# Which non-western music tradition has accomplished the greates achievements?



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

Apart from western music, which musical tradition did in your view attain the higest level in terms of quality or complexity? I would come down in favour of Persian (Iranian) music. Excepting the western classical canon, I have never heard something as awesome as this:
Hossein Alizadeh, Album Sallaneh: 



Ardavan kamkar, In Dastgah-e Shour:


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I would say the music of the Indian sub-continent has achieved as much as anything produced by any other music tradition, including its influence on the western music traditions, both classical and popular.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

*Indian Classical Music*


----------



## Shosty (Mar 16, 2020)

Perotin said:


> Apart from western music, which musical tradition did in your view attain the higest level in terms of quality or complexity? I would come down in favour of Persian (Iranian) music. Excepting the western classical canon, I have never heard something as awesome as this:
> Hossein Alizadeh, Album Sallaneh:
> 
> 
> ...


Being from Iran I can't be impartial really, but I do think there are some fantastic Iranian composers/musicians. I also love a lot of African music, particularly from Mali. Toumani Diabaté, Ali Farka Toure, Tinariwen to name a few. 
If you're interested in Iranian music do check out Kayhan Kalhor's music (if you haven't already):

Improvising with Toumani Diabate:





One of his best pieces performed with Brooklyn Rider:


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Pygmy (a dated name for four or five different people groups in West Africa that are distinct from the majority Bantu population groups). Only other polyphonic tradition outside the West and likely tens of thousands of years old.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Perotin said:


> Apart from western music, which musical tradition did in your view attain the higest level in terms of quality or complexity? I would come down in favour of Persian (Iranian) music. Excepting the western classical canon, I have never heard something as awesome as this:
> Hossein Alizadeh, Album Sallaneh:
> 
> 
> ...


Feel the same way about Persian music that I feel about Persian food - its good, but seems like blander version of the same kind of thing you can get in India. N Indian music borrowed alot from Persia (most of the instruments like the Sitar / Setar Santur/Santor or Sarod are adapted from Persian models).


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

^My mind was absolutely blown when I first heard that music. Like nothing else on earth.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I also think that Flamenco (Spain) and Fado (Portugal) are two vernacular genres which have produced some amazing music.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Bwv 1080 said:


> Feel the same way about Persian music that I feel about Persian food - its good, but seems like blander version of the same kind of thing you can get in India. N Indian music borrowed alot from Persia (most of the instruments like the Sitar / Setar Santur/Santor or Sarod are adapted from Persian models).


You may like this


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

K-Pop absolutely rules all music history. 

Kidding...for non-western music, I think the joy of improvisation found on Hindustani music similar so incredible, I really love Ravi Shankar.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Indian, Balinese;
West African - the rhythmic development - drum ensembles - is complex and quite amazing.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> You may like this
> 
> View attachment 138894


Listening now, that is really cool. For 1789, the Western part of it sounds like French Baroque.

BTW, are you familiar with Lundu, the first notated Afro-European Brazilian music from about the same time? Domingos Caldas Barbosa (1739-1800) was perhaps the most famous composer


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I am surprised no one mentioned gamelan yet. I read that it was one of the few musical traditions to reach the complexity of western music.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I am surprised no one mentioned gamelan yet. I read that it was one of the few musical traditions to reach the complexity of western music.


yes, indeed, one of the most complex forms of music! Amazing stuff.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Jacck said:


> I am surprised no one mentioned gamelan yet. I read that it was one of the few musical traditions to reach the complexity of western music.


I did, a couple of postings above...Balinese gamelan, very sophisticated


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

This is music from the oldest surviving human culture, this could be more than 100,000 years old


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

Shosty, thanks for your tip, but it's not my cup of tea, it has too much of a western feel to it.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Apart from western classical—Japanese, Indian, and Persian traditions are the ones that interest me most.


----------



## Shosty (Mar 16, 2020)

Perotin said:


> Shosty, thanks for your tip, but it's not my cup of tea, it has too much of a western feel to it.


That's alright. Kind of a surprise that Kalhor's music sounds western to you, I kind of understand how the work with Brooklyn Rider might sound westernish, but Kamancheh itself has always sounded distinctly eastern to me.
If I may ask, do you get the same impression from his solo pieces (like below)?


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

aioriacont said:


> K-Pop absolutely rules all music history.


This is a thread about non-western music, not western non-music.


----------



## Perotin (May 29, 2012)

@Shosty
The last video you posted sounds eastern to me as well. But the prevoius two sound like Philip Glass tinkering around with Persian instruments.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Barbebleu said:


> I would say the music of the Indian sub-continent has achieved as much as anything produced by any other music tradition, including its influence on the western music traditions, both classical and popular.


I would have to say that's hyperbole. I don't think any other tradition has reached the "universality" levels of western music, and it's not really chauvinistic to say so. It's just, as I see it, a fact.

The two "non-western musics" that have interested me most are Chinese and Balinese. I don't know about "accomplished greatest achievements".


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

consuono said:


> I would have to say that's hyperbole. I don't think any other tradition has reached the "universality" levels of western music, and it's not really chauvinistic to say so. It's just, as I see it, a fact.
> 
> The two "non-western musics" that have interested me most are Chinese and Balinese. I don't know about "accomplished greatest achievements".


