, called "Transdisciplinarity: Integralism and the New Ethics". She writes that, "Referring to the earlier cultural movements of traditionalism and modernism, [Ken] Wilber suggests that integralism is the next big developmental step. 'Integral' conveys a sense of responsibility to humankind as a whole and to all living beings." The chapter doesn't examine integral much further, but at least we can say that she is integrally aware; that is, aware of integral.
Alongside her mention (and I believe embrace) of integral (for her, a "lens" that allows the "separate truths" of aesthetics and ethics to "mutually enrich each other"), she then cites the book, Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity, by Basarab Nicolescu, a theoretical physicist. According to Gablik, he argues that "reality is not something that exists only on one level. Rather than the self-sufficiency of each discipline unto itself, Nicolescu advocates a transdisciplinary approach that can deal with the dynamics of several levels of reality at once. He is careful to distinguish transdisciplinarity from multidisciplinarity (a way of widening the frame of a particular discipline) and interdisciplinarity (transferring methods from one discipline to another)."
In the cases of both integralism and transdisciplinarity, Gablik writes, particular disciplines of human endeavor are "traversed." Furthermore, the "dynamics of several levels of different and even mutually exclusive realities (ceramic arts, say, and hunger; aesthetics and ethics) at once." Thus with Gablik's new chapter to her popular book, we see the initial inklings of how integral has begun to operate in the wider mainstream world, outside of Integral Institute. Indeed, she was involved in very early I-I meetings. At the very least, the integral model (which indeed takes a transdisciplinary approach as its foundation, but in fact expands upon that to include research into multiples intelligences, gender dispostions, states of consciousness, perspectives, and so on) can offer a fresh new lens to look at the world. Thus the model is like a new pair of glasses, to replace the old pair and to accordingly refocus the world, our approach to the world, and our relations within the world. And it helps clear up all of those damn headaches that arise because of fuzzy worldviews.
Kasimir Malevich, in his seminal The Non-Objective World: The Manifesto of Suprematism wrote of how a change of what he calls the additional element can, even in a subtle fluctuation, radically alter the makeup of a piece of art. In my case, the change from our apartment in Rogers Park to our 3-flat house in Logan Square (not to mention my brand spanking new work desk), likely brought about a new kind of consciousness of "home." Given that I have a home not just in a physical/gross sense (with such nice hardwood floors), but also in a more mental/cybernetic sense (you don't see me, you see my words and images and mentally intuit who I am), a fluctuation of an additional element of home has ripples on several levels.
Hannah and I (with a LOT of help from our friends in Chicago) moved in to our new house over the weekend. 6 hours of work on Friday night, 19 hours on Saturday, and 2 on Sunday morning. Of course, now you can expect brief thoughts on integral property management to surface on The Daily Goose in the coming weeks and months. But for now, something entirely concrete and material is top priority for our 3-flat house -- the assembling.
The move was made a great deal easier because of a wonderful gift from painter and friend Jeff Lohrius. He offered this image for use in Electric Goose Productions, my integral multimedia production company.
Jeff is a gifted artist out of New York. Recent works for "digital oil" have been featured at The Manifest. Check out the fantastic Bija 2 and read a brief statement by Jeff about the work. He makes beautiful and striking integral art.
has tossed "integral art pandit" into the mix. Definitely a good possibility. "Pandit" is a sanskrit term that means simply "a scholar who is deeply proficient and immersed in spiritual wisdom." Similar to the English term "pundit", pandit is a learned person open to knowledge that sources from the edge of spirit to the edge of manifestation. Thus a pandit is a scholar, to so speak, of body, mind, and spirit.
Outside of Hindustani traditions, few know of this term. This has both good and bad sides, but as long as we pay respect and honor the history of the title in our practice and life, we can do service and truly earn the title of "pandit". But it is possibly a loaded term, so all of this is still to be decided and under consideration. You can read more about the term here.
And at the very least, we can toss "integral art pandit" into the maybe pile. As such:
Integral art pandit = an art scholar learned in the ways that body, mind, spirit resonate in the self, culture, nature of artistry, artifacts, and art interpretation.
Because most of my training is of a musical nature, I think you might understand why I am not altogether comfortable with a tag such as 'art philosopher', beit regarding philosophy that is integral or not. While it is certainly not a rule (and in fact I take it as my aim to blow away such a rule if it exists), the reality I face amongst my friends and peers is that art philosophers are generally regarded in a lesser light than artists. The famous quote I like to cite is that "talking about music is like dancing about architecture" and I simply extend that to apply not just to talking about music, but to all of art as well. Why get metaphysical with art, the thinking goes, when viewing concrete art and interpreting concrete art confuses enough people as it is. The 20th century in the West is a time when the role of the 'informed critic' took center stage in many important art circles. Some critics (but certainly not all) are quite simply boring, and thus ruin or spoil an art experience.
