What is Musical Meaning? Theorizing Music as Performative Utterance

Abstract

In this article, I theorize a new conception of musical meaning, based on J. L. Austin’s theory of performative utterances in his treatise How to Do Things with Words. Austin theorizes language meaning pragmatically: he highlights the manifold ways language performs actions and is used to “do things” in praxis. Austin thereby suggests a new theoretic center for language meaning, an implication largely developed by others after his death. This article theorizes an analogous position that locates musical meaning in the use of music “to do things,” which may include performing actions such as reference and disclosure, but also includes, in a theoretically rigorous fashion, a manifold of other semiotic actions performed by music to apply pressure to its contexts of audition. I argue that while many questions have been asked about meanings of particular examples of music, a more fundamental question has not been addressed adequately: what does meaning mean? Studies of musical meaning, I argue, have systematically undertheorized the ways in which music, as interpretable utterance, can create, transform, maintain, and destroy aspects of the world in which it participates. They have largely presumed that the basic units of sense when it comes to questions of musical meaning consist of various messages, indexes, and references encoded into musical sound and signifiers. Instead, I argue that a considerably more robust analytic takes the basic units of sense to be the various acts that music (in being something interpretable) performs or enacts within its social/situational contexts of occurrence. Ultimately, this article exposes and challenges a deep-seated Western bias towards equating meaning with forms of reference, representation, and disclosure. Through the “performative” theory of musical utterance as efficacious action, it proposes a unified theory of musical meaning that eliminates the gap between musical reference, on the one hand, and musical effects, on the other. It offers a way to understand musical meaning in ways that are deeply contextual (both socially and structurally): imbricated with the human practices that not only produce music but are produced by it in the face of its communicative capacities. I build theoretically with the help of various examples drawn largely from tonal repertoires, and I follow with lengthier analytical vignettes focused on experimental twentieth and twenty-first century works.

Introduction: Making History Through Music Performance and Education

“…Another, more promising and in-depth approach to performativity comes from music theorist Andrew J. Chung who presents what he calls a use-theoretical notion of "meaning"' (Chung, 2019). Drawing on Austin and Wittgenstein, he promotes a performative perspective on the musical work as an artefact, as "an invitation to set down momentarily a certain tool we are accustomed to wielding as part of our sense-making circumspection toward the sounding, musicking.…”

“…Suffice it to say, for the moment, that there is a growing tendency to address performativities more fully in music research (see e.g., Chung, 2019;Kartomi, 2014;Madrid, 2009), in addition to the established Butlerian approaches affiliated with, for instance, identity, gender and ethnicity studies. In one sense, we seek to join forces with Chung's P 1 -Performativity and P 2 -Performativity, as well as Miller's Performativities sub 1 and sub 2 (Chung, 2019;Miller, 2009), while at the same time acknowledging the individual contributions and genealogical steps of performativity's development (e.g., Loxley, 2006;Loxley & Robson, 2013) in close relation to pedagogy and rhetoric. I offer here a possible starting point, not a complete methodology, but rather a contributory incentive towards creating a course for future research: What will HIP do for us in the future?…”

Hearing Early Modern Music Through the Contemporary

“…Another, more promising and in-depth approach to performativity comes from music theorist Andrew J. Chung who presents what he calls a use-theoretical notion of "meaning"' (Chung, 2019). Drawing on Austin and Wittgenstein, he promotes a performative perspective on the musical work as an artefact, as "an invitation to set down momentarily a certain tool we are accustomed to wielding as part of our sense-making circumspection toward the sounding, musicking.…”

“…Suffice it to say, for the moment, that there is a growing tendency to address performativities more fully in music research (see e.g., Chung, 2019;Kartomi, 2014;Madrid, 2009), in addition to the established Butlerian approaches affiliated with, for instance, identity, gender and ethnicity studies. In one sense, we seek to join forces with Chung's P 1 -Performativity and P 2 -Performativity, as well as Miller's Performativities sub 1 and sub 2 (Chung, 2019;Miller, 2009), while at the same time acknowledging the individual contributions and genealogical steps of performativity's development (e.g., Loxley, 2006;Loxley & Robson, 2013) in close relation to pedagogy and rhetoric. I offer here a possible starting point, not a complete methodology, but rather a contributory incentive towards creating a course for future research: What will HIP do for us in the future?…”

Musical Modus: Perspectives for Ontological Interpretation

“…Проблема переходит в иную плоскость. Например, акционизм (перформативная теория) мыслит музыку как эффект, выполнение значимых действий со значимыми последствиями, в которых мы находим способы совладать с нашим восприятием, исполнением или «прослушиванием» себя [Chung 2019]. Этот способ мышления предполагает, что категории, к которым часто обращаются при обсуждении музыкального значения, -выражение, раскрытие, референциальность, символика, значение и т.п.…”