Thus far, I've found Chinese classical to be rather vexing. Can you post some of what you've liked?


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

There is quite a bit of Chinese music that is heavily westernized. Two very well-known examples are the Yellow River Piano concerto and the Butterfly Lovers violin concerto.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Red Terror said:


> Thus far, I've found Chinese classical to be rather vexing. Can you post some of what you've liked?


I don't have any specific examples in mind, not being that knowledgeable about it, but it's the techniques and traditions of Chinese opera ("xiqu") that I think are interesting.


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I can't claim to have that wide an exposure to all the cultures mentioned here. However, I did study the Japanese Koto and have always had a great appreciation for it, Shakuhachi and other Japanese instrumental and vocal traditions. However some of the most memorable concerts I ever attended were by Ali Akbar Khan and Ravi Shankar (at one they played together) whose virtuosity astounded me. I can remember those performances today as some of the most involving I ever heard.


----------



## Andante Largo (Apr 23, 2020)

In the case of Kayhan Kalhor's Works, I recommend his "The Wind" and "It's Still Autumn" albums.

Live performed "The Wind" album:





My favorite track from "It's Still Autumn" album:


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

JAS said:


> There is quite a bit of Chinese music that is heavily westernized. Two very well-known examples are the Yellow River Piano concerto and the Butterfly Lovers violin concerto.


Tan Dun water and paper concerto


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

consuono said:


> I would have to say that's hyperbole. I don't think any other tradition has reached the "universality" levels of western music, and it's not really chauvinistic to say so. It's just, as I see it, a fact.
> 
> The two "non-western musics" that have interested me most are Chinese and Balinese. I don't know about "accomplished greatest achievements".


Who said "accomplished greatest achievements "? And because you "see it " doesn't make it a fact, just an opinion. I didn't imply that the Indian classical tradition was in any way superior to that of the western, although it does have a head start in years of performance. I stated that it had at least achieved as much.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

African music is grossly overlooked but I don't know enough to have an opinion. I was once entranced by this complex percussive music from Mali in an elevator (some guy playing it).


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

OK, let's get to it:


Barbebleu said:


> Who said "accomplished greatest achievements "?


Uh, read the thread title.


> And because you "see it " doesn't make it a fact, just an opinion.


Yeah...and...?
But I think it is factual to say that the western tradition is more universal in appeal while the Indian is more ethnic and parochial. Here's what "more universal" looks like:




Those singers and instrumentalists are loving it, and to me their performance is just as valid and authentic as one in Berlin or London. And Bach is no doubt loving it too. It isn't music tied to geographical location or ethnicity.


> I didn't imply that the Indian classical tradition was in any way superior to that of the western, although it does have a head start in years of performance. I stated that it had at least achieved as much.


It had achieved as much in what way, exactly? What is an "achievement" in music? Which tradition is more globally influential, western or Indian? What is that you were saying about "opinion"?


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

I don't like the term "western classical". I would prefer if no matter where a person has been born or lives in, could feel that this music can be for them, or represent them. Just call it classical. The rest can be folk, and there is nothing shameful about calling it such.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

consuono said:


> OK, let's get to it:
> Uh, read the thread title.
> Yeah...and...?
> But I think it is factual to say that the western tradition is more universal in appeal while the Indian is more ethnic and parochial. Here's what "more universal" looks like:
> ...


Even though I would like to agree with your take on universality of the Western music, I however think your statement is blatantly Eurocentric. Measuring music's worth by "influence" is as pointless as measuring music's worth by sales. In a world dominated by the west since the industrial revolution, it is almost tautological to say that western music is more influential hence "achieved more". I can also say *Kanye West has achieved more than Copland, Ives, and Bernstein combined since 2000, and that Starbucks coffee is more "universal" than Masala chai*. Both statements are meaningless at best.

I don't think the problem is the statement that *Bach or Beethoven is universal*, but the statement that *Western music tradition is more universal than Indian music* is problematic. This opinion is as misguided as saying "Western philosophy is more universal than the Eastern philosophy". Not only is this idea absurd, but self contradictory, since the very idea of "universality" transcend the east vs west or civilized vs barbaric/exotic or modern vs traditional dialectics.

By imposing concepts like "west" and "tradition" upon Bach's music you have already diminished Bach's universality. Yes *Bach belongs to the Western canon, but that's not why it is universal.* And your suggestion that Raga, Koto music, or Gamelan band somehow does not have the same universal appeal as Mass in B minor is dubious at best. *Even western listener can have more affinity to Raga than to Bach's best choral work.*


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I don't think the problem is the statement that *Bach or Beethoven is universal*, but the statement that *Western music tradition is more universal than Indian music* is problematic..


Equal temperament and the development of harmony are a matter of optimization of the physics of sound in relation to the human hearing apparatus. There is nothing non-universal about that achievement.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Fabulin said:


> Equal temperament and the development of harmony are a matter of optimization of the physics of sound in relation to the human hearing apparatus. There is nothing non-universal about that achievement.


Of course, but just keep it as a "human achievement" rather than "it's the shining example of our great Western tradition" if you want to invoke universality.

