I think here we should have a closer look to the poem of Schiller, and particularly this paragraph : _Wem der große Wurf gelungen,_ _Eines Freundes Freund zu sein;_ _Wer ein holdes Weib errungen,_ _Mische seinen Jubel ein!_ _Ja, wer auch nur eine Seele_ _Sein nennt auf dem Erdenrund!_ *Und wer's nie gekonnt, der stehle* *Weinend sich aus diesem Bund!* _Who has succeeded in the great attempt,_ _To be a friend's friend,_ _Whoever has won a lovely woman,_ _Add his to the jubilation!_ _Indeed, who calls even one soul_ _Theirs upon this world!_ *And whoever never managed, shall steal himself* *Weeping away from this union!*
@@derPetunientopf This precisely plays into Zizek's point actually, in all those ideological regimes mentioned the excluded were framed as ones incompatible, people "unable to love" as in lacking basic humanity. Every excluded group was characterized by being framed as inherently incompatible with the ideology, unable to form this "brotherhood", be it black people in Rhodesia, jews in nazi Germany or "reactionaries" in communist China
Not sure if this is a perfect example but since zizek has a history in film and visual arts, i couldn't help but point out how the anime neon genesis evangelion plays ode to joy in its most vehement moments. I meant it's a very well written show with biblical imagery and it just point how ode to joy even represents everything it's insane how i never considered any of this before when it was right in front of us
I remember reading a critical analysis of Ode to Joy after watching the Evangelion episode where Kaworu is introduced and I was amazed at how much meaning the show's metaphors held. Anno truly is a genius.
I think that this great bit by Rowan Atkinson, takes Zizek (or Beethoven?) argument even further. Atkinnos shows here that what Zizek grasp as the "frame part", is already perforated by the second part. That's the catch Zizek refers to (or should refer to) - the excluded is already included. The tune of the carnivals rhythm is engraved, as Atkinson shows, in ideology itself (empty vain) - the first part of this piece. The carnivals rhythm is there just to show us that which was there from the begging. In other words: you should listen to this piece, playing the two parts simultaneously. that's critique if ideology. ruclips.net/video/oWGZdYNpaSo/видео.html
Beethoven has more harmonically speaking, innovative works specially in the minor works, string quartets, etc. which totally left behind the rigid classical aesthetic, but this part of the 9th carnavalesc was written when he was completely deft.
I'm not sure that Žižek's final statement is the most reasonable interpretation of the finale of Beethoven's 9th. After the more turbulent variations of the Ode to Joy theme, it reaches a numinous climax, followed by an almost giddy celebration of joy itself; not very 'subversive' to my ear. In fact, it's just his classic 'darkness to light' paradigm, and yet is utterly moving and transcendent in the way that only late Beethoven can truly achieve.
I think the major tonality masks some of the madness of the later variations, and actually makes quite a contrast with the sublime contrapuntal presentation of the theme at the start.
@@carsonwall2400you are entirely correct, yet you could no be more mistaken at the same time. For slavoj, media is simply a tool to establish signifiers. Beethoven’s intention and the true meaning of the piece is largely irrelevant. It is much easier and more efficient for slavoj to use ode to joy as an example of a symbol that has been transformed into an empty signifier than it would be for him to explain Jean Baudrillard’s theory of simulacra and simulations. Even if you first heard of baudrillard’s work upon reading this comment, you still likely understand a whole book worth of his work. Trust me, I studied his work at the university of Toronto and I can confidently say that this short youtube video explains the concept of floating signifiers better than baudrillard did himself. If Beethoven intended the song to simply be a sonic representation of joy, then it becomes a less concrete example of a floating signifier. Thus, slavoj sacrifices an accurate and precise analysis of classical music in order to make his main point: the philosophical notion of an empty signifier and the role of empty signifiers in all ideology.
Isn't he saying that that part subverts the dictators? The dictators who want to exclude can't really truly use ode to joy for their purposes, because ode to joy really just fuckin goes for it, as you have described
It's interesting how the ode is used in Die Hard especially with the achievement of the Criminal Master Mind who kinda steals the show over the hero and I think there's a nod to this in the end credits as the American Christmas song takes 1/4 of the epic Ode hinting you kinda wish this Master Plan had worked.
Really good analysis, I agree with him. Remember that Wagner was a follower of Beethoven, he studied Beethoven all his life. Later Wagner and Beethoven were the favourite composers of the Nazi Party
But wasn’t that the point of Clockwork Orange? That even evil can recognize embrace superior sublime beauty? And that rather than humans being clockwork oranges that can be socially constructed that the fact that even in our most extreme depravity we can know a ray of light of divine inspiration? And doesn’t that negate and erase the ill posed attempts to ‘reform’ men as if they are material machines?
Every regime feels like it's entitled to that melody because they see them selves as some peak of civilization. And yet, this is the athem of the EU. I bet they feel like, finally this melody is in the right hands.
