Music: A Subversive History

by Ted Gioia

A preeminent music historian and critic presents a global history of music from the bottom up


Histories of music overwhelmingly suppress stories of the outsiders and rebels who created musical revolutions and instead celebrate the mainstream assimilators who borrowed innovations, diluted their impact, and disguised their sources. In Music: A Subversive History, historian Ted Gioia reclaims the story of music for the riffraff, insurgents, and provocateurs.


Gioia tells a four-thousand-year history of music as a global source of power, change, and upheaval. He shows how social outcasts have repeatedly become trailblazers of musical expression: slaves and their descendants, for instance, have repeatedly reinvented music, from ancient times all the way to the jazz, reggae, and hip-hop sounds of the current day.



Music: A Subversive History is essential reading for anyone interested in the meaning of music, from Sappho to the Sex Pistols to Spotify.

Genres: Music, History, Nonfiction, Art, Audiobook, Politics, Cultural

528 pages, Hardcover

First published October 15, 2019

About the author

Ted Gioia (1957) is an American jazz critic and music historian.

Reviews

[Maria · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am putting this down for the moment, the patronizing tone was too annoying. I might return to it at some point though, because he does talk about interesting stuff.

[Kendra · Rating 2 out of 5]

Gioia notes early in this book that he's been writing it for 25 years. That shows: his conception of how music history is taught and written about and discussed is about 25 years out-of-date, and his work in this book suffers badly from it. The book would have been a powerful call to action and change two decades ago, but today, with hundreds of fantastic, progressive, new, and radically different approaches to music historiography in practice, both for "art" and "pop" musics, Gioia's work is out of touch, and the book's claims come far too late for it to be relevant or useful.

[Alex MacMillan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This global survey of the history of music is a hit-or-miss affair, as many chapters, particularly during the prehistoric and medieval eras, either drag or are too repetitive. He overuses cliched phrases such as "the present ethos" and "at this juncture" to the point of aggravation. The author's editor should have urged him to consolidate the first half's key points into fewer chapters, especially as his postmodern speculations about the subversive undertones of premodern music are overly reliant upon a spotty historical record. The book picks up in the second half, but never reaches the same level of insight of other books that I've read about music with similar themes, such as In Praise of Commercial Culture, Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! and A Renegade History of the United States.

[James Klagge · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting read. Offers a history of music from the start (hunter-gatherers) to streaming. Although it examines a few non-Western traditions, it is mostly Western music. The "subversive history" proposes that musical innovation always comes from the outsiders and then eventually gets accommodated. Thus, the history of music is a sort of pendulum. While this is painting with very broad strokes, it makes for an interesting viewpoint. It does feel like the details are sometimes cherry-picked to fit the theory, but that is probably unavoidable if one is committed to a theory.
The author is very knowledgeable, and the real interest of the book is in the obscure musicians or historical details known to the author. My favorite chapter was the last one, on the effects of modern technology on music.
Being a scholar myself (of Wittgenstein, not of music) it is only appropriate that I nit-pick a bit:
-In telling stories about musicians, it is only natural that the author wants to fill out the stories with interesting details. But this leads the author to use ancient biographical sources or anecdotes that are either questionable or known to be apocryphal. (While I admire the author for using endnotes to give sources, he doesn't even give sources for these stories. I'm guessing they come from places like The lives and opinions of eminent philosophers by Diogenes Laertius. The extensive stories related about Pythagoras and Empedocles struck me as especially doubtful.) I guess this is the danger of trying to take scholarship to the people.
-The author discusses how singers can hide messages in their songs that are known to insiders but disguised to outsiders--like spirituals ostensibly recalling the Israelites' escape from Egypt but also calling for their own liberation from slavery, or sexual innuendo. The author says (p. 159 & 186) that "Henry Louis Gates introduced the term 'signifying' to encompass this practice..." That's just silly. Gates may have "introduced" the term into the scholarly discussion, but it has been a well-known term for at least decades. The Signifying Monkey is a stock character in African-American folktales, and Sonny Boy Williamson II sang about "signifying" in "Don't Start Me to Talkin'" (1955).
-The author gives the background for Christmas songs being called Christmas "carols" (p. 191). It is plausible and interesting, but I wonder how he resisted mentioning Bob Dylan's "legendary" account of the origin of the term in his XM Theme Time radio show about "Christmas and New Years." I think Bob made it up out of whole cloth!
-The author has justifiably critical things to say about Steven Pinker, who is NOT a philosopher (as claimed on p. 279) but a psychologist (as claimed on p. 469); and whose name is "Steven" (as claimed on p. 279), NOT "Stephen" (as claimed on p. 469).
-I was bothered by his discussion of "rock" music as it emerged as distinct from "rock-n-roll." Certainly there was no "rock" in the '50's, and it had emerged by the '70's. But when, more specifically? The author claims (p. 381) "By 1960, rock had taken over the commercial music business." That seemed awfully implausible. I would have put the emergence of "rock" more like the mid-'60's. He mentions both "Revolver," by the Beatles, and the Velvet Underground on p. 391, Henrdix's "Are You Experienced" (p. 362) and Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" (p. 363), and I would connect them with the start of "rock"--i.e., 1965-66.
-The author has an interesting chapter ("The Sacrificial Ritual") about the early death of rock stars and the impact on their music, but this way of putting it just didn't make sense (p. 405): "Music stars at this exulted level may even see their recordings reach a new peak of popularity in the week following their demise." But...they are not around to "see" anything following their demise!
-The author's brief discussion (p. 407) of the cathartic effect of some music, with an allusion to Aristotle, would have been a good place for a footnote to my op-ed “Violent media may have a cathartic role in healthy lives,” Roanoke Times, May 7, 1999, posted on my webpage.
-I enjoyed the ways the author found to connect music with mundane aspects of life, like exercise. He says (p. 459) "synching the tempo of a music playlist with an athlete's heartbeat can improve stamina, speed and performance." My own experience with running is that synching the beat of the music with my stride is much more visceral. A powerful song that matches or is slightly faster than my stride is incredibly motivating. Of course, it all depends on your stride, but for me U2's "Beautiful Day" is perfect.
-I would have enjoyed some discussion of the role, experience and aesthetics of listening to music. For example, the possession of music (records, tapes, cd's, downloads) is less than a century old, and quickly passing. I would need a U-Haul to move all my records/cd's (and books), while my son could move all his in his pocket. I devote notable space in my house to books and music, while that's never a consideration in anyone's mind on "House Hunters." (For more on this see my op-ed “Me and my books,” Roanoke Times, September 4, 2014, posted on my webpage.). When I was a teenager and into my twenties I set aside time to listen to music. Even now I do, though less so. Mostly now music is part of multi-tasking--listening to streaming while you work, etc. I am not a multi-tasker. Connected with both the previous points about space for music and time for music, there is the matter of music-listening technology. Along with my space for records and cd's I have a "stereo" with a record-player, cd-player, amplifier and speakers. I am not high-end, but anyway medium-end. I care about how the music sounds. What does it mean for music that that is now rare? Will sound technology ever matter any more? Does it matter whether it matters? (OK, I'm a philosopher...)
In sum, I'm glad I read the book, and found lots to enjoy. But I think I'll search out something by the author that is more narrowly focussed, such as Delta Blues: The Life and Times of the Mississippi Masters Who Revolutionized American Music.