*We will be doing Beethoven a favor by not abusing his genius for claiming culture superiority over the others.* I don't want to remind you that many have already done that.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Of course, but just keep it as a "human achievement" rather than "it's the shining example of our great Western tradition" if you want to invoke universality.


That's precisely what I'm saying.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Even though I would like to agree with your take on universality of the Western music, I however think your statement is blatantly Eurocentric.


That's a postmodern-ish political statement, not a musical one.


> I don't think the problem is the statement that *Bach or Beethoven is universal*, but the statement that *Western music tradition is more universal than Indian music* is problematic.


It's problematic in that it runs counter to current philosophical/political dogma. It nevertheless appears to be true.


> By imposing concepts like "west" and "tradition" upon Bach's music you have already diminished Bach's universality. Yes *Bach belongs to the Western canon, but that's not why it is universal.* And your suggestion that Raga, Koto music, or Gamelan band somehow does not have the same universal appeal as Mass in B minor is dubious at best.


I'm not "imposing" anything. Saying that distinct ethnic or geographical musical traditions exist *except* in the case of music that we find to be "universal" doesn't make sense. And no, Indian or Japanese or Balinese music simply does not have the *more* universal appeal of Bach or rock or jazz or even disco, which are products within that western tradition. I can't think of a Zubin Mehta, Seiji Ozawa or Yuja Wang within the Indian, Japanese and Chinese traditions. None of which is to say that "Europeans" are "superior".


> Yes Bach belongs to the Western canon, but that's not why it is universal.


Bach created music using the materials that had been created/discovered "within" that tradition. Bach, Beethoven, Palestrina, plainsong and so on are not simply "within" that tradition; as a group all of it *is* that tradition.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> And no, Indian or Japanese or Balinese music simply does not have the *more* universal appeal of Bach or rock or jazz or even disco, which are products within that western tradition. I can't think of a Zubin Mehta, Seiji Ozawa or Yuja Wang within the Indian, Japanese and Chinese traditions. None of which is to say that "Europeans" are "superior".


Why are we even discussing the universality of different music traditions as it doesn't describe neither the complexity nor the quality of that music? We'd end up with pop music, possibly even K-pop, being the most complex high-quality genre of music. Btw, I wouldn't be surprised if K-pop indeed was more universal than Western pop music. It seems to be immensely popular in Asia of course, but also in Europe and possibly in the US as well. (I'm an European and just cannot evaluate its popularity in the US.)

I also don't know how are we supposed to evaluate universality? Take Chinese traditional music for example. I'm quite sure that it's a lot more popular in Asia than is Western classical music. I'm quite sure that Chinese traditional music has been significantly more impactful for the music of other Asian countries (and there are many!) meaning that one could say that regarding the number of listeners, Chinese traditional music has possibly been significantly more impactful, popular and universal because the number of listeners is much bigger and possibly it has had a great impact on the musical tradition of multiple other countries. I don't think the universality should be assessed based on the countries, rather individual listeners who are all unique. Based on such logic, the conclusion is that Chinese traditional music is more universal than Western because it appeals to larger number of people.

If we want to talk about the quality and complexity of the music, we should talk about the music and not its impact, universality or the amount of listeners. Western classical music is probably closer to my heart than any other genre of music but I think the reason isn't its superiority but the fact that it's closely associated with Western culture, which I've been exposed to my whole life and which feels safe and comfortable due to my familiarity with it.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

annaw said:


> Why are we even discussing the universality of different music traditions as it doesn't describe neither the complexity nor the quality of that music. Otherwise we'd end up with pop music, possibly even K-pop, being the most complex high-quality genre of music. Btw, I wouldn't be surprised if K-pop indeed was more universal than Western pop music. It seems to be immensely popular in Asia of course, but also in Europe and possibly in the US as well.


So what gives you the right to (by implication) denigrate pop music? Pop, Western classical, gamelan all are of exactly equal quality according to prevailing dogma.



> I also don't know how are we supposed to quantify universality? Take Chinese traditional music for example. *I'm quite sure that it's a lot more popular in Asia than is Western classical music.* I'm quite sure that Chinese traditional music has been significantly more impactful for the music of other Asian countries (and there is many!) meaning that one could almost say that regarding the number of listeners, Chinese traditional music has possibly been significantly more impactful.


Are you *really* sure about that bolded statement, or is it just what "sounds right"? "Universality" would mean adaptability (or adoptability) across various cultures. It would be something that speaks directly across other cultural barriers.


> If we want to talk about the quality and complexity of the music, we should talk about the music and not its impact, universality or the amount of listeners.


I don't know if all the above are completely separate considerations.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> So what gives you the right to (by implication) denigrate pop music? Pop, Western classical, gamelan all are of exactly equal quality according to prevailing dogma.