She's a British actress and singer named Gaye Brown, who was born in 1941. You won't find a complete performance of the "Ode to Joy" passages from Beethoven's symphony from her in relation to this film, as she only performed this brief portion of it for this specific scene.
It surprises me that Zizek speaks of the centrality of exclusion to this musical piece, yet avoids mentioning that Beethoven was himself excluded by deafness when he composed it.
Zizek tends not to care for for the intent of the creator of a given piece of media but rather for the ideological messages which are inherent to the piece of media itself.
I always get so annoyed when Friedrich Schiller doesn't get a voice anymore. He wrote 'Ode to Joy' and the words in that piece are HIS. People always forget to look at the POEM itself and always look at Beethoven's adaptation
Same reason no one reads Belasco's play Madame Butterfly which inspired Puccini's opera or the play The Lady of the Camellias as opposed to Verdi's La Traviata.
It's not the best or most interesting of Schiller's work and he himself questioned it's poetic value. However as lyrics for the grand finale of Beethoven's 9th it is perfect. Why would that annoy you?
František Zvěřina No, as Schopenhauer said, to analyze music one must disregard the words explicitly sung. The genius is that poem is meaningless, just as the music makes fun of the supposed sentimental value of an empty container. The choice of poem is purposely one written with a grand aesthetic and no deeper meaning, as the first half of the ninth portrays the way ideology wants to be perceived and the second part states the sad reality, even admitted to by Schiller: ideology is meaningless and the simple act of questioning it removes all aestheticism and reveals the true lack of beauty on a deeper level.
I’am confused. I don’t see the connection between any subtle ideology in Beethoven’s adaptation and the spread usage of its symphony as a fake song for union and humanity. Could someone explain it please?
Zizek's point can be a little confusing here, due to his usual rhetoric and presentation. Basically, Zizek is not saying that Ode to Joy stands for some very spesific ideology - which is being somehow spread in a duplicitous manner by some establishment for a political agenda - or that Beethoven was consciously being critical of ideology - a term that didn't exist yet in it's modern form in his time. Rather, Zizek is using Ode to Joy - and it's aesthetic effect- as an analogy for the general functioning of ideology or how every ideology has to function in order to be effective. Much like the first part of the symphony, every ideology must have that - seemingly - all-inclusive, universal appeal, where it fully encapsulates and explains reality in some beautifying and integrating fashion. This is the "pathetic" moment where you are moved by something "deep" and believe it to be something necessary and "real". But the catch, as Zizek puts it, is that this frame or feeling is never as neutral as it is. Here the second part comes in and shows the "carnivalesque", fake side of ideology. Ideologies must always try to "tame" the world, explain every possible element or aspect within it in a satisfying way. But no ideology is ever able to do this, because the world will always contain something antithetical to every specific ideology, some disturbing element, which can not be incorporated within the "symbolic universe" of the ideology. Ideology will thus be forever incapable of completely filling in the void in the center of things. To Zizek, Beethoven was practicing the "critique of ideology" by showcasing in a musical work this very impotence of an universal integration. The idea that we are "all one" is purely ideological and thus artificial. But this idea nonetheless has emotional and political appeal, thus the widespread usage of the first part by various and conflicting political parties/groups/nations etc. It has "universal" appeal and ideology must in general form have this appeal, though to Zizek it is irreducibly fake. I'm not sure if I answered your question here. Hope I did.
@@ikosabre Wow! Very bright explanation, thank you very much. I find your ideas clear and structured. This makes me wonder, aren't you overestimating what Zizek said by adding your thoughtfully developed ideas into this (perhaps) vague speech. On the other hand, I couldn't agree more with your observation about the limited capacity of any ideology to understand and explain reality's complexity. But, could you please tell us more about how Beethoven's symphony state that?
@@diegovillacreses7071 That is of course always possible, as with any interpretation. This may be especially true with Zizek, who can be very incoherent and hyperactive in his presentation and reasoning at times- though I would not say "illogical" or "convoluted" as some would. However, based on my own extensive reading and studying of philosophy and the little I have read and heard from Zizek, I believe that I "get" him, his general ontology and logic of thought/method. I can see "where he is coming from", especially in the light of his lacanian and hegelian background and the relevance these traditions of though have for the study and history of ideology. I am "patching up the holes" here somewhat and I cannot be sure, but I believe my interpretation is generally on good grounds. As for the Ode to Joy, I cannot be certain. I am not a music historian or expert on Beethoven. I simply go by what Zizek says here and try to understand why he would reason like this, based on his intellectual background. I do not know what he bases his view on. Is it a personal interpretation or is it based on some more objective, external sources or opinion? Perhaps it has to do with structure? The first part can perhaps be seen as sublime, integrating, edifying and grand. It is the "universalizing" aspect of ideology, which makes the world whole and congruent with our representations, nullifying or annulling the alien and the contradictory. The second part is the "vulgar", carnivalesque, chaotic or mocking even. This represents the alien otherness, disharmony or the contradictory repulsiveness of reality, which ideology will never be fully able to integrate or tame. It is that part of existence which "laughs" at our desire for unity of symbolic representation or "being-as-one-with-the-world". As I said, I am not sure how true this interpretation is or whether Beethoven had anything of the like in mind. As said, ideology as a concept did not exist at the time. However, maybe, by accident, Beethoven was indeed drawing attention to the general form of human experience of the world/reality in a musical form? After all, it can be said that art imitates, exemplifies and empowers the states of human experience/consciousness/condition. Usually in cases like this I am more interested on how Zizek uses analogy to make his point about something else, such as ideology. I find his analogies instructive, even if they are not necessarily accurate, though this of course is no excuse for questionable claims.
