MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303437272 · doi:10.7202/1092049ar

Joseph Weiss, "The Dialectics of Music: Adorno, Benjamin, and Deleuze"

2022· article· en· W4303437272 on OpenAlex
Kai Yin Lo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophy in Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt, Politics, and Modernism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialecticPhilosophyPsychoanalysisEpistemologyAestheticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adorno and Horkheimer's Dialectics of Enlightenment (1947) and the former's Beethoven: The Philosophy of Music and Philosophy of New Music (1949).Adorno's thinking-in particular, his critique of humanity's domination of, and alienation from, nature in capitalist modernity, leading to the seemingly irreconcilable split between subject and object, nature and history-by and large lays the premise for the book's dialectical approach to explicating the tensions between social, historical, and anthropological forces underpinning the material and formal content of music.The Adornoian perspective is placed in dialogue with those of Benjamin and Deleuze, two philosophers for whom art (and music) occupy a rather important position in their philosophical inquiry.As a constellation of interrelated fragments, Weiss's book seeks to probe the tensions and contradictions underlying the ontological existence of music in the modern world: if music, la Marx, does not simply function as an anesthetic distraction for the working class, keeping the repressive regime of capitalist exploitation out of their consciousness; if music is not to be employed by the state apparatus to perpetuate certain ideologies that reify mass consciousness as a means of subjugating them to the despotic regime; if music, instead, has the power to recuperate and revivify what is alive in us-our ability to create and innovate, to think and reflect upon and beyond the unquestioned laws and status quo-how then should music uphold itself in our modern society such that it can engage with the natural or social reality and potentially occasion real transformations?What is the responsibility of music for humankind, especially for the modern subject?The reduction of this book into several main theses can hardly do justice to the plethora of insightful ideas throughout Weiss's elegant and poetic prose.I would briefly point out three respects in which this book stands out from its predecessors.First, by bringing the three philosophers into a shared intellectual terrain, Weiss allows their divergent philosophical ideas to engage in dialogue with one another-sometimes one idea may complement and enrich another, while at other times they may confront each other in the form of contradiction-and precisely in the latter case that, as Weiss suggests, '[t]he irreconcilability between these thinkers is itself a moment in the movement of negative dialectics' (x).Secondly, this book explores a repertoire beyond those discussed in the original writings of Adorno, Benjamin, and Deleuze, ranging from traditional classical works such as Brahms and Wagner, the blues and jazz of Charlie Patton, Elizabeth Cotton, and Deford Bailey, to contemporary works composed by Luigi Russolo and Michael Gordon, extending the purview of musical investigations into further territories of contemporary music-making.Lastly, the book picks up on Benjamin's essay on technology and interrogates the roles technological advancement plays in music creation.Inasmuch as both Adorno and Deleuze did not expound explicitly (or positively) on the issue of technology, this book attempts to elaborate on their philosophical commentary on art with a consideration of the revolutionary force afforded by technology: on the negative side, technology inadvertently turns living-labor into dead-labor, and human subjects into objects; yet it

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it