If we now consider purely the words I wrote, then the fact that I state that based on such logic we would end up with pop music being the most complex high-quality genre of music doesn't mean that I'm in any way denigrating it or saying that such conclusion would be wrong. 4*x = 16 => x = 4 (I'm not denigrating "x" ). It's just the conclusion we'd have to make if the thought like that. It does not matter at all what I personally think, I can think that 4 = 2 if I want to. I might think that Beethoven's String Quartet No. 14 is more complex than a lot of pop music, which I do think, but I could also think otherwise. The words above do not really express my opinion and as my opinion about LvB SQ no.14 being more complex than a lot of pop music is only an opinion, I also do not wish to discuss it further because I think it's personal and dependent on one's preferences and likes. I do not wish to make objective arguments regarding such matters and thus I'm talking from my own personal subjective views which the above conclusion, at least in my view, did not reflect.



> Are you *really* sure about that bolded statement, or is it just what "sounds right"? "Universality" would mean adaptibility (or adoptibility) across various cultures.


For the very reason I inserted "quite". I might be entirely mistaken and didn't wish to make conclusive statements.



> It would be something that speaks directly across other cultural barriers.


And how do we evaluate it?

I still don't understand how the universality of music should reflect its complexity or quality.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

annaw said:


> If we now consider purely the words I wrote, then the fact that I state that based on such logic we would end up with pop music being the most complex high-quality genre of music doesn't mean that I'm in any way denigrating it or saying that such conclusion would be wrong. 4*x = 16 => x = 4 (I'm not denigrating "x" ). It's just the conclusion we'd have to make if the thought like that. It does not matter at all what I personally think. I might think that Beethoven's String Quartet No. 14 is more complex than a lot of pop music, which I do think, but I could also think otherwise. The words above do not really express my opinion and as it is only an opinion, I also do not wish to discuss it further because I think it's personal and dependent on one's preferences and likes. I do not wish to make objective arguments regarding such matters and thus I'm talking from my own personal subjective views which the above conclusion, at least in my view, did not reflect.


But then if you want to say that western-inspired pop is more universal than Chinese classical music, that's likewise a value judgement that violates current dogma. So either way.



> For the very reason I inserted "quite". I might be entirely mistaken and didn't wish to make conclusive statements.


In which case it's "not quite sure".



> And how do we evaluate it?


By using the criteria that you disqualified: "impact", number of listeners/performers etc.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> But then if you want to say that western-inspired pop is more universal than Chinese classical music, that's likewise a value judgement that violates current dogma. So either way.


It's a judgement based on logic which I stated above. What is current dogma? Btw, now that I think about it, I think we should leave pop music out because some of it combines different musical traditions.



> In which case it's "not quite sure".


Be it how you think is better. Both phrases reflect some uncertainty, but then I'm not a native speaker and maybe thus cannot evaluate how much uncertainty I have to express and through which words and phrases.



> By using the criteria that you disqualified: "impact", number of listeners/performers etc.


It would be a bias towards orchestral music - requires more performers. Again, then is pop music the most impactful music.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

annaw said:


> It's a judgement based on logic which I stated above. What is current dogma? Btw, now that I think about it, I think we should leave pop music out because some of it combines different musical traditions.


But modern pop is still overwhelmingly Western in origin.



> Be it how you think is better. Both phrases reflect some uncertainty, but then I'm not a native speaker and maybe thus cannot evaluate how much uncertainty I have to express and through which words and phrases.


Well, no, both phrases don't reflect some uncertainty. "Quite sure" is...quite sure.


> And how do you evaluate it?


Read my earlier comments.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> But modern pop is still overwhelmingly Western in origin.


What about K-pop then?



> Well, no, both phrases don't reflect some uncertainty. "Quite sure" is...quite sure.


I was initially quite sure, but I'm not quite sure anymore :lol:. I'm still quite sure that "quite sure" reflects some uncertainty. It's "quite sure" not "absolutely sure". But whatever, just keep in mind that I _wanted_ to express uncertainty but maybe failed miserably.



> Read my earlier comments.


Yep, I realised it a moment later. Edited my previous post. I think you should define what you mean by impact.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

annaw said:


> What about K-pop then?


K-pop is pretty much 99.99% Western-style pop (in terms of chord progressions, song layout) with Korean lyrics. The same way Un Suk Chin is not a traditional Korean music composer, but a Western contemporary music composer of South Korean birth.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> K-pop is pretty much 99.99% Western-style pop (in terms of chord progressions, song layout) with Korean lyrics. The same way Un Suk Chin is not a traditional Korean music composer, but a Western contemporary music composer of South Korean birth.


Yeah, that I suppose is true - bad example. My main argument is that we should focus on e.g Western-influenced pop music but we still shouldn't talk about all pop music. There is certainly pop music which hasn't been influenced about one culture only and thus it would be somewhat wrong to say that all pop music is influenced by this or that culture, while it in reality is a mix of different cultural influences.

One interesting problem we encounter with these cultural influences is that the culture itself is in constant change but this is probably off-topic considering the OP.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> Even though I would like to agree with your take on universality of the Western music, I however think your statement is blatantly Eurocentric.


Let's look it at from a different angle then. Are there any non-Western traditions that accomplished less than the Western one? Surely, you're not going to claim every single one of them achieved as much as the Western one, are you?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

annaw said:


> ...
> Yep, I realised it a moment later. Edited my previous post. I think you should define what you mean by impact.


There is a lot of defining in this thread that needs to be done: "achievement", "Western", "Eurocentric", "popular" and so on.