@@diegovillacreses7071 This is pretty much what Zizek says in this video. I watched the movie a few times in order to process everything he says and understand why he makes certain jumpcuts from one analysis to another. The movie doesn't have a very clear structure, but in honesty it's very dense, so a re-watch is in order for anyone who is genuinely interested in this essay on Ideology. What it boils down to is this: Beethoven made a symphony, and politicians like to pretend that just a part of it embraces their truth and therefor, abuse it for their own agenda. He clearly shows how the way in which this particular piece is used, to demonstrate peace and unity, is farcical on its own, exactly because it has been used by very differing regimes with opposing views to justify their own revolution, not because they are making alliances with other regimes. In a way, Zizek suggests, Beethoven already knew his music would be abused by powerful ideologies to demonstrate their benevolence, and so he added the additional parts to contradict this message of peace. In my opinion he goes a little bit too far in this, because Beethoven was greatly inspired by the ideals of freedom and brotherhood that motivated the French Revolution to create this symphony. As Beethoven's music demonstrates more often, he was very aware that peace does not come easily. Sometimes, people have to fight for peace. Hence the bombastic second part. The third part, however, shows light at the end of the tunnel, we hear angels singing, there is peace, which Zizek carefully neglects because it is not part of his argument. Once you know the original intent of the piece, you can understand why so many regimes feel inspired to use it as their anthem: it signifies that war is justified when it comes to attaining liberty and achieving brotherhood. If Zizek makes any point with his movie, it is that he himself is stuck in a certain ideology and that he does not seem to care how other cultures, other ideologies, might interpret abstract values like liberty and brotherhood. So his cynical attempt, and he admits in many of his lectures that he can be quite cynical, to say Beethoven was an all-knowing geezer who made an ironic symphony about world peace is completely unfounded and only goes to show that even here, in a movie where he tries to deconstruct ideology and its political aspects, he too is just a political agent of producing propaganda in favor of his own ideology. The movie is great, it taught me alot about Christianity and gave me great insights on how I am a product of society, but just be critical that everything he says and shows are arguments for his own ideological beliefs. This is the biggest problem I have with Zizek, he loves Hegel, and he's a Lacan scholar, but like Lacan, there is alot of politics involved in whatever he says or writes. It doesn't make alot of sense once you start questioning what he says and look up the facts and go along with them like a historian would. Which is why I really love him for using Titanic as an example in this movie and even says it is a perfect piece of evidence how ideology continues to revive itself. The history, the fictional element, do you know if it's true? Do you even care if it's true? It opens the door to post-truth, truth based on emotions instead of facts, which is pretty much the times we are living in right now. If anything, Zizek is simply being very honest here in a post-ironic fashion and shows that he is part of this zeitgeist and very much in touch with how the younger generation is experiencing our society. Which is probably why he's so popular. He's ready to involve himself in these lesser games to show us the way to something greater, and that's admirable.
@@DarkAngelEU I mean, he just used Beethoven to make an analogy. Does it need to be factual if he's only concerned about commenting on ideology instead of the piece itself? Regardless, it has been used to unite and implant a certain feeling, be it for different interpretations of liberty or whatnot, even if the piece wasn't ironic, the situation still is just from the fact that opposing factions use it. I also didn't get the impression that he was suggesting Beethoven "knew it all along". Just kinda made an observation ig? Like how the movie recontextualizes the piece. But I don't really know anything about academic philosophy or whatever this is so Im not really too sure either. I just stumbled upon this from watching the movie and I got genuinely curious.
At the very end Zizek says that through his work he practices critique of ideology - i'd like to try to understand that in greater detail. If it is critique, then how come the 9th serves to strengthen ideology like no other? Or am I missing the point somewhere? Please help this really interests me lol, even start a discussion :)
+Tristan All the regimes and personas of different ideologies who celebrate the piece focus on the first part (sublime beauty, hymn to universal brotherhood etc.), they ignore the second part, the carnevalesque rhyhtm, which is intended by Beethoven to represent those who are excluded from the ideal of united humanity. Beethoven pretty much anticipated what would happen with his music later, i.e. being abused by false propagandists of progress who in reality always exclude others from their utopia.