[J Earl · Rating 5 out of 5]

Music: A Subversive History by Ted Gioia started out by surprising me and ended up by blowing me away. Not what I had expected, as in: much more than I expected.

I love to read music histories. Most tend to be about a specific genre, maybe about an era, sometimes about an instrument. The few I have read that are a history of music as a whole still tend to be selective with what is considered music (or at least what they deem worthy of inclusion) and/or limited by a broad style (western vs eastern; tonal vs atonal). This book not only covers all of these but goes so far as to start with the Big Bang. Yes, that Big Bang.

The breadth of topics covered through the portal of music and musicality is breathtaking. From prehistoric ideas of how music might have been used through various institutional attempts to control and limit music to the idea of music as primarily entertainment divorced from any practical purpose, Gioia cuts a wide path through not just music history but human history.

He manages to not only cover all of this information but make some arguments for how music has been pivotal in history itself and even some insight into specific musicians (Beethoven, Parker, etc). I think because of the wide sweep through history this book will appeal to a wide range of readers, though admittedly certain sections may be more appealing than others. For scholars in various disciplines this may well indicate how music (broadly defined) might be incorporated into future research. For casual readers I think Gioia has managed to not get bogged down in any one area or time so that even if your primary interest might be a specific time the rest of the book will still interest you. And the early points he makes serve quite often as part of the foundation for later discussions in the book, so reading every section, even if not your main interest area, is highly recommended.

While acknowledging that there will no doubt be some people who don't want this exhaustive or comprehensive history of music, I can't really think of any particular group of readers to whom I wouldn't recommend the book.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Joachim Stoop · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was different and a bit less engaging than I expected

[Jason Friedlander · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gioia’s story of (mostly western) music’s subversive power is interesting and entertaining to follow, though I realized halfway through that my engagement with it was inversely related to how much I knew about the period or artists brought up. At the end of the day it’s another grand narrative more intriguing read between the covers than within a broader context, but still one worth seriously considering.

[Jennifer Vekert · Rating 2 out of 5]

The paleobiology was notably wrong on a few obvious points so all the cool stuff seemed dubious. Dnf.

[Oskar Ledeboer Gill]

Important takeaways;

- Big Tech bad
- Bach was a raging alcoholic with 20 children

[თემო გერაძე · Rating 5 out of 5]

უსქოლიო წიგნების წაკითხვის პროცესში მიღებულ ცოდნასა და სიამოვნებას გაუმარჯოს 🥱

[Gaili Schoen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some fascinating information here. Shocking to hear that the US spends more on military bands than it does on the National Endowment for the Arts. It seems that the American government believes that music is best suited to ramp up our military! I appreciated that women in music history were given if not equal time, they were at least given most of their due. Many interesting anecdotes and the central argument that it is rebellion and outsiders that give rise to the most innovative music is plausible. The author speaks about the magic of music to affect us deeply and to transform lives and cultures. This book could have been much shorter as the author repeats himself, restating the same points in different ways over and over again. And if he maintained a less academic tone, he could make his book much more accessible to music lovers. The author would have benefitted from a more proactive editor!

[Nick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not that I really needed to read another history of music this year, but this one may have been the best of the lot. It's because it doesn't just cover the history of popular music, but all music, from pre-history until the modern day. Hearing about the rebels of music, and how music invades almost every part of our lives was right up my alley.

Gioia shows how music has always been a tool of subversion - of sex and violence, trance and ritual. Across time there has been a continual process of innovation by the outsiders of society that is then followed by legitimisation from the mainstream, a cycle that has been happening long before more recent examples like punk and hip-hop came about.

It's meticulously researched, persuasively written, and most importantly - it's never boring!

[Gus Weyandt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gioia’s history of music uniquely maps the age-old battle between artists and power structures. Comprehensive and thought-provoking, “Music: A Subversive History” challenges its readers to rethink musical innovation, not just as simple entertainment or high art, but as a social and political force with immense ability to alter and uproot lives as well as entire societies. This is a must-read for any music OR history buff: It will surely expand your understanding of music beyond the constraints of the algorithms and records that mark the average person’s everyday relationship with human kind’s most provocative and powerful art form .

[Oz sf · Rating 3 out of 5]

I would have titled it “American …”. Claiming that it covers history of “global” music makes me wonder if the publisher/author ignores the value of music outside certain cultures.