By the way I'm not making fun of your use of English. For a non-native user you communicate very well. I just wanted to be clear about what you meant.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> Let's look it at from a different angle then. Are there any non-Western traditions that accomplished less than the Western one? Surely, you're not going to claim every single one of them achieved as much as the Western one, are you?


 It would appear that the rule is:
If the subject is non-western traditions, then achievement is celebrated and is "at least equal to" the western one. If the subject is the western tradition then there aren't "achievements" because there may not be any western "tradition" at all, or at least extremely rigorous definition is required; and if there is, then comparing it favorably or advantageously to non-western ones is "Eurocentric".


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> There is a lot of defining in this thread that needs to be done: "achievement", "Western", "Eurocentric", "popular" and so on.
> 
> By the way I'm not making fun of your use of English. For a non-native user you communicate very well. I just wanted to be clear about what you meant.


I didn't take it personally at all ! I was joking myself - I have a tendency to overuse words that express uncertainty.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Quite a lot of western musicians, classical and non-classical, have borrowed from, let us call them for the sake of argument, non-western traditions.

I’m not sure the same can be said for the converse. Non-western musical cultures seem to be content to remain self-sufficient without feeling the need to let their particular musical tradition be influenced by the west. 

That is what I meant when I said “influencing western musical traditions” in post #2.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Barbebleu said:


> Quite a lot of western musicians, classical and non-classical, have borrowed from, let us call them for the sake of argument, non-western traditions.
> 
> I'm not sure the same can be said for the converse. Non-western musical cultures seem to be content to remain self-sufficient without feeling the need to let their particular musical tradition be influenced by the west.
> 
> That is what I meant when I said "influencing western musical traditions" in post #2.


That's a very interesting idea! And considering colonialism etc which, whether we like it or not, was a part of Western history, it makes sense that Europeans have been influenced by very many different nations. Not only Western music, also cuisine, art etc.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Barbebleu said:


> Quite a lot of western musicians, classical and non-classical, have borrowed from, let us call them for the sake of argument, non-western traditions.


Overwhelmingly that would be modern composers/musicians. I don't think Bach, Mozart and Beethoven were much aware of or under the influence of Indian or Chinese music. On the other hand there have been *quite* a lot of Chinese and Indian musicians and composers who have studied those three.



> I'm not sure the same can be said for the converse. Non-western musical cultures seem to be content to remain self-sufficient without feeling the need to let their particular musical tradition be influenced by the west.


So where would Takemitsu fit? Is the following list representative of Chinese music or western? 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_composers


annaw said:


> ...it makes sense that Europeans have been influenced by very many different nations. Not only Western music, also cuisine, art etc.


So why is it so difficult to acknowledge that the flow of influence also went the other way, probably to an even larger degree?


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> Let's look it at from a different angle then. Are there any non-Western traditions that accomplished less than the Western one? Surely, you're not going to claim every single one of them achieved as much as the Western one, are you?


I am not denying that, but that has nothing to do with the universality of the works produced by the so-called Western tradition. And that in no way diminishes the universality of the works produced by other cultures.

Doing achievement contest and differentiating the west from the rest of the world is the wrong way to argue for the universality of the great geniuses of Classical music (which was the original statement I am criticizing). Imagine asserting that the German tradition achieves more than non-German tradition and somehow the German spirit is more universal than the rest. Why should it matter anyway when Beethoven is enjoyed worldwide, except to reinforce the "west" identity? *When it comes to the universality of Beethoven's music the level of analysis should be on a human level, not reducing it to the Western tradition or the German tradition.* It is precisely the fact that people who are not identified with the West can equally enjoy and perform Beethoven that is the hallmark of the universality of Beethoven's music.

I am also not denying that maybe it is true that you need to be able to speak German in order to perform Beethoven "the right way". But this only diminishes the universality of Beethoven.

And there is *no reason to believe say, Raga is in anyway less universal than Beethoven*. This is just absurd. If anything it is easier to enjoy Raga than to enjoy late Beethoven work, without preconceptions.

This line of thinking is similar to saying that Enlightenment is the crowning achievement of the Western thought. Yes and no. It is true that Enlightenment is the child of the Western tradition originated from the ancient Greeks. But once enlightenment value is adopted by people who do not culturally identify with the West, it is free from its traditions and becomes open-ended. That's true universality. If enlightenment value is Western, then it is not universal and people in other parts of world will reject it (which is tragic mistake many parts of the world including Europe is making).

The same for scientific discovery. What's the point in claiming that Newton's laws of mechanics and universal gravity is a Western achievement, rather than a Human achievement? You don't see how Eurocentric that it? How about Pythagoras theorem being a Western achievement? How about Algebra being a Arabic achievement and the Western science just built upon it? We can play this game ad infinitum and ad nauseam. *It only serve to promote culture identities and diminishes the universality of what should be called the human achievements.*


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> It is precisely the fact that people who are not identified with the West can equally enjoy and perform Beethoven that is the hallmark of the universality of Beethoven's music.


Well exactly, but that doesn't mean that Beethoven's work isn't "western" at the same time that it's "universal". Also I think it's something a little peculiar to music. I don't think that in the visual arts, literature or architecture the barriers to "universality" are quite as noticeable.