+Allzumenschliches44 You can't say he anticipated. The change from good times and light to sorrow and darkness is seen in many classical piece. This one is just stronger. I think that the meaning of the song is not limited to ideology and politics, but more to life in general. He could believe that light was only temporary, and that darkness would always catch up with it.
I always thought while hearing ode to joy, did Beethoven really want all humanity to unite ? Was he really thinking about Aborigines, Blacks, Browns when he thought about united humans ? especially considering the time period he lived in.
Does it matter? Was Cleisthenes thinking of the US, UK, Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia etc. when he helped to institute the first democracy? Probably not, but look how widely applicable it now is. Was Maxwell thinking of satellites and the internet when he devised the equations of electromagnetism? Probably not, and yet look how far it's come. Some of the best creations are those that have been reshaped and adapted by many others.
@@desudesudesu5326 fyi those things developed later on from their basic ideas,these non Europeans coexisted with them because atleast he may know about Africans, Asians. Im not necessarily saying Beethoven should think about non European people but refuse to believe most people of his time really cared for a universal human brotherhood.
I like this take, but listening to the symphony, I'm not so sure. The "second part" he talks about strikes me more joyous than subversive. And also there's the fact that that part is a very small part of the whole and it goes back to the earlier mode not soon after..
Exactly. Carnival can also function as ideology. That's when an ideological edifice tries its best to unify us all into a single joyous moment of freedom and liberation. It's a very brief expected exception that perfectly fits ideology. Beethoven cam be read as an ideologist precisely when he tries to denounce its failure through a very brief carnivalesque way.
The host did have me for a while until I thought, somewhere amidst the clip from A Clockwork Orange: "I don't think Beethoven was thinking this at all- that ideologies that ingest this tune will ultimately fail blahblah- I think he was working through its musical variations." Maybe I'm just shallow but not everything's political, my goodness! I see this comes "From 'the Pervert's Guide to Ideology' (2012)". Oookay >_>
Beethoven was a highly political artist, you know? For years, he was rooting for revolutionary France and Napoleon day in and day out and devoted his works to them, up until Napoleon crowned himself Emperor. That was the day when Beethoven ripped to pieces his dedication of his "Eroica" symphony to the man.
When I first started to get into classical music, it surprised me that there wasn't a grand reprise of the theme at the end of the 9th symphony. Why that? Wasn't the creation of this theme Beethoven's central achievement? Beethoven is keen on repeating the great moments in his music. In the 9th, you get instead a bunch of highly esoteric variations, eventually culminating in a beautiful interplay of different voices. Then music stops, for just a moment, and starts again in what Zizek rightly calls a kind of carnavalesque mode, ending the piece with a bang. It's very strange. Zizek is definitely on to something here.
@@lavamatstudios If tlatosmd is correct, then Żiżek might also be correct. Otherwise, Żiżek is inserting his own agenda into what could be summarized as "satire," "irony," or "mockery."
@@xylophone897 That would be delightful if it's true, so I'll look into it. If it's true, it will be yet another little lie by omission from my childhood and youth. I guess everyone just ignorantly wants a positive song with no caveats, and so they never try to mention the other face of the song to schoolchildren.
One can do a cynical reading and displace the very praise of Zizek for Beethoven here. What if the second part is at the very heart of ideology by already including in itself, in a cynical way, its own failure in advance? Like, "yeah, yeah, we know it's a failure! Here, take your carnivalesque exception as "objet petit a" in order to suture this signifying chain of ideology with its own exception!". It's cynical reasoning at full disposal of post-ideological ideology for you!
The symphony is comprised of four movements, which Wikipedia refers to, from first movement to fourth and last, as 'Allegro ma non troppo, un poco maestoso', 'Molto vivace', 'Adagio molto e cantabile', and 'Finale', respectively
@Elpistoler09 What gives you confidence in that Beethoven was in fact consciously (you didn't state 'consciously', but it seems implicit) depicting ideology / a specific ideology? I can't find any source for this. Serious question.
@Elpistoler09 You said "The first part of 'Ode to joy' is the 'superficial' glimpse of ideology which looks 'normal' and harmonious, the second part represents the real chaos happening behind the curtains of ideology" I'm wondering what he was portraying and/or criticizing and how we know that he in fact was doing that and not only making music that sounded good in his head.