[Tekla Inashvili · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5
ზოგი თავი უფრო საინტერესოდ და გემრიელად იკითხებოდა - ზოგი ისე რა. თუმცა, ამაში გასაკვირი არაფერი არაა, იმის გათვალიწინებით, რომ ეს არ არის მხატვრული წიგნი.
მშვენიერი იყო
"მუსიკა დღესაც მაგიურია და მათთვისაც კი, ვისაც მისი გამოყენება დავიწყებია"

[Rob Saunders · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh my! Sex, violence, subversion, disruption in the lower classes, science experiments on the effects of sound inside bubbles, and Plato's warning about musical taste shifts that would lead to the "untuning of the universe" all in one book? About music? Indeed. This ain't no 'it's only music and butter wouldn't melt in its mouth' story. It's the inside scoop and it's way better.

Music: A Subversive History by Ted Gioia, is a far-ranging, hard-to-put-down discourse that analyzes everything from the evolution of sound, to the birth of music genres, to musicians and audiences, and to those who have (throughout history) sought to control feelings, effects, and profits from its making. I am a lifelong musician and student of music. This book raised my eyebrows and my understanding. It is the most comprehensive, thoughtful, and satisfying book on music I have ever read.

A really odd thing happened on my way to reading this book. I hefted this tome onto my lap and (for some reason) opened the book at what I guessed was the mid-point and started reading a chapter entitled "Subversives in Wigs" about classical musicians. (If nothing else you'll thank me for mentioning the joke about J. S. Bach in this chapter.) I was hooked immediately. I "finished" the book, then went back and read it from the beginning. In retrospect, this reading method was some personal subversive intrigue of its own accord. But it was a rather fortunate bit of serendipity that I found the second half much more riveting than the first half and may not have otherwise made it through all 500+ pages. If you're a scholar every page is a gold mine. Gioia lays out his research and builds the foundation for his theories from page one. As it should be.

Read this book if you're into musicology or the music business or if you like creating, listening, performing, or appreciating music. Read this book if you want some thoughtful perspective on music history, science, and culture. Read this book for insights and stories about musicians and those who have tried to control music from the beginning of time to the present. Recommended for everyone.

Read this book: you may never hear or think about music the same way again.

Here are a few quotes.

Ted Gioia wrote:

More than one thousand references to music can be found in the Bible – in Judeo-Christian tradition, no physical icon or relic can come close to matching the potency of sound as a pathway to the Divine and a source of transformative energy. P. 10

[T]he modern guitar represents the exact danger that Plato had perceived in the flute more than two millennia before: an untuning of the universe. P. 102

It may seem strange that the technical terms for different melodic modes would originate with slavery, but such connections reveal important truths about the roles of outsiders and musical innovation...the scale that exerted the greatest impact on music of the 20th century, the blues scale, also originated among slaves and the descendants of slaves. P. 111

[A]ny attempt to grasp sudden shifts and apparent innovations in the sphere of music must start with the same question criminal investigators ask: cui bono, or, in simple translation, Who benefits? P. 112

Religions require trance as much as they do dogma, perhaps even more. P. 137

The same religious authorities who fostered singing when it was under their control also worked as zealously to eliminate all its other manifestations. No force in the history of the Western world has ever matched the early Christians and their determination to police, prohibit, and punish singing among the populace. P. 139

Back in 1709, Antonio Vivaldi felt compelled to offer this dedication to King Frederick IV of Denmark and Norway: "It gives me great confidence to offer you my abasement which in real consideration of my nothingness could not in any way be more diminished." P. 247

Even when the changes are gradual, sometimes a single shift in the ecosystem reflects a reality previously hidden from view. P. 253

Ninety-nine percent of the disinformation and propaganda in music history comes from institutions - and, of course, the unwitting dupes who swallow their tall tales. They aim to promote their agendas, not serve as beacons to the historical truth, and their claims must always be scrutinized and checked against primary sources. P. 265

The outsider becomes the source of a different pathway to legitimization. P. 364

Music has always been connected with sex, as far back as the fertility rights of yore, but never had the music business been so openly interventionist in facilitating liaisons [as during the Disco era.] Disco was Tinder before there was Tinder. P. 410 - 411

Letting people pick their favorite music will always be a dangerous liberty with political ramifications. P. 447

As the accumulated examples of the previous decades - even centuries - attest, true innovation in music comes from disruption, not standardization. P. 448

[Fakekitten · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't enjoy the book very much at first, because it smells like what a middle-aged, middle-class white male who liked jazz would think music history would look like.

He shows very limited non-Western musical elements, and still inevitably falls into the narrative of Western music-centric. (It's kind of like how Han Chinese write Chinese music history lol.)

On this summer road trip, we went back home to visit grandma. As a Buyi(布依） growing up in an ethnic minority autonomous region, I didn't think my grandmother's music was anything special. The songs sound simple, the rhythm is monotonous, and the lyrics are almost unintelligible.

Folk songs exist in one form in the inherent impression of mainstream media and the public (such as Yunnan mountain songs), that is, bold and flirtatious minor. On Bilibili (a video website ) you can search for the key words of “山歌”, and you will find many low-cost music videos and derivative spoof videos.

The music my grandma sings and records herself sounds too rough, often with loud vocals and background sounds, and starts and ends in a straightforward way. I wonder why she didn't just buy music that someone else recorded on the market? At weekend fairs in small cities, it is not difficult to find recordings (usually personal or small studios) that look like "老司机带带我" on Bilibili.

"Confucius can read, but he can't sing." This is what my grandmother said to us before she showed me her recorded mountain songs. My grandmother is illiterate. This sentence really applies to her.

What is music? What is music to my grandma? In this book, he commented on the early music as follows: "For people without semiconductors and spaceships, music is their technology... songs are cloud storage, which preserves the history, tradition and survival skills of the community."

