Frith Reflection

Simon Frith argues that the relationship between music and identity is in and of each other. Like “the mind in the body, and the body in the mind. (Frith)” His first argument is that identity is mobile, which is an idea that was also presented in the Stewart Hall article. He also wants to look deeper at how music can construct an experience by looking at the subjective and collective identity which requires him to judge the quality of experiences. His main points about his argument are divided into sections where he elaborates on them: the mobile self, postmodernism and performance, space time and stories, from aesthetics to ethics the imagined self. He utilizes different varieties of musical critiques to show how his ideas are supported over a large range through different genres: the idea that the “separate groups” as different as they are, like identities can be related through the mechanisms of mobility and change.
Something that stood out to me was how Frith described the critiques given about Spoonie Gee and Milton Babbit. He said “the critics seem to know better than the artists what they are- or should be- doing.” It seemed odd that a critic would be able to judge the intentions of a work better than the artist or an experience of music on them. But Frith explains that musical identification, determining the quality of the experience, becomes an “ethical agreement.” That idea was slightly confusing to me.
A final thing that stood out to me throughout reading this article was the constant divisions among ideas and entities. There are divisions between high and low critics, hard and easy listening, fine and performing arts, and between different types of identities. It’s as if things must always be compared to one another and judged to determine the norm.