I was originally going to
include this as part of an article I’m working for the premier issue of a
really awesome Australian journal called Creature. And by really
awesome, I mean it’s going to include stuff by Nina Power & Lauren Berlant.
Anyway, I’ll post more info on that when it comes out. But, since I decided on
leaving this out of that project, I thought I would post it here.
This is, of course, totally
unfinished and very much in need of more careful consideration and revision.
So, your thoughts are, as always, welcome.
I’m
thinking of Usher’s single “Numb” (from the current Looking 4 Myself
album) as a potential example of black artists subverting neoliberal logics of
intensity. If you’re numb, you can be fully integrated in economies of
affective intensities, but in such a way that changes in intensities don’t
register, or, if they register, they don’t matter. Basically, if the
entrepreneurial subject is the subject of interest (in all senses of the
term), the numb subject doesn’t give a fuck…which is different than
being “disinterested” (in the Kantian sense of unbiased and “objective”). The
disinterested subject still believes in “interest”—that’s why it’s important to
distance oneself from it. The numb subject neither invests in interest, nor
rejects it. I can’t decide—because this ultimately be undecidable, except in a
case-by-case basis—if numbness is subversive, or if it’s an
always-already-normalized transgression that just reaffirms the privilege of
already privileged subjects.
For
already-privileged subjects, one potential way of subverting the logic of
intensity is to just go numb—to not be affected by either high or low
intensity, to render oneself unable to perceive it, immune to affect. Usher’s
song “Numb” does just this—the lyrics place “numbness” at the musical climaxes;
the most intense musical moments are paired with lyrics that talk about
insensitivity. This song suggests several ways privileged people (and maybe
groups?) might subvert various aspects of neoliberalism, in particular its
“just-in-time” demand for flexibility, and its imperative to always intensify
one’s life.
First,
as Steven Shaviro argues, neoliberalism demands absolute flexibility from its
participants: you have to be ready at any time, for any thing. Instead of
long-term teleology, it wants presentist responsiveness. It discourages us from
future-orientation and demands we focus on now. Though “Numb” does not
explicitly discuss neoliberalism, the musical settings of its lyrics clarify
that numbness is a response to the presentist responsiveness to which
neoliberalism compels its various elites. It is clear that time and duration
are central concerns in the song, because the word “time” is featured at
important musical moments: “time” is
uttered on the crest of the first soar or “hit” in B (and later again in B1).
In fact, the song builds up to these crests by repeating the word “long” 8
times in a row; it’s worth noting that “long” is actually the shortest phrase
in the song—I’ll say more about this paradox later. So, two of the more
important structural features of the song are about time and duration.
Neoliberalism collapses all duration into “now.” Numbness is a response to
neoliberalism’s now-imperative, its just-in-time-ness. The song repeatedly uses
the word “now” at important structural moments. In D, “now” is an intermediary
valley between two C peaks, thus facilitating the prolongation of the plateau
of intensity throughout the C section. More importantly, at A -1.1, “now” is
the nadir of which “numb,” in C, is the apex. So “now,” which neoliberalism
frames as the moment of greatest intensity, is, in the song, the moment of
least intensity. Neoliberal presentism is the opposite of numbness.
Numbness, ironically, is the peak of pleasure.[i]
How can insensitivity be the peak of
pleasure? This also has to do with neoliberalism’s demand for just-in-time
flexibility. In the A and B sections, there is a tension between the poetic
meter in the lyrics and the musical meter in the instrumentals. The words at
the end of lyrical phrases hit on downbeats (so the end of a line of lyrics
happens at the beginning of a musical phrase). The lyrical and musical phrases
are out of synch (this is why the song starts on a pickup). The
asynchronization between lyrics and music keeps listeners on their toes, and
thus evokes flexible subjectivity and just-in-time temporality. In contrast,
the word “numb” appears in sections where the music and lyrics are more
obviously quantized/synchronized. The regularity—that is, the predictability—allows
listeners (and performers) to relax, to run on autopilot, so to speak. Because
we can anticipate what comes next, we can rely on expertise and habit, and do
not have to give our full attention solely to the matter of staying in time. We
can focus on other things, like ornamentation (and there is melisma in these
sections). Regularity is a reprieve from just-in-timeness, so it feels like
relative numbness.
Color Key to chart:
[less intense] Light BlueàDark BlueàLight PurpleàDark Purple [more intense]
|
4-Bar Section
|
Description
|
|
A
|
|
|
A
|
|
|
A1
|
A with quarter note bass and some tambourine
|
|
A1
|
Rhythmic soar—“long, long, long…” builds to hit on B
downbeat
|
|
B
|
Crest of A soar on “Time”
|
|
B
|
|
|
B1
|
Timbral soar with wooshing/wind sound in synth
|
|
B1
|
|
|
C
|
Crest of B soar on “Numb”
|
|
C
|
|
|
A -1
|
Less intense version of A, sans lyrics
|
|
A 1.1
|
vocal is reprise of A, but instrumental is intensification
of A1 w kicks on 2&4
|
|
A 1.1
|
|
|
A1.2
|
|
|
A1.2
|
|
|
B1
|
Crest of A1 soar on “Time”
|
|
B1
|
|
|
C
|
Crest of B soar on “Numb;” also, peak of entire song;
is really A but louder, a more intense A (the wobbly
treble synth is louder and fuller, as is the percussion track, which is a
louder, fuller version of A1)
|
|
C
|
Stays at top of peak…
|
|
C
|
[Vocal ambiguity/homophony btw “now” and “numb”]
|
|
C1
|
…until last bar, which deintensifies to…
|
|
D
|
Intermediary valley on “now” on downbeat
|
|
D
|
|
|
A -1.1
|
Absolute nadir on “now” on downbeat” (now is nadir of
numb’s apex)
|
|
C
|
|
|
C
|
|
|
C
|
|
|
C
|
|
|
A -1.2
|
|
[i]
Irony is key to this song: the word “strong” in A1 falls on a weak beat (the
fourth beat of the measure), just as the repeated “long”s are the shortest
phrase in the song.
more thoughts on this later, but you have to promise me that if you publish this, you'll include a footnote to the infamous "honey badger" video... since the honey badger, likewise, doesn't give a fuck either.
ReplyDeletealso, how does numb read against climax? is climax the diagnosis of the neoliberal condition and numb the resistance? "we're going nowhere fast, we've reached the climax"
ReplyDeleteAD, that's a great point about "Climax" (and the honey badger, lulz). I'm also thinking that numbness is an individualized response (a response by/for indiv subjects), not a systematic response that addresses institutions...unless one individual not responding appropriately to affective cues would/could then introduce some negative feedback into the system/institution...
ReplyDeleteI really need to read protevi's last book, don't I. I totally don't understand affective politics yet.
ReplyDelete