When she showed us the music she recorded, she was excited to explain the lyrics, some of which are about the history of the Three Kingdoms period,some are praying to nature for more children and more blessings.

I finally realized that music has another function besides entertainment for Grandma who has never received education. Music carries desire and emotion, and it is also the education method of history, literature, and even the whole ethnic group.

In the era of tight discourse power, music is also the voice channel of marginalized groups. In the era of apartheid, black music is a bullet that can pierce the standardized music of white people. That is to say, according to the education, the blues is in the form of 12 bars, but black artists usually make the chorus last 11 or 13 bars, and even include incomplete bars and free notes.

Like rock music and rap music in the future, blues became part of the commercial music industry. From record companies to Internet companies, music has always been tried to incorporate and utilize, but has always jumped out. Just as everyone is beginning to fear that AI will replace human creation, and fear algorithms will feed us taste, music has some qualities that resist this "smooth age", that we can't put words to music, we can't really discipline the form of music.

As non-music creators and ordinary listeners, are we "helpless" with music? In the final non-declaration on music in his book, he said: "The audience is never passive, they always use music." We share music in social medias, we listen to music with our lovers, and we try to reproduce music with vision and words, which is another expression of music. We connect other senses through hearing, narrow the distance and space, and realize the interaction of love, vulnerability and strength. At this moment, our destination is the same.

After returning to Shanghai,we once had dinner with an Indonesian American. He mentioned that his grandfather left a ballad to his descendants, saying that it could lead them to find their hometown. He always felt that this was his grandfather's nonsense until he returned home once and really found the location of his ancestral house through this song. “曲径通幽处"（A winding path leads to a secluded place）. In many cases, human ideologies may be different, but music can always have magic power to make us “殊途同归”（go the same way）.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

A captivating read and a nice counterpart to the standard music history textbooks. Gioia presents a compelling theory about the development of musical styles and argues his case persuasively with regard to each era and style that he covers. Much of the evidence presented is truly illuminating. Who knew that the Lydians and Phrygians were actually ethnic groups enslaved by the Greeks, for instance? I bristled a bit at Gioia's insistence upon the universality of music, but he's referring more to its social functions and patterns of development, not the particulars of any given theoretical framework such as 12TET.

The book is not without notable flaws. The testimonial from Fred Hersch at the very beginning boldly asserts that Gioia argues the universality of music from all cultures, which leads one to believe that the book will present a balanced, global perspective. To Gioia's credit, Music is significantly less Eurocentric than many other music history books, especially in the beginning. However, as the book goes on, it increasingly falls into the groove of the conventional European music history timeline. Gioia gives many forms of African-American and/or popular music their due (finally), but the book is only half-committed to the idea of a global perspective. A few references to Rumi or the Shijing ultimately amount to a shallow multiculturalism. The lack of substance with which Gioia discusses Latin American music is striking in comparison to his discussion of certain other topics: references to Sid Vicious abound, yet the words "Cuba" or "Mexico" do not even appear once. A couple of distracting typographical errors made their way into the first edition, and whether they will be corrected in future editions remains to be seen.

Nevertheless, I enjoyed Music for what it really is: an alternative Western music history text, A People's History of the United States for music, if you will. It's certainly a hell of a lot more exciting than my undergrad textbook. Because of the vastness of the topic and the relative brevity of the work, many seminal figures within even the Western classical tradition don't receive their proper due, and I'd recommend reading this book as a supplement to more traditional music history material.

[molosovsky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone interested in music should at least give this one a try.
Gioia has a holistic view, and is not ›only‹ concerned with musical techniques, styles and fashions, but with anthropological, social and political aspects.
Extremely valuable how he regards themes that rarely find their way into a non-fiction book about art, especially music, about all the ›dark‹ or ›raunchy‹ powers that music possesses: sex, violence, social unrest, defiance, magic, altered states of mind.
Gioia is a fine storyteller so that this book entertains like a novel about music and humans (individuals and societies) through the last 4000 years. Not experimental, but straightforward, never afraid to speculate or ask questions. Recommended for everyone interested in music, from layman to expert.

Listend to audiobook (very good performed by Jamie Rennell except for some french pronounciations … I think) but will also buy hardcopy for notes and further study.

Also: one of the books I would LOVE to translate into German if I had the time and/or energy.

[Mangoo · Rating 5 out of 5]