@Elpistoler09 Oh ok. Since you told Nessie Andrew that he didn't know what he was talking about when he said that the symphony had no meaning related to ideology, I thought that you knew Beethoven's intention in his symphony for a fact.
its the opposite,Alex`s Ode to Joy is not his exclusion it is simply translated into his own language no matter how silly it is, which is why he says brother, but ok Zizek, relax not everything is politics
Monsieur Zizek, un de ces touche à tout, qui s'improvise critique de film , de musique classique, d'art, de théologie ( dont il ne connaît pas une ligne), et que sais-je d'autre. Il raconte n'importe quoi sans avoir la moindre formation sérieuse dans ces domaines. Pseudo philosophe et admirateur de Lacan (un autre arriviste psy) , il ferait mieux de se limiter à sa sociologie au lieu de raconter n'importe sur qui est bien plus grand que lui !
If someone would still have doubts whether Mr Zizek is indeed as crazy as he seems to be, then this short video would quench all doubts. For instance: if a work of art, be it a piece of music, or a novel, or a philosophical text, or a poem, is misunderstood by underdeveloped listeners / readers, that does not mean that the cause is to be found in the work itself. And then, revisiting the old klischées of the nazis, of the Chinese cultural 'revolution' (calling B 9th bourgeois music!), Peruvian lefties, and in one breath the hymn of the 9th as the hymn of the EU (suggesting the EU is about ideology), is simply absurd and utterly primitive. Also he makes the grave mistake by claiming B's 9th is a neutral, empty framework to be filled with any ideology whatsover: not only the music, but Schiller's explicit text clearly states a humanist ideal. Such empty framework merely exists in the empty minds of people who are too underdeveloped to understand a work like this, and it is them who filled their own empty framework with their own misconceptions. So, Mr Zizek does a good job by counting himself among those empty-headed masses which he uses to illustrate his clims.😄
this is bullshit. The 9th allows us to see the humanity in the people shown even though they were part of horrible regimes. It allows us to forgive them. To imply that the 9th can motivate people to perform horrible acts is a big leap in logic.
"this is bullshit. The 9th allows us to see the humanity in the people shown even though they were part of horrible regimes. It allows us to forgive them. " What? No.
That s exactly what is said in this video, and that s how this piece is used ideologically by those mentioned in the video. Did you feel something very humane when looking at the faces of those nazis, ect ect.... being absorbed in the sublimity of the piece? It works then, that s what Zizek is trying to convey brother.
How can you not be riveted by this man, he can be talking about literally anything and have you hanging on every word
Because you keep waiting for him to get to the point?
He’s a rare combination of spectacle and substance. Both idiots and erudites can find something to enjoy in Zizek
"The song of doing stuff" - Humanity (At any point in history)
original
You can't beat the sound of the 9th when Hans Gruber and his men crack the vault in Die Hard.
The FBI helped them though. In the US, you can't do anything without the help of the FBI.
@@mator2339 Its a movie
Seeing Leonard Bernstein and Slavoj Žižek in one video on a single topic is my favorite crossover.
Never disappointed when I decide listen to Zizek
When the first western leader ever visited North Korea in the early 2000s what did the NK marching band play? You guessed it...
Britney Spears' Toxic
Free Bird
Shakira Hips don't lie
Frank Stallone
@@funnytortoise or so the Germans would have us believe
It's like "Guile's Theme." Goes with EVERYTHING.
I think here we should have a closer look to the poem of Schiller, and particularly this paragraph :
_Wem der große Wurf gelungen,_
_Eines Freundes Freund zu sein;_
_Wer ein holdes Weib errungen,_
_Mische seinen Jubel ein!_
_Ja, wer auch nur eine Seele_
_Sein nennt auf dem Erdenrund!_
*Und wer's nie gekonnt, der stehle*
*Weinend sich aus diesem Bund!*
_Who has succeeded in the great attempt,_
_To be a friend's friend,_
_Whoever has won a lovely woman,_
_Add his to the jubilation!_
_Indeed, who calls even one soul_
_Theirs upon this world!_
*And whoever never managed, shall steal himself*
*Weeping away from this union!*
Thank you! It surprises me that Zizek didn't comment in it. The moment of exclusion is literally stated in the text itself.
So it's THE call for puritanical collectivism.
I'm not sure, if this is the moment of exclusion, that Žižek meant. In the text it's not an exclusion a government is deciding about.
Its the exclusion of those that are unable to love.
@@derPetunientopf This precisely plays into Zizek's point actually, in all those ideological regimes mentioned the excluded were framed as ones incompatible, people "unable to love" as in lacking basic humanity. Every excluded group was characterized by being framed as inherently incompatible with the ideology, unable to form this "brotherhood", be it black people in Rhodesia, jews in nazi Germany or "reactionaries" in communist China
Kaworu my beloved
Eva sucks
So glad it was Bernstein's that you used for the video. Thank you.
I know right??
Shows that Žižek is a true connoisseur.