So in my work, I make a strong distinction between 'writing about art' and 'being a critic of art.' The latter I am certainly capable of, and of course sometimes it is completely appropriate to create and feel into a critical piece on some contemporary art. My wife Hannah writes film reviews for The Manifest, which I happen to think are very strong pieces of film criticism, especially given that she is a graduate film-making student herself. In general, I am quite qualified to generate criticism of the music world, and generally less qualified to do so in other mediums. I certainly could, given research on my part; though I am happy to defer to people in other mediums of art who can offer a more informed critical piece than I could, and can do so in less time.
Another major issue in 'art philosophy' is the issue of being prescriptive versus descriptive. That is to say, many art theorists (and those in the Western classical music tradition are some of the worst offenders in this area) take what is a descriptive account of research into an area of art, and then pronounce those findings to be the 'standard of excellence' to which all subsequent art is compared, and generally, reduced. What these theorists describe as the condition and habits of artists, say, in the 18th century, they then proscribe for artists living in today, as the proper activity and method to that medium. Of course the main problem here is that every artist reconciles his or her art and artifacts to present conditions and present energies. Thus unless for a mode of study of craft, there simply is no direct reason why musicians of today must follow the musical paths of previous composers such as Beethoven or Bach, per se. Composers can learn from these masters in any number of ways, but relevant and important art is generally a creative emergence of some kind that surprises the hell out of us. We simply don't know what 'good art' of today is going to be like, specifically. And those that say they do we can examine to see if they ought to be in the funny farm (or making artifacts themselves!).
Another main problem of 'art philosophy' is that it, in its extreme cases, can take 'the map' to be the 'territory.' It is not that artists are not interested in knowledge, of simple or complex manifestations. Quite the contrary. But a main problem is that theories become dissociated and divorced from the day to day reality of being an artist who looks to intuitively connect with the Muse. Here is where such treatises and manifestos about art get dull and painful, like extracting teeth. Conversely, this is perhaps why so many 'good' manifestos use such heightened and excited language -- ie, lots of exclamation points!! -- because in doing so, at least the written piece and author acknowledges that in many cases, artists are simply looking for some means of inspiration. For when that spark lights, the artist and his or her Muse can do the rest, and we can all stand by and gape our mouths at the spectacle. In general, good art writing uses first the territory of art, artist, and interpreter, and builds a case organically from the ground up, using the language and ideas relatively common to those creative souls on the ground.
And here is where I arrive at one of my main points. The question is 'what is the aim of integral art philosophy?' First off, it depends upon whom the audience is. A piece for creative interpreters and curators of art is generally going to be at least a little distinct from a piece for creative artists. But in either case several general points come to the for.
1) Don't be boring, punk. 2) Work to massage deep intuition. 3) Build an organic case, or narrative. 4) Realize that the audience is not robots, but breathing humans. 5) And in the case of integral art scholarship, aim to take as much as possible into account.
And perhaps one final consideration: Contemplate the 'integral art philosophy koan' which is the paradox that integral art philosophy is on one hand completely meaningless and besides the point, and on the other, of fundamental importance and support to the energies of artists, interpreters, and the world. Feel into that koan, especially the first part of it, and then put your art philosopher hat on, and let your own Muse and fingers do the spiel.
So whether this job is called "integral art philosopher," "integral art scholar," "integral art professor," "integral art metaphysician," or simply "integral art writer," I don't quite know yet. Maybe "integral art host" is simply the title that reflects all that and more. I do know that being an integral art philosopher (whatever the name) is something I feel called to do, but that does not change the fact that I'm surprised as hell that I'm doing it.
There are certain basic requirements that appear to be necessary to this sort of thing. The conventional requirements of a scholar get us at least part of the way there. Those include the production of numerous pieces of short and long scholarship in the field. Furthermore, those pieces of scholarship are all well-written, peer-reviewed, and published in some capacity that allows access to some fairly wide degree.
Moving into postconventional art scholarship, where integral art scholarship resides and aims to reside at all times, we simply say that everything for conventional scholarship applies, plus further considerations. On the content side (and more specific to art philosophy/scholarship), we see that there are both depth and span considerations. On the depth side, there has to be a strongly felt exploration of the history of art. Artists, artifacts, and interpretations all go back several centuries, and any reasonable comprehensive account of art would take into view, as much as is possible and reasonable. Thus both the history and the historicity (the way bias and methodology shape the creation of art histories) of art needs to be considered, both privately and in the scholarship itself. Naturally there is a lot of grunt work involved here, to examine and bring forth the wisdom and experience reflected in the countless art treatises from our past.