As per its subtitle, "subversive" is an apt description of the type of narrative that pervades this fascinating, engaging and at times provocative history of music, ranging from pre-historical times till almost present days. According to Gioia, music itself is subversive, a force to reckon with: it is the manifestation of an inherent form of expression that humans have developed to channel and promote either sex or violence, the most subversive forces in psychology; it is driven by subversives, outsiders, outcasts, people that are not linked to rules and even expected to break them, only until they are eventually legitimized and institutionalized by society in an attempt to become itself immune and even fortified by the sanctioning, while inevitably susceptible to the next subversion; and it is a subversive point of view the one that the author takes, presenting the extensive material under his belt in generally chronological order, though with illuminating diachronic connections, at times meant to evidence the ultimate time invariance in human attitudes, as if time does not really have ways to change them. For Gioia, music changes only exogenously, and the waves of change are ultimately absorbed by society in waiting for the next wave - this is the distinct perspective that unifies this learned attempt at condensing a script for the evolution of this form of art. Music starts as imitation of natural sounds - and here Gioia seems to quarrel Pinker against the latter's presumption that music is only "auditory cheesecake", a reductive judgement that does not accounts for the poignancy of psychological power and emotional control that music exerts - as a way for hunters to keep away animals (root of rock music) and later for herders to soothe and calm them (root for country music). The dialectic between Pythagorean or Apollinean music versus Orphic or Dyonisian music then ensues - the former mathematical and crystalline, the latter visceral and transcendental - as well as between feminine music (considered weak, lamenting) and masculine music (stately, virile). From a form of collective entertainment generated by anonymous musicians for anonymous populations, music gradually becomes a legitimized expression of personal sentiments, so that the musicians become recognized and the audience itself becomes progressively the arbiter of value and acknowledgment. The Catholic church tried to censor music and reduce it silence only until it had to yield to its power and accept to embed it in rituals and even benefit from its reach. Musicians gradually become financially autonomous from institutions and patrons thanks to publishing and performances, and this leads to the triumph of Romantic subjectivity followed by patriotism and folk traditions - until the rules are irreversibly broken by African ascendants in the new world (just like it happened with slaves in Greece) and their invention of rag(time), blues, and jazz (later bebop). Add electricity to it, and the next wave introduces rock 'n' roll, then more simply rock until the British invasion and the summer of love. To this, the punk reaction (although this transition could and should have been more emphasized with the decadent excesses of progressive rock), followed by disco and pop, which then leave the stage to rap and hip-hop and the final dissolution of genres into the seemingly infinite count of music sub-genres currently available on demand on streaming. Along the ride, technology and support for music evolves accordingly and finally dissolves into the digital ether, and what remain unmoved and undefeated are the innate human tendencies triggered by oxytocin, for good and for bad.
The book concludes with an anti-manifesto, a list of 40 principles that self-imposed to the attention of the author during his work, and that play the role of a grand summary and morale of this fluently- and wittingly-written parable. The apparatus of references is substantial though not overwhelming as one could have anticipated from the amount of details and topics covered.
Gioia eschews the paradigmatic, conservative approach to music history on the ground that what is commonly known has been written and inherited after legitimization by the system. In a way, he gives for granted the knowledge in the reader of the "traditional" music history. While this pretty singular point of view is welcome and may well encapsulate a much more realistic description of the undercurrents in musical evolution, its focus is ultimately biased towards the United States (certainly in the chapters that cover the last 2 centuries; by the way, and as in virtually all types of history books, time accelerates across this tome, so that to describe the last 2 centuries takes as much pages as for all previous centuries), which only partly reflects their cultural and lately technological hegemony. One has to note also the relatively little attention dedicated by the book to the description the expansion of the musical language and vocabulary over time - for instance, the birth of polyphony at the edge of Renaissance and the suspension and final dissolution of tonal harmony at the beginning of 20th century are only mentioned en passant, while they could also be considered very subversive changes in their own right. The iterated remarks on the waves of societal subversion may also induce one to conclude that artistry may only hold within the boundaries of a given musical genre as long as it is "hot", whereas this does not make justice to artists and bands that have remained successful and generally relevant across decades also, if not specifically, by credibly reinventing themselves or openly challenging audience expectations (this may sound as the ultimate apology for progressive music, were it as successful as it would deserve to be). A final note must be dedicated to the feeling of liberation and deconstruction that a musician may feel while realizing how the received musical styles are sediments inherited from past legitimizations turned into rules, whereas music should only be descriptive and constructive and not prescriptive of what can and cannot be expressed.

[Amy Lively · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. I will be honest that I had to skim chunks of this book, mostly in the first half, because I just am not interested in the music of ancient history. I also thought the last two chapters were lacking in analysis and were more a lament about music in the digital age. However, the parts I liked I liked a lot, which was made all the more apparent to me when I saw how many notes I had taken & highlights I had by the time I was done.

I found the notion of approaching music history from the “outsider”/subversive point of view an interesting one (which is also why I had some trouble with the last two chapters— they didn’t seem to fit his overall thesis.) Our best music seems to come from the writers who are using their platform to be heard when they aren’t feeling heard in any other way. Then it becomes mainstream (which usually means white people like it) and it isn’t subversive anymore. And then the cycle begins all over again.

[Barry Hammond · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ted Gioia has written nothing less than an alternative history of music. His researches have revealed that music is not something that is taught in schools or academies or halls of higher learning. It is always something started by outsiders, immigrants, and the outcasts of societies, which gradually becomes assimilated by the norm. It has always been in a constant state of revolution and is usually mistrusted by any authority until they gradually accept it and use it for their own purposes. It is also not based in logic and mathematics (though it contains those elements) but has a magic, ritual and superstitious aspect that is rarely acknowledged and is closely associated with sex and violence. Gaps in its history tend to cover up the places where it has been co-opted by authority. Anyone with an interest in music or music history will find this a most enlightening text. - BH.

[Serdar Karabati · Rating 4 out of 5]

You may read part of my notes about the book at: https://www.jazzdergisi.com/muzik-tar...

[Rosina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Finished this in almost exactly a year to the date. I decided this was a summer read and kind of gave up on it once school started, and I finally picked it back up today and finished the last 200 pages or so.

The first half of this book was, for me, a drag. Most of it called for prior knowledge of history to be fully enjoyed, which I unfortunately just do not have. I also felt like things were jumping from one place to another, making it difficult to follow along. It’s extremely well-researched, which for me was both a pro and a con. I think non-fiction at its best follows a plot of sorts, for example How Music Got Free. Of course, that’s impossible to do in a book that covers the entirety of music history, but it’s definitely worth noting that if EXTREMELY fact-heavy books aren’t your thing, definitely don’t pick this up!

Despite everything I’m saying, I thoroughly enjoyed this from the 1920’s and thereon. Once I was actually able to recognize the musicians being discussed, the material was easy to remember and to create connections to, making it extremely engaging.

All in all, my “complaints” for this book are pretty invalid, since I picked this book up looking for a genuine music history book, and not just about the history I was aware of. That being said, I am VERY happy to get this book out of my pile.

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting look at innovation and musical disruption over the arc of history. Not sure what it means for the future, or even if it holds up retrospectively. But I learned a few things , and the writing is clear and engaging.