Sublime...Zizek is thought provoking
"Now, of course, there is a catch here." 4:10
Not sure if this is a perfect example but since zizek has a history in film and visual arts, i couldn't help but point out how the anime neon genesis evangelion plays ode to joy in its most vehement moments. I meant it's a very well written show with biblical imagery and it just point how ode to joy even represents everything it's insane how i never considered any of this before when it was right in front of us
I remember reading a critical analysis of Ode to Joy after watching the Evangelion episode where Kaworu is introduced and I was amazed at how much meaning the show's metaphors held. Anno truly is a genius.
Honestly, Zizek would love Evangelion. Such a shame he dosen't watch anime.
Just discovered that I'm a blood thirsty dictator because I also like Ode to Joy. Lol
I think that this great bit by Rowan Atkinson, takes Zizek (or Beethoven?) argument even further. Atkinnos shows here that what Zizek grasp as the "frame part", is already perforated by the second part. That's the catch Zizek refers to (or should refer to) - the excluded is already included. The tune of the carnivals rhythm is engraved, as Atkinson shows, in ideology itself (empty vain) - the first part of this piece. The carnivals rhythm is there just to show us that which was there from the begging. In other words: you should listen to this piece, playing the two parts simultaneously. that's critique if ideology.
ruclips.net/video/oWGZdYNpaSo/видео.html
you really need to polish your argument there but nevertheless i was delightfully entertained by atkinsons performance.
greetings
a german guy
For those who don't know: search on RUclips "Rowan Atkinson Beethoven's 9th." Yes, hilarious performance!
Beethoven has more harmonically speaking, innovative works specially in the minor works, string quartets, etc. which totally left behind the rigid classical aesthetic, but this part of the 9th carnavalesc was written when he was completely deft.
I'm not sure that Žižek's final statement is the most reasonable interpretation of the finale of Beethoven's 9th. After the more turbulent variations of the Ode to Joy theme, it reaches a numinous climax, followed by an almost giddy celebration of joy itself; not very 'subversive' to my ear. In fact, it's just his classic 'darkness to light' paradigm, and yet is utterly moving and transcendent in the way that only late Beethoven can truly achieve.
Yeah, from what I had heard about Zizeck, I was surprised at such a lazy, uninformed analysis in the second half of the clip.
I think the major tonality masks some of the madness of the later variations, and actually makes quite a contrast with the sublime contrapuntal presentation of the theme at the start.
@@carsonwall2400you are entirely correct, yet you could no be more mistaken at the same time. For slavoj, media is simply a tool to establish signifiers. Beethoven’s intention and the true meaning of the piece is largely irrelevant. It is much easier and more efficient for slavoj to use ode to joy as an example of a symbol that has been transformed into an empty signifier than it would be for him to explain Jean Baudrillard’s theory of simulacra and simulations. Even if you first heard of baudrillard’s work upon reading this comment, you still likely understand a whole book worth of his work. Trust me, I studied his work at the university of Toronto and I can confidently say that this short youtube video explains the concept of floating signifiers better than baudrillard did himself. If Beethoven intended the song to simply be a sonic representation of joy, then it becomes a less concrete example of a floating signifier. Thus, slavoj sacrifices an accurate and precise analysis of classical music in order to make his main point: the philosophical notion of an empty signifier and the role of empty signifiers in all ideology.
Isn't he saying that that part subverts the dictators? The dictators who want to exclude can't really truly use ode to joy for their purposes, because ode to joy really just fuckin goes for it, as you have described
6:23 there is the poster of 2001 a space odyssey. I just noticed that.
That's the vinyl for the soundtrack dude
@@ChrisJFilms impressive recognition
@@Venus_Plaza yes and its 2001 space odyssey from the movie pedantic prick
It's interesting how the ode is used in Die Hard especially with the achievement of the Criminal Master Mind who kinda steals the show over the hero and I think there's a nod to this in the end credits as the American Christmas song takes 1/4 of the epic Ode hinting you kinda wish this Master Plan had worked.
Is the part where he talks about Rammstein in the film somewhere on RUclips?? Can't seem to find it anymore.
Anyone know where the video where Zizek talks about classical music more generally is?
And so on...
Really good analysis, I agree with him. Remember that Wagner was a follower of Beethoven, he studied Beethoven all his life. Later Wagner and Beethoven were the favourite composers of the Nazi Party
go listen to or watch "Wagner's Ring as a communist narrative"
But wasn’t that the point of Clockwork Orange? That even evil can recognize embrace superior sublime beauty? And that rather than humans being clockwork oranges that can be socially constructed that the fact that even in our most extreme depravity we can know a ray of light of divine inspiration? And doesn’t that negate and erase the ill posed attempts to ‘reform’ men as if they are material machines?
Cool room🍊
Its the korova milkbar
In Afrikaans St. Paul's 1st. Corinthians 13 was put to this.
Adorno claims this is not Hegel
Every regime feels like it's entitled to that melody because they see them selves as some peak of civilization.
And yet, this is the athem of the EU. I bet they feel like, finally this melody is in the right hands.
Re: 4:05 what if the empty void filled with a path of perverse meaning was a fish?