> And there is no reason to believe say, Raga is in anyway less universal than Beethoven.


What reason or evidence is there to believe that it is?


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

consuono said:


> What reason or evidence is there to believe that it is?


The burden of proof is not on me, but on people who makes the assertion that Western music is somehow more universal than "world music".

Of course we could do experiment to actually verify that for people who has no preconceived idea who Beethoven is and what Raga is. Yeah, surely they will enjoy the contrapuntal complexity of Grosse fuge much more than the songful, improvisional raga Bhairavi, who am I kidding.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> The burden of proof is not on me, but on people who makes the assertion that Western music is somehow more universal than "world music".
> 
> Of course we could do experiment to actually verify that for people who has no preconceived idea who Beethoven is and what Raga is. Yeah, surely they will enjoy the contrapuntal complexity of Grosse fuge much more than the songful, improvisional raga Bhairavi, who am I kidding.


Well if I point to audience size *outside* the geographical origin of the music, then it's "well Lady Gaga is even more popular, so there". There is no burden of proof. It's fairly obvious, although it's a political faux pas to say so. It's "Eurocentrism". I couldn't care less for political dogma, and see the garbage as well as the gold in "European culture".


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

consuono said:


> So why is it so difficult to acknowledge that the flow of influence also went the other way, probably to an even larger degree?


I have not stated that it didn't. I just stated that the flow of influence went one way but didn't say that it was the only direction.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

consuono said:


> Well if I point to audience size *outside* the geographical origin of the music, then it's "well Lady Gaga is even more popular, so there". There is no burden of proof. It's fairly obvious, although it's a political faux pas to say so. It's "Eurocentrism". I couldn't care less for political dogma, and see the garbage as well as the gold in "European culture".


For you it's paradoxical isn't it? Lady gaga's hot singles "seem" to be more universal than Bach's Mass in B minor? How dare these philistines not see the genius of Bach.

You are also putting up a strawman argument, as if stating a view is Eurocentric is a political dogma.

The claim that "Western music is more universal than the rest" is a big claim, and requires justification. That's why the burden of proof is on those who claims it, in the same way that the burden of proof is on those who claim "God exists", not on others to show God doesn't exist.

The suggestion "Our western culture is more universal than the other cultures" is Eurocentric. This has nothing to do with politics. I am not even claiming that Eurocentrism is bad! I am just pointing out that this is self-contradictory in the sense that this goes against the very idea of universality.

Universality has nothing to do with culture identities. If you need to emphasis that Bach belongs to the Western tradition, then you are not doing a great job demonstrating its universality. This has nothing to do with politics, but for philosophical reasons.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

Wikipedia describes Eurocentrism as "a worldview that is centered on Western civilization or a *biased* view that favors it over non-western civilizations."

If someone can objectively prove that Western classical music tradition is more universal or better than others, then it's not Eurocentrism because it's an objective observation and is thus not biased. If I claimed it on unreasonable basis, then it would be.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

annaw said:


> Wikipedia describes Eurocentrism as "a worldview that is centered on Western civilization or a *biased* view that favors it over non-western civilizations."
> 
> If someone can objectively prove that Western classical music tradition is more universal or better than others, then it's not Eurocentrism because it's an objective observation and is thus not biased. If I claimed it on unreasonable basis, then it would be.


The statement itself is ill-formed. Cultural identity cannot be universal, to be universal is to transcend cultural identity. Just because the Arabs have done tremendous contribution to Algebra does not mean Algebra as a universal concept has anything to do with Arabic mathematics traditions during the golden age of Islam.

Nobody think of the Arabic traditions when they are solving equations (which is precisely why Algebra is universal). Only Arabs who want to take pride in their culture identity want to remind themselves of the heritage. Similarly, the cultural or historical setting or the English tradition shouldn't matter for performance of King Lear outside Britain, that's why King Lear is universal.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> the Arabs have done tremendous contribution to Algebra


They named it, but got it from India and Persia, who were doing algebra before Islam was a thing


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> For you it's paradoxical isn't it? Lady gaga's hot singles "seem" to be more universal than Bach's Mass in B minor? How dare these philistines not see the genius of Bach.


In a way it is. It perhaps takes more effort to appreciate Bach, or perhaps Bach just doesn't have the Gaga publicity machine. But yes, pop can be quite universal. Universal in itself doesn't denote quality.



> You are also putting up a strawman argument, as if stating a view is Eurocentric is a political dogma.


It isn't a straw man. Identity politics is very much a thing.



> The claim that "Western music is more universal than the rest" is a big claim, and requires justification. That's why the burden of proof is on those who claims it...


That carries a burden of proof, but yet "raga is just as universal in appeal as Bach" or "Indian music achieved at least as much as any other tradition" doesn't.



> The suggestion "Our western culture is more universal than the other cultures" is Eurocentric. This has nothing to do with politics. I am not even claiming that Eurocentrism is bad!


 You don't have to claim it's bad because the term "Eurocentrism" comes pre-loaded with bad from identity *politics*. It has everything to do with politics.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

annaw said:


> Wikipedia describes Eurocentrism as "a worldview that is centered on Western civilization or a *biased* view that favors it over non-western civilizations."