[Oto Bakradze · Rating 4 out of 5]

წიგნი განსაკუთრებულად საინტერესო ხდება მას შემდეგ, რაც მკითხველისთვის ცნობილი შემსრულებლები შემოდიან ტექსტში(სადღაც მე-17-მე-18 საუკუნე). მანამდე, წიგნის 2/3 ფაქტობრივად ერთი და იმავეს გამეორებაა: თუ როგორ ითვისებდა დიდგვაროვანი ელიტა მარგინალიზებული ხალხის მუსიკას და სათავისო მიმართულებას აძლევდა.

მინუსი რაც აქვს ისაა, რომ ზედმეტად ბევრი ისტორიკოსის გვარ-სახელია დამოწმებული და კითხვას ცოტა მომაბეზრებელს ხდის.

[Augusto Bernardi · Rating 4 out of 5]

The intro is rather weird but I'm a big fan of this author so I'm willing to continue to find out more about the history of music.

Part 1, the beginning of music, and I'm already thrown off and think about music completely different. He starts talking about the "music" or sounds of space and science but his bigger point was that original tribal music or use of sounds was of that of nature. I loved his comparison to Prometheus stealing fire. He makes a distinction between music and all other forms of art that it is adopted and not created. The original themes were pro creation and fighting. This still counts to this day. The two vague themes account for a huge amount of music. Including in nature. The song bird is an excellent example of that too. He does make a big point though at the end that making music though isn't just a simple biological gene. It is a mix of multiple factors which is the focus of this book.

The next chapter he links the earliest instruments to the remains of hunted animals or the tools used to kill them. I'm surprised how early horns and flutes came to be, even with neanderthals. The string instruments derived from the string of bows. He compares the symphony philharmonic to the Carnivore Hunters. That isn't the only thing that connects music back to these primitive times. He mentions the tribalism nature of music, also unlike other art forms. Perhaps all songa are to some degree an anthem, but the anthem itself is specifically designed to unite people. The original hunter gatherer songs would have been a "work" song to unite them and possibly informative of something. It was also noteworthy that music was originally to a large degree only participatory,not for an audience.

He brought up a very insightful point of the importance of Pitágoras, who doesn't really get the credit that he deserves. Often just a footnote of history. Essentially it had to do with the link between mathematics and music. What would distinguish indirectly noise from melody. It brought order to music and have it the rules we use today. It creates algorithms. Even non western music, with little to no cultural influence can now be broken down and explained with the mathematical theories of Pitágoras. His influence carries over even in our interpretation of music history itself as we view the evolution of music in his format. The chapter loses me a bit with the stuff about shamanism or Socrates but my takeaway later is that drumming used to be an instrument played by women and that eventually changed completely to men.

Later there was a long chapter essentially saying that music themes changed radically from ancient Mesopotamia to the rest of history and then kind of circled back now. Essentially with a really big focus on sex. Even krass sexual scenes. Originally it had to do with crops and fertility and so forth but that faded out of music, like mentioned before with male domination, and then kind of back to the over sexuality now in music.

Music certainly was used for information. Recitation came before writing so he names several of the ancient classics like the illiyad, the Gilgamesh, the Quran, Paradise lost, and the world of shakespeare as being spoken first. This is important because music was not always a form of entertainment but an important format to recite information. The world champions in memory use this exact method to break their records. The music or performative element of the great original works is precisely what creates their improvisational features. He gives the example of repetition used in the illiyad and also by jazz player Charlie Parker in his solos.

The singer as an individual or a n important component also comes long before the composer but long after the song itself. Signs of the singer start appearing in ancient Egypt as more emphasis is put on the perofrmance and how elaborate it is. For them, the more sexual it was. The bigger point though was that the singer would be focused on when singing in protest. This would happen in cultural melting pots and low economic zones.

Then comes what should good music sound like. Well this focuses more on the symbolic nature of the instruments used and less so about the specific tuning. He made a big point that the consensus on this has changed various times in history. He mainly focused on playo saying he the lyre is a proper instrument whereas the flute was not. Something to do with not being able to story tell. This would of course be somewhat overturned with the electric guitar and the classical flute in the 20th century. Even plato himself asked for the flute to be played on his deathbed. A late change of mind. This is extended upon in the next chapter with things being manly or not. Mainly talked about the romans not being very ground breaking in music for this exact reason. Splitting what is manly or not and thereby not giving us quite an accurate depiction of what the general music was of the time. It most definitely was foreign.

Finally we come to religion. Obviously an influential element in all things history and music is definitely not exempt. I don't care about any philosophical aspect of religion on music. Think I've had quite enough of that. Thankfully we got to some of the technicalities. Religion obviously didn't like or banned so many things so music was largely limited to singing. The choir was the majority of western music, until Bach came along and put a bigger emphasis on the keyboard and violin. But then more on the gradual evolution of Christian music by those that were willing to challenge the boring old hymns and borrowed from the blasphemous.

The next chapter was mainly about the African influence on western music. Not necessarily because of the cultural influence but because of the oppressed slaves in the West. The author makes a brilliant point that musical innovation can only come from challenging the status quo. Something that the rich would unlikely so and that slaves in particular had the best advantage. Plus the very fact that they were likely from a different culture and land.

I was intrigued by a chapter talking about performative music as opposed to symbolic or having some sort of meaning. This way music solely for a purpose through performance. Like the lullaby. There are many other modern day requirements of this that use music for good or bad.

Another mind blowing conclusion he makes later is that the cast majority of music ever made was done without thought towards the audience. This is largely due to it not having one in the earlier times and then also because of religion having a strong influence deciding what music shall continue or not. Main examples are choirs in cloisters, sailors songs and the anthem. But all this started to change in the late medieval period with traveling musicians and the audience becoming "the judge of aesthetic merit".