Creo qie entiendo cuál es el punto del vídeo pero no entiendo ni una palabra alguien póngale subtitulos por favor!
4:58 who is she singer opera? And how get performance complete
She's a British actress and singer named Gaye Brown, who was born in 1941. You won't find a complete performance of the "Ode to Joy" passages from Beethoven's symphony from her in relation to this film, as she only performed this brief portion of it for this specific scene.
Very interesting.
Ah to be criticizing Beethoven's Ode to Joy while sitting in the opening scene of A Clockwork Orange.
Only Zizek
It’s called irony, my friend
That shot is actually not from the opening scene, though the set there does appear in the opening scene.
It surprises me that Zizek speaks of the centrality of exclusion to this musical piece, yet avoids mentioning that Beethoven was himself excluded by deafness when he composed it.
Zizek tends not to care for for the intent of the creator of a given piece of media but rather for the ideological messages which are inherent to the piece of media itself.
I always get so annoyed when Friedrich Schiller doesn't get a voice anymore.
He wrote 'Ode to Joy' and the words in that piece are HIS.
People always forget to look at the POEM itself and always look at Beethoven's adaptation
+dominoes37 that's because the music goes so far beyond the poem. It gives a greater spark to Schiller's words.
Same reason no one reads Belasco's play Madame Butterfly which inspired Puccini's opera or the play The Lady of the Camellias as opposed to Verdi's La Traviata.
It's not the best or most interesting of Schiller's work and he himself questioned it's poetic value. However as lyrics for the grand finale of Beethoven's 9th it is perfect. Why would that annoy you?
František Zvěřina No, as Schopenhauer said, to analyze music one must disregard the words explicitly sung. The genius is that poem is meaningless, just as the music makes fun of the supposed sentimental value of an empty container. The choice of poem is purposely one written with a grand aesthetic and no deeper meaning, as the first half of the ninth portrays the way ideology wants to be perceived and the second part states the sad reality, even admitted to by Schiller: ideology is meaningless and the simple act of questioning it removes all aestheticism and reveals the true lack of beauty on a deeper level.
Who gives a fuck
it is just great music used by politicians for targeted political symbolism that is contradictive to the lyrics of Schiller
Yeah, but why they chose to use it is the real point here.
I’am confused. I don’t see the connection between any subtle ideology in Beethoven’s adaptation and the spread usage of its symphony as a fake song for union and humanity. Could someone explain it please?
Zizek's point can be a little confusing here, due to his usual rhetoric and presentation. Basically, Zizek is not saying that Ode to Joy stands for some very spesific ideology - which is being somehow spread in a duplicitous manner by some establishment for a political agenda - or that Beethoven was consciously being critical of ideology - a term that didn't exist yet in it's modern form in his time.
Rather, Zizek is using Ode to Joy - and it's aesthetic effect- as an analogy for the general functioning of ideology or how every ideology has to function in order to be effective. Much like the first part of the symphony, every ideology must have that - seemingly - all-inclusive, universal appeal, where it fully encapsulates and explains reality in some beautifying and integrating fashion. This is the "pathetic" moment where you are moved by something "deep" and believe it to be something necessary and "real".
But the catch, as Zizek puts it, is that this frame or feeling is never as neutral as it is. Here the second part comes in and shows the "carnivalesque", fake side of ideology. Ideologies must always try to "tame" the world, explain every possible element or aspect within it in a satisfying way. But no ideology is ever able to do this, because the world will always contain something antithetical to every specific ideology, some disturbing element, which can not be incorporated within the "symbolic universe" of the ideology. Ideology will thus be forever incapable of completely filling in the void in the center of things.
To Zizek, Beethoven was practicing the "critique of ideology" by showcasing in a musical work this very impotence of an universal integration. The idea that we are "all one" is purely ideological and thus artificial. But this idea nonetheless has emotional and political appeal, thus the widespread usage of the first part by various and conflicting political parties/groups/nations etc. It has "universal" appeal and ideology must in general form have this appeal, though to Zizek it is irreducibly fake.
I'm not sure if I answered your question here. Hope I did.
@@ikosabre Wow! Very bright explanation, thank you very much. I find your ideas clear and structured. This makes me wonder, aren't you overestimating what Zizek said by adding your thoughtfully developed ideas into this (perhaps) vague speech.
On the other hand, I couldn't agree more with your observation about the limited capacity of any ideology to understand and explain reality's complexity. But, could you please tell us more about how Beethoven's symphony state that?
@@diegovillacreses7071 That is of course always possible, as with any interpretation. This may be especially true with Zizek, who can be very incoherent and hyperactive in his presentation and reasoning at times- though I would not say "illogical" or "convoluted" as some would.
However, based on my own extensive reading and studying of philosophy and the little I have read and heard from Zizek, I believe that I "get" him, his general ontology and logic of thought/method. I can see "where he is coming from", especially in the light of his lacanian and hegelian background and the relevance these traditions of though have for the study and history of ideology.
