“9/11 is the greatest work of art in the cosmos” (Stockhausen).
Karlheinz Stockhausen’s theoretical approach to the events of 9/11 from a political or aesthetic perspective brought about several problematic issues from both media and political influences. Stockhausen was faced with these issues directly after making his statement.
From our perspective, this criticism is void if people refuse to acknowledge the matter as anything other than a gruesome, unjustified attack on the United States, rather than an orchestrated, theatrical response to a political issue.
To theorize about 9/11 in an aesthetic or political fashion is to do exactly what was discouraged post 9/11; to think of 9/11 as a response to a particular political issue.
It is our opinion that this orchestrated response promotes an intellectual standpoint on an issue, rather than blind acceptance of media influence.
2 comments:
*Additional commentary by Carolyn Moriarty:
In reference to the terrorist attacks that occurred on 9/11, Karlheinz Stockhausen remarked that it was “the greatest work of art that is possible in the whole cosmos.” The mass media wasted on time in slamming Stockhausen with harsh criticism about his antipatriotic sentiments.
My commentary on this involves the effects that mass communication has on society as well as the impact that society has on mass communication and the media. It seems that In the United States, the public is given freedom over their means of communication. For example, we know that we are excluded from the system of Communism that used media as a means of spreading propaganda.
In truth, the system of mass communication in the United States is more controlled than we may realize. Our media is tied to our nation’s history, our sense of nationality and our collective moral values. . In other words, mass communication plays an important role in showing people what to do in terms of social and cultural practices. (Perhaps this is why Stockhausen made his remark offhandedly. As a native German, perhaps he was unaware of the surge of nationalism that occurred after the events of 9/11).
The government’s task is to provide surveillance on news that exposes change or instigates conflict. When the public is exposed to media texts that infringe upon our cultural hegemony, they react with anger and defiance. If what we hear does not coincide with the “right” way of doing things, we label the speaker as prejudice and ignorant.
The way the media conveys distorted stereotypes encourages a type of ethnocentrism. This, I believe is one factor that caused the backlash against Stockhausen. In response to his critics, the German composer claimed that his remark was made with innocuous intent. According to him, 9/11 was a great work of art because it captured the eyes of the entire nation, it made people think, and it provoked heavy discourse.
Critics were still unwilling to accept Stockhausen’s admission, claiming that while good art can indeed invoke a cathartic response in viewers, it should remain a step away from reality. This excludes that depiction of real suffering.
The role of the media in shaping the collective values that encourage ethnocentrism may be attributed to the criticisms Stockhausen received. However, I think Franz Schoenberner’s quote in Hugh Dalziel Duncan’s book Communication and Social Order offers the best commentary on the social function of art in society. According to the editor of a German magazine, “an acute sense of the comical side of life is a good antidote against panic. But it sometimes works as a narcotic, because one usually forgets that a situation can be at the same time highly humorous and terribly dangerous (412)”.
-Carolyn
In response to Carolyn’s post, I agree that while the media did play a crucial role in how the citizens of the United States viewed the attacks, it goes further than playing into harsh stereotypes.
Stockhausen met with intense backlash because he dared to examine the reasoning behind the attacks, rather than accept that it happened and it was terrible.
Immediately following the attack, the government and media depicted a great sense of mourning, anger, and unity: mourning for all of the innocent lives taken and affected, anger that someone dared attack this country, and unity in order to instill feelings of nationalism and pride in the American culture and values.
Instead of considering as to why the country was attacked, the force behind it, and the places which were targeted, the media and government put up a united front in face of what President Bush deems “deliberate and deadly attacks.”
We often forget how “deliberate” the attacks really were. These premeditated attacks centered on attacking, not on innocent citizens of the country, but on places that hold precedence in American culture, i.e. the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Admitting that the attack happened for reasons other than random acts of terror are unthinkable because the media shoots down anyone who tries to say otherwise.
We wrote, “From our perspective, this criticism is void if people refuse to acknowledge the matter as anything other than a gruesome, unjustified attack on the United States, rather than an orchestrated, theatrical response to a political issue.” Stockhausen provoked feelings that the country were unwilling to consider because of the fear that may rise from it.
It is far easier to name an enemy and attack them than it is to sit back and think over the situation critically.
Had the country looked at the attack as something other than blind murder, then perhaps a more efficient plan could have been formulated as to how to move forward.
-Caitlin
Post a Comment