Sadly, other traditions did not have the efficient system of notation of European classical music. If you can't record your accomplishments, you can't pass them onto your later generations. And so there is no "richness" in the language and tradition.

All kinds of philosophical argument can be made how being "primitive" and "uncivilized" is the mankind's true goal, like Claude Lévi-Strauss's Tristes Tropiques. I guess it's cooler for a person to be "philosophical" than "practical" in this age.

The new way of thinking in the Europeans that came with the world wars, that views Europe's past achievements pessimistically, is said to have given birth to modern art.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

> In a way it is. It perhaps takes more effort to appreciate Bach, or perhaps Bach just doesn't have the Gaga publicity machine. But yes, pop can be quite universal. Universal in itself doesn't denote quality.


*And yet we were discussing universality not quality. *You have yet made a convincing case for the particular version of your assertion "Bach is more universal than Raga" other than stating that "it's obvious". If by universality you mean a popular contest then it doesn't hold, nor by the thought experiment I put forth. Because you have admitted that Bach's music can be difficult, which diminishes it's universal appeal.



> It isn't a straw man. Identity politics is very much a thing.


*It is a straw man in the context of our discussion.* You were invoking "idenity politics" which has nothing to do with our discussion as way to deflect a point that "universality has nothing to do with culture identity". As if anything (the term Eurocentrism) related to "identity politics" should be discredited outright (which also has no basis unless you have an ideology). Yet it is you who insists a culture identity for the universal dimension of Western classical music.



> That carries a burden of proof, but yet "raga is just as universal in appeal as Bach" or "Indian music achieved at least as much as any other tradition" doesn't.


If you read carefully, "Bach is more universal than Raga" is deduced as a corollary to your point "Western music tradition is more universal than the rest". So from a logical point of view, the burden of proof is still on you. I stated clearly that "there is no reason to believe that" which means the corollary of your extraordinary claim lacks evidence and justification. Inverting the burden of proof is a logical fallacy but I entertained that with a thought experiment.



> You don't have to claim it's bad because the term "Eurocentrism" comes pre-loaded with bad from identity *politics*. It has everything to do with politics.


According to Aristotle, we are political animals, what's wrong with that? Even if there is a "hidden" political dimension, how does that affects the validity of your statement or my argument? Should I carefully choose my word now so as to not offend you because Eurocentric is a "dirty word"? How about Western-centric which is a word I have just created to mean exactly that perspective to view West the favorably without justification? I am afraid you are bring in it "identity politics" to deflect a point.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for the great achievements of the West. Using history to claim cultural superiority is a different thing and deserve all the skepticism, but that's still debatable. But claiming that one culture identity is more universal than the others is self-contradictory.

The idea of universality in aesthetic trace back to Kant, which means precisely the property of being independent of the cultural identities, of being valid to all humans. It is therefore nonsensical to appropriate the universal aesthetic experience from the masterpieces (if they exists in the first place) to a monolithic culture identity like the concept of the West. You don't need to know ancient Indian philosophy or Sanskrit when you apply the concept of zero. Indians have "discovered" zero and "negative numbers" but whether it is the Indians or the Chinese who made the discovery is irrelevant to the universality of "zero" and "negative numbers". Similarly, listeners don't need to understand Polish history or what kind of dance Polonaise or Mazurka were, or Chopin's life and struggle, his unique individuality, his crafts in order to experience the *universal dimension* (e.g. the subtle human sentiments and emotions) of the Chopin's music; or a better example, listeners' knowledge of the anti-antisemitism and adultery of Wagner and the performance tradition in the third Reich do not interfere with the experience of the *universal dimension* (e.g. the struggle between love and power) of the Ring.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Bwv 1080 said:


> They named it, but got it from India and Persia, who were doing algebra before Islam was a thing


"Perhaps one of the most significant advances made by Arabic mathematics began at this time with the work of al-Khwarizmi, namely the beginnings of algebra. It is important to understand just how significant this new idea was. It was a revolutionary move away from the Greek concept of mathematics which was essentially geometry. Algebra was a unifying theory which allowed rational numbers, irrational numbers, geometrical magnitudes, etc., to all be treated as "algebraic objects". It gave mathematics a whole new development path so much broader in concept to that which had existed before, and provided a vehicle for the future development of the subject. Another important aspect of the introduction of algebraic ideas was that it allowed mathematics to be applied to itself in a way which had not happened before."

- MacTutor History of Mathematics archive


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> *And yet we were discussing universality not quality. *


Yeah...so...?



> *It is a straw man in the context of our discussion.* You were invoking "idenity politics" which has nothing to do with our discussion as way to deflect a point that "universality has nothing to do with culture identity". As if anything (the term Eurocentrism) related to "identity politics" should be discredited outright ...


 As it should. I'm weary of those cheap scraps of 50s French philosophy and the associated lingo.


> If you read carefully, "Bach is more universal than Raga" is deduced as a corollary to your point "Western music tradition is more universal than the rest". So from a logical point of view, the burden of proof is still on you. I stated clearly that "there is no reason to believe that" which means the corollary of your extraordinary claim lacks evidence and justification. Inverting the burden of proof is a logical fallacy but I entertained that with a thought experiment.