Sometimes the author can go on these ideas or rants that are far too complicated and are a bit of a stretch. You lose me with those without concrete examples or a definitive point. At least so far I realize that is precisely the problem with ancient music. There are really gradual changes with no great inventions. Which is the start of a chapter about inventing the paid audience. Obviously it has a long lead up but the official one is in 1600 with the first recorded opera. The hub of music and opera at the time was Venice at the time. The cultural melting pot. This is where the music industry started and not by the composers but by the performers. The performers were being paid more. This is where the term diva originates. Funny, because I had heard Pavarotti called a diva before. Women were also being paid now as well music whereas before they were a tiny percentage of music.

Finally back to Bach, or as he is referred to in this book, J.S Bach. He is famously associated with high brow music for serious people. The high class status quo of music. But actually, you wouldn't have to look very deep into his life or his music to discover he was actually very subversive and rebellious in many ways. I would love to deliver deeper into his biography but suffice to say that he went to prison and also had 20 children. Not by the same woman. That should give you an insight into his nature. The chapter unfortunately barely talked about what Bach brought on a technical level to his music. It more focused on him not being part of the stock standard music by his piers and also still working for the church. There really wasn't such thing of having a successful music career and not somehow associating with the clergy. The chapter gave multiple other examples of these men leading double lives of subversive music and the church, despite their later legacies. Vivaldi and heidel also being examples used. Bach and his successors in music, like Mozart also became the first music superstars. Having the fame, success and prestige, and a massive sexual life, from their music careers. The original rockstar dare I say. The book talked briefly about Mozart too and essentially that he lived a perfect middle to upper class life despite the difficulties of free lance work in music ata the time with few copyright rules and on top of that his lifestyle that brought it lots of debt. Heiden is also mentioned how he gains a career in music in England, as opposed to Germany. They weren't just superstars in terms of their life and success but also by putting them on a pedestal, they were figures that were used for political and religious movements too. Regardless whether they were actually part of said movement or were even alive during it. He gives the example of Schubert, living a extremely short life, dying at the age of 31 and pretty much dedicating every living moment of his entire existence to music. Thereby producing a massive amount of music which was perfect for all these political movements. But if Schubert didn't have time for living as massive recluse, he also didn't have time for political movements.

Finally we reach Beethoven. This is the prime example of all of what mentioned before. The greatest example of classical music and a figure so reveared in all political movements, all countries and all ages too. Everyone wants to claim Beethoven to their movement and yet it was very blurry what thoughts he really did have. We do know that he was definitely not a friendly, personable or even presentable man for high court. And also there are many examples of people during his time, critics, piers and mentors that critized his work às mysterious, gloomy or just too complicated. I liked in this chapter as well how there are much bigger and more subtle forces working in Europe at the time that contributed to the success or legacy of Beethoven. He existed precisely during the time of romanticism. A time that valued the personal and natural instead of looking towards institutions for the answers. This is something that promoted or encouraged the love for these outsiders like Beethoven.

The next era in the mid 1800s for music is centered around these musicians now picking a team or group or ideology to follow. The don't really need to even pick as nationalism really flourished. The perfect example of this is Wagner, with his extremely strong views on anything, especially Jews.

The following extremely lengthy chapter was about the outsider and the antihero theme which seems to originates from folk music. It's a shame how boring and confusing and drawn out this chapter was as it seems to be vital for this book and modern music itself. The music I like. And I didn't really understand it it beyond the point that folk music is the origin of praising the Robin hood like characters and vulgar lyrics.

The subversive culture of music was expanding in Europe in the cabaret scene. But the bigger point of the chapter is that, that did not happen in America too as they had the African American influence to their subversive culture on music. Really, this playa an enormous part in modern day music. All modern music to some degree has some of those influences. Precisely because of their separate second class citizens status is why they influence strongly the taboo elements of music innovation.

Later it talked about blues and jazz. Of course the same themes of previous chapters clearly appear in this one too. Vulgar lyrics, coming from a low socioeconomic background, African American, Mississippi melting point. I liked the parts about blues originally breaking out of the conventional song structures or that pithagorian song structures until it way later is brought into the mainstream and has its set style. A Musician that helped to do this transition was Robert Johnson.

Jazz developed relatively at the same time in Louisiana. Jazz has the amazing ability to absorb other forms of music. It's foundation is improvisation though. You could have an entire book about this, which Goia does and I loved his appreciation for the jazz book too. Louie Armstrong and Duke Ellington were some of the important pioneers in jazz. I found it more interesting is that jazz's lack of popularity as the twentieth century progressed, while maintaining an outsider status is what allowed it to keep evolving to the different styles of jazz.

The chapter about country music was very interesting to me. It had many takeaways. Of course I can't really do justice to the chapter as a whole, as the author overcomplicates some parts but I had some takeaways. He talked about the origins of country music not being as subversive as the other genres, which is unique but rather to soothe the animals of the farm of pasture. Send obvious in a sense that country music of course came from cowboys in the mid west. On a technical note, to soothe they avoided for the majority of the history of country music history having the drums in the music or band. Sometimes even specifically banned. Because one thing that makes country music unique and so popular all over the world over multiple generations, is that it's about preserving tradition and culture. It goes out of its way to do that way beyond the preservation of normal life. He gave the example of the cowboy hat and also the outdated Texas accent. But eventually, like all genres, they admire and praise the outsiders, regardless how much the outsiders really are from the outside. He gave the example of Johnny Cash being portrayed like a badman from prison despite having a minor misdemeanor. Willy Nelson as well with his reputation for being caught with weed somehow ballooned into his own weed business in later life. The chapter somehow mushed up the start of rock n roll too. It's somehow the mix of the white folks of country and the added influence of the African Americans. At least that's what I understood. That's what would produce Little Richard and Chuck Berry. He made a point that it isn't about who created rock n roll as an individual artist but rather that the audience has made that decision before them to create that interest or sound. Pretty much of white folks like the subversive stuff, music from black folks.