On the span side, at the very least we need potential scholars to show an understanding of the many ways art brings forth energy around the world, in all of the world's cultures and traditions. All art, simply put, is on the table. All artists, all art interpreters, and everything both produce can offer an important contribution to what is nothing less than a truly world-centric embrace of art. We tend to see certain patterns arise in cultures and worldviews in those cultures, and these patterns provide broad but (hopefully) helpful points of departure for the conversations that can ensue from this integral embrace. It appears that we will always find some happy medium between a purely monist stance (art is one organic whole) and a purely atomistic stance (art is many parts). An integral stance can do both, in a weave that can emphasize what is best for a given context or situation. Embracing the whole/part features of art is what it means to proceed holonically.
One additional point is that I in particular feel it is fundamentally important to be an artist before being an integral art philosopher. This is because while some people can do a very good job of faking it, at day's end we communicate to others what our own experience dictates we can communicate. You have got to do before you can talking about doing. You have to make before you can talk about making. You have to singing before you can talk about singing. If I have anything to do with it, I want to unite artist and art critics simply by requiring critics to have some practical experience in making art, and by similarly requiring artists to have some practical experience in being an art critic. These fields are far from mutually exclusive. Though at times in the 20th century in the west, it seemed like the two camps never talked to one another. This must change. The way to do so is to simply say that one has to get at least a passing grade in the other. Artists gotta get a passing grade in art criticism, and critics gotta get a passing grade in art creation. Expert mastery is not required; adequate comprehension and production is, or at least should be, I think.
From Awakening to the Tao (1988. Boston: Shambhala), by Liu I-ming, trans. by Thomas Cleary:
The Tao is in the body. Within the body in hidden another person, who always accompanies you, whatever you do. Awake or asleep, it is always there; looking, listening, talking, walking it is very very close. This is not the awareness of conditioned knowledge, it is the original sane energy, vitality, and spirit. If you seek this in terms of form or shape, you are mistaking the servant for the master.
What integrally informed artistry training aims to do is nothing less than provide a resonant and healthy body/mind home, in such a way that artistic intuition can fully and spontaneosly flower in whatever manner or medium the artist irrigates that energy. It is in that spirit that the master violinist Yehudi Menuhin wrote extensively about his experiences with hatha yoga, and specifically, Iyengar Yoga. Here is a brief but illustrative article about how Menuhin came upon yoga, and how he feels it changed his life, and his music.
HEAR YE, HEAR ME: I talk about the integral model and its potentials for use in artists' own practice in a spoken word MP3 I posted at Momentary I. The integral model can be, in a sense, an organic touchstone. Consciousness states and energy bodies can pop forth based upon the activities that the model frames. Do listen in.
You can listen to more of the conversation between Willow Pearson, John Forman, and myself at the site for the Integral Artistry Intensive. You can register online for the weekend, which is shaping up to be a resonant and enriching environment for creativity.
LUKE AND DINAH: Go drinking wine and argue about integral, or so it seems. Catch this week's episode of the loving couple in issue #18 of The Manifest.
AN AESTHETIC RESPONSE STREAM: That is what my initial take on Abigail Housen's research tells me. People's responses, or ongoing recognition, of visual art appears to progress according to a trajectory similiar, in principle, to the generic body to mind to spirit. This is exciting stuff for the Art Domain. It is likely to create more than a few ripples in the art world. (In truth, it already has.) Read more about it here.
CASA DE LA DALLMAN: More forgiveness requested for the lack of attention to The Daily Goose. I am shedding some skin. These sorts of things are generally a good thing, and bring about all new sorts of experiences. You also get a certain awed numbness feeling, or at least I do.
One of the things I have going on (besides my work for Integral University, the Integral Artistry Intensive in May, The Manifest, the Kosmic Trainwreck Circus, various film scores, my website, my new album, my new mbira, and so on) is the purchase of our first house. Check out the picture:
The building is a legal 3-flat. Pending the closing (on 4.23), we will live on the 2nd level, and rent out the 1st level and the garden level as two separate units. There is a back yard, garage, and lots of other fun stuff going on. Our neighborhood will be the Logan Square section of Chicago.
Witnessing the purchase process has been interesting. Fortunately, I have a good agent, and I had good meetings with the lender and the real estate lawyer. My family and friends have been very supported of Hannah and me. This movie has been flashing before my eyes (with a pretty good soundtrack), and I am happy to be in a leading role. This definitely feels like a good step forward in the world. I'll start to wear some new clothes; they may seem heavy at first, but I suspect I will grow into them.
So on to planting flowers and lilac bushes. And, oh yeah, closing.
RSS
