Sounding the Virtual: Gilles Deleuze and the Theory and Philosophy of Music <i>Sounding the Virtual: Gilles Deleuze and the Theory and Philosophy of Music</i> . Edited by B <scp>rian</scp> H <scp>ulse</scp> and N <scp>ick</scp> N <scp>esbitt</scp> . Farnham: Ashgate, 2010. xvii + 288 pp., ill., mus. exx. Hb £65.00.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collection brings together essays by (mostly) music scholars who extend the work of philosopher Gilles Deleuze (often writing with Félix Guattari) into music. As the editors note, perhaps the biggest obstacle to reading music scholarship is the highly specialized vocabulary of music theory. Chapters by non-music scholars are generally most accessible, while music scholars handle Deleuzian concepts relative to music with varying degrees of finesse. In the opening chapter Christopher Hasty takes up the problem of music's resistance to representation, exploring Deleuze's image of thought as a means of thinking, hearing, and performing music in new ways. Brian Hulse's project would create, in contradistinction to traditional approaches, a minor music theory based on Deleuze's concept of difference. Sean Higgins returns to Deleuze's image of thought to offer an uncommonly provocative and productive discussion of noise in music studies. Michael Gallope's chapter (fourth in the book) is the first to take up Deleuze's concept(s) of music directly. Gallope extends Hulse's discussion of Deleuzian repetition and argues that tensions in Deleuze's writings related to ethics and those on metaphysics lead to a bifurcation in his writing on music. Martin Scherzinger also focuses on tensions in Deleuze and Guattari's writing on music, arguing that their use of Pierre Boulez's modernist music undermines their political project critiquing late capitalism. Amy Cimini takes up Deleuze's musical thought in terms of Spinoza's work on mind–body relations, positing potentialities of music listening as an ethics of joy. Arguing music as a Deleuzian war machine, Jean-Bodefroy Bidima draws on Deleuzian thought in terms of both methodology and content to explore Deleuze's concepts of intensity and the event. Nick Nesbitt, with clarity and passion, also approaches the Deleuzian musical event, evincing intimate familiarity with and sensitivity to jazz in its many nuances. Carrying this Deleuzian line to his writings on sensation and art (music), Judy Lochhead analyses Wolfgang Rihm's composition Am Horizont in terms of what she calls a logic of edge. By contrast, Marianne Kielian-Gilbert's densely theoretical analysis deploys a singular reading of Deleuze and Guattari's work, drawing on feminist writers to consider processes of ‘becoming music’ through a variety of musical examples from J. S. Bach to Mary Chapin Carpenter. Bruce Quaglia places Luciano Berio's compositions and his Charles Eliot Norton Lectures in dialogue with Deleuze's writings, as he develops a minoritarian epistemological framework for music analysis in the Deleuzian sense of what music can do. In the final chapter, startling for its striking evocation of the nomadic culture and music of the Bashkirs in juxtaposition with Deleuze's philosophical figuration of the nomad, Ildar Khannanov deftly analyses Western melodic line related to its sedentary nature, highlighting Chopin's music for nomadic strategies that ‘transcend’ sedentariness. Together, the essays demonstrate potentialities of Deleuzian concepts to proliferate innovative responses to Deleuze in musical studies. A chapter featuring two scholars (one from music studies, one not) jointly addressing a Deleuzian concept and music might have extended the volume's audience more productively beyond music studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".