The "global reach" of Bach vs raga is proof enough. And...you know it. But if you have evidence to the contrary, let's see it.


> According to Aristotle, we are political animals, what's wrong with that? Even if there is a "hidden" political dimension, how does that affects the validity of your statement or my argument?


It gets to motivation and perspective. Some see "truth" or "morality" through a political lens, in which any kind of objective reality can be distorted or massaged to fit the dogmas of a political agenda, when actually the process should be the other way around.


> But claiming that one culture identity is more universal than the others is self-contradictory.


Hm. I would say that the ancient Athenian culture was far more universal in scope and in impact than, say, that of the Aztecs. Nothing contradictory there. Which is not to say that that was due to the "racial" or "ethnic" characteristics of either.

As for the rest of the screed, TL;DR.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

> Yeah...so...?


So you have made an irrelevant argument because I have no qualm about the musical quality of Bach. (Do I need to spell out everything for you ?)



> As it should. I'm weary of those cheap scraps of 50s French philosophy and the associated lingo.


Says the person who preaches about the danger of seeing thing through political lens and dogmas and the importance of "objective reality" (as if that's relevant to the discussion). Yet here throw jabs at empty air in such general terms without anything concrete or relevant to add. How can I take you seriously after see high quality comment like this.



> The "global reach" of Bach vs raga is proof enough. And...you know it. But if you have evidence to the contrary, let's see it.


So it's a popularity contest for you after all, if that's what you mean, thanks for clarifying that Bach is more popular worldwide than Raga, I am glad that I have learnt something that I don't already know.



> I would say that the ancient Athenian culture was far more universal in scope and in impact than, say, that of the Aztecs. Nothing contradictory there.


This is an actual concrete counter argument. But you don't seem to understand the concept of universality as developed throughout the history of the Western thought, as a part of the Western tradition you seem so eager to champion (except the those French philosophers in the 50s, whoever they are).

It is true the Athenians have ask questions and developed concepts and institution that is related to the so-call universal values, but that Athenian culture itself is definitely not universal, not at its time, and certainly not today (imaging voting based on random lottery, slavery, and pedarasty). *A culture identity is an instrument to differentiate oneself from the others, it cannot be the "universal", or more "universal".*

*What you really mean by universal is "popular" (well you can't beat China or India on population) or "widespread" (just like Lady Gaga or Kanye West). *



> Which is not to say that that was due to the "racial" or "ethnic" characteristics of either.


It's funny that you bring up "racial", "ethinic", which was not even in the discussion. I have used specifically the term culture identities to avoid unnecessary relation to these touchy subjects.


----------



## Shosty (Mar 16, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> "Perhaps one of the most significant advances made by Arabic mathematics began at this time with the work of al-Khwarizmi, namely the beginnings of algebra. It is important to understand just how significant this new idea was. It was a revolutionary move away from the Greek concept of mathematics which was essentially geometry. Algebra was a unifying theory which allowed rational numbers, irrational numbers, geometrical magnitudes, etc., to all be treated as "algebraic objects". It gave mathematics a whole new development path so much broader in concept to that which had existed before, and provided a vehicle for the future development of the subject. Another important aspect of the introduction of algebraic ideas was that it allowed mathematics to be applied to itself in a way which had not happened before."
> 
> - MacTutor History of Mathematics archive


Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi was a Persian polymath, though. He was born in Khawrazm, which was part of the Persian empire back in the ninth century. He wrote in Arabic because like Latin, Arabic was the scientific/academic language of the muslim world back then. Being muslim and writing in Arabic do not necessarily determine a person's nationality, especially in those times.

Either way this is all very off-topic in my opinion, and I don't think the discussion in the past few pages is what the OP had in mind. Just saying.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> A culture identity is an instrument to differentiate oneself from the others, it cannot be the "universal", or more "universal".
> 
> What you really mean by universal is "popular" (well you can't beat China or India on population) or "widespread" (just like Lady Gaga or Kanye West).


It still doesn't address the point. At any rate a work of art can be "universal" as a *work of art* and not be "popular" in the strict sense of the term. In fact, "popular" is usually the antonym of "classical" or "high art". So there's a contradiction in terms. So no, I'm not equating "universal" with "popular". _You are._
By the way I did try to define universality a little in an earlier comment:
' "Universality" would mean adaptability (or adoptability) across various cultures. It would be something that speaks directly across other cultural barriers.'
There is absolutely nothing contradictory in saying that a distinct culture or tradition can produce art or literature or philosophy that is readily grasped and adopted by other cultures...and which doesn't make that originating culture itself "superior". Athenian culture produced Socrates and also destroyed Socrates. Socrates was still a product of that culture.


UniversalTuringMachine said:


> But you don't seem to understand the concept of universality as developed throughout the history of the Western thought, as a part of the Western tradition you seem so eager to champion (except the those French philosophers in the 50s, whoever they are).


Well then maybe you need to look into Derrida, Lyotard, Foucault and Barthes.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

consuono said:


> Well then maybe you need to look into Derrida, Lyotard, Foucault and Barthes.


Why should I torture myself and I don't think they like metaphysical idea like the "the universal". Why don't you just say your point rather than list the names.


----------