Finally the chapter I had been patiently awaiting, the chapter about Rock n roll music, or later dubbed just Rock music. The major figure at least at the start of this chapter is Elvis. Elvis's original music is exactly what everything we've mentioned in the previous chapter. A subversive figure of the outskirts that became mainstream. I thought it was extremely interesting that Elvis almost alone as the king in this era as many of his contemporaries that had similar features had major setbacks in their careers or even early deaths like Buddy holly. On one hand, it made him a legendary star almost unlike any other, creating a ton of imitators. But on the other hand, the mainstream transformed Elvis into a nice respectable character and his music changed in the 60s. This could have been a turning point in music and rock could have just been another fad had it not been for another subversive group from the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, the Beatles. The Beatles are monumental for continuing rock. But as several bands tried to be like the Beatles, the Beatles would continue to change and thereby continue to inspire more and more genres and bands.

Skipping ahead a bit, I liked when he talked about disco music as the further progression. Economically better for venues as they would switch the performer to the dance track and also shift the focus from performer to the audience dancing. It was more direct as a facilitator for sex. It also became completely predictable in regards to rhythm and melody. Heavy metal at the same time was the extension of rock in a different and more extreme direction. To a smaller audience now as it becomes more niche. Almost like a development to a species that has already evolved in a different direction. According to this book at least it says that heavy metal Music didn't go far enough and didn't really connect with people in the same way that Punk rock did. That really was the biggest and more subversive evolution of rock. It became the true political or cultural movement. The sex pistols are the perfect example of that as their hit song was banned from the BBC. A rare occurrence that actually made them more famous and successful. He compares their insane antics in a way to a ritual or sacrifice. That is really their success in a way. Especially from their bassist, Sid Vicious. Their career as a band and also Sids life was short as he had several run-ins with the law and then died of an overdose.
Music then changed in the 80s and 90s mainly due to the creation of MTV. This would have profound changes to music not just aesthetically but also because it would shift the power from the performer and song writer to the studio and production company. This is why the top artists of the 80s were Madonna and Michael Jackson. Both with massive studios behind them. The pendulum then swung the other way in the 90s and possibly for the last time for rock in Seattle with Nirvana. This is truly a massive statement which took me a while to wrap my head around. It's not as if there aren't more successful bands than Nirvana, including the foo fighters which have lasted longer, and sold more. But Rock is in the nostalgia business. There hasn't ever been a cultural movement like Nirvana ever since. To the displeasure of Nirvana themselves. A group of outsiders that prided themselves of not being the mainstream were forced to become the mainstream. It was too much unfortunately for Kurt and his mental health fell apart as we know. I chuckled but I was hurt at the same time when he compared a classic rock radio being the equivalent of serving stale bread to the table.


Rap

The digi

[Paddy · Rating 4 out of 5]

First off, the title of the book may more accurately read as a subversive history of WESTERN music. It takes a non-westerner to recognize this simple fact out of the gate.

However, the author has done a wonderful job of presenting music as a subversive force through the ages, even as it paradoxically serves as a force to unite communities. Music’s association with sex and violence from times immemorial serve as the backdrop for the entirely of the book. The author is not wrong with taking this position as we learn from the examples he provides. The transformation of societies through the emergence of new musical styles that start either from the bottom strata of society - slaves,peasants - or the outer edges of normal society - punk, hip-hop - inform us about recurring patterns that have played out in living memory for most of us.

The author bemoans the current state of music ( auditory cheesecake) while warning us about the dehumanization of music through technology and AI, forces that are atomizing society to a point where existence is more and more a solitary affair and less a communal experience.

Even though the author clarifies that this book is about musical history, it really is more about the sociology of music. To that end, his omission of the cult-like following for the Grateful Dead, with its long tail now in its 25th year after the passing of Jerry Garcia, King of the Dead Heads, is puzzling. He also mostly ignores the popular music of the aughts and the current decade, which I don’t blame him for.

As a performing musician for several decades, I can confess to the lack of inspiration in the current pantheon of musical heroes. Blame it on my age, but I find myself drawn more to remasters and reinterpretations of jazz and rock standards to contemporary jazz or rock. Nostalgia reigns supreme. I pay hundreds of dollars to see classic rock bands in their fifth or sixth “farewell” concert but would not consider paying a small door charge for an emerging band.

My big question on the future of music is also one he leaves us contemplating at the end of the book: what new musical genre can possibly emerge now that will breathe life into the comatose industry ? He suggests that a new style will emerge from technology with the assistance of AI. I see it happening and am not sure what that’s going to sound like. There is no substitute to real music performed by a real musician to make a genuine emotional connection with the audience. However, AI is replacing humans in many aspects of life. Musicians won’t be spared either.

[Ted Burke · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating read, Goia does us the favor of skipping the technical comparatives and assorted arcana that interest tech heads and deep nerds and instead discusses, in plain language, the evolution of music in social, philosophical and spiritual context, revealing the need to make music as a means to give direct and immediate expression of human experience . He covers a lot of material here, does a fine job displaying the various arguments over the use and misuse of music has been, and is very cogent and persuasive as to how various music forms, especially song, developed over time , changing condition, and need to adapt . Some of his conclusions seem a little pat--I am suspect these days of sweeping pronouncements about unbelievable large things such as the history of music--but Goia does make you appreciate the miracle of being able to make music .

[AcademicEditor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Writing about music can be very difficult indeed--explaining with words what really is best heard with one's own ears. The cultural history of music is equally as complex, with every piece having a wide array of sources and influences, as well as some coincidental resemblances.

Ted Gioia has done well at emphasizing the interconnected nature of music as it relates to our experience as humans. The reader gains a kind of bird's-eye-view of why and how we make music, as well as lots of interesting facts that will impress your friends or trivia night competitors.