I am "patching up the holes" here somewhat and I cannot be sure, but I believe my interpretation is generally on good grounds.
As for the Ode to Joy, I cannot be certain. I am not a music historian or expert on Beethoven. I simply go by what Zizek says here and try to understand why he would reason like this, based on his intellectual background. I do not know what he bases his view on. Is it a personal interpretation or is it based on some more objective, external sources or opinion?
Perhaps it has to do with structure? The first part can perhaps be seen as sublime, integrating, edifying and grand. It is the "universalizing" aspect of ideology, which makes the world whole and congruent with our representations, nullifying or annulling the alien and the contradictory. The second part is the "vulgar", carnivalesque, chaotic or mocking even. This represents the alien otherness, disharmony or the contradictory repulsiveness of reality, which ideology will never be fully able to integrate or tame. It is that part of existence which "laughs" at our desire for unity of symbolic representation or "being-as-one-with-the-world".
As I said, I am not sure how true this interpretation is or whether Beethoven had anything of the like in mind. As said, ideology as a concept did not exist at the time. However, maybe, by accident, Beethoven was indeed drawing attention to the general form of human experience of the world/reality in a musical form? After all, it can be said that art imitates, exemplifies and empowers the states of human experience/consciousness/condition.
Usually in cases like this I am more interested on how Zizek uses analogy to make his point about something else, such as ideology. I find his analogies instructive, even if they are not necessarily accurate, though this of course is no excuse for questionable claims.
@@diegovillacreses7071 This is pretty much what Zizek says in this video. I watched the movie a few times in order to process everything he says and understand why he makes certain jumpcuts from one analysis to another. The movie doesn't have a very clear structure, but in honesty it's very dense, so a re-watch is in order for anyone who is genuinely interested in this essay on Ideology.
What it boils down to is this: Beethoven made a symphony, and politicians like to pretend that just a part of it embraces their truth and therefor, abuse it for their own agenda.
He clearly shows how the way in which this particular piece is used, to demonstrate peace and unity, is farcical on its own, exactly because it has been used by very differing regimes with opposing views to justify their own revolution, not because they are making alliances with other regimes.
In a way, Zizek suggests, Beethoven already knew his music would be abused by powerful ideologies to demonstrate their benevolence, and so he added the additional parts to contradict this message of peace. In my opinion he goes a little bit too far in this, because Beethoven was greatly inspired by the ideals of freedom and brotherhood that motivated the French Revolution to create this symphony. As Beethoven's music demonstrates more often, he was very aware that peace does not come easily. Sometimes, people have to fight for peace. Hence the bombastic second part. The third part, however, shows light at the end of the tunnel, we hear angels singing, there is peace, which Zizek carefully neglects because it is not part of his argument.
Once you know the original intent of the piece, you can understand why so many regimes feel inspired to use it as their anthem: it signifies that war is justified when it comes to attaining liberty and achieving brotherhood.
If Zizek makes any point with his movie, it is that he himself is stuck in a certain ideology and that he does not seem to care how other cultures, other ideologies, might interpret abstract values like liberty and brotherhood. So his cynical attempt, and he admits in many of his lectures that he can be quite cynical, to say Beethoven was an all-knowing geezer who made an ironic symphony about world peace is completely unfounded and only goes to show that even here, in a movie where he tries to deconstruct ideology and its political aspects, he too is just a political agent of producing propaganda in favor of his own ideology. The movie is great, it taught me alot about Christianity and gave me great insights on how I am a product of society, but just be critical that everything he says and shows are arguments for his own ideological beliefs. This is the biggest problem I have with Zizek, he loves Hegel, and he's a Lacan scholar, but like Lacan, there is alot of politics involved in whatever he says or writes. It doesn't make alot of sense once you start questioning what he says and look up the facts and go along with them like a historian would. Which is why I really love him for using Titanic as an example in this movie and even says it is a perfect piece of evidence how ideology continues to revive itself. The history, the fictional element, do you know if it's true? Do you even care if it's true? It opens the door to post-truth, truth based on emotions instead of facts, which is pretty much the times we are living in right now. If anything, Zizek is simply being very honest here in a post-ironic fashion and shows that he is part of this zeitgeist and very much in touch with how the younger generation is experiencing our society. Which is probably why he's so popular. He's ready to involve himself in these lesser games to show us the way to something greater, and that's admirable.
@@DarkAngelEU I mean, he just used Beethoven to make an analogy. Does it need to be factual if he's only concerned about commenting on ideology instead of the piece itself? Regardless, it has been used to unite and implant a certain feeling, be it for different interpretations of liberty or whatnot, even if the piece wasn't ironic, the situation still is just from the fact that opposing factions use it. I also didn't get the impression that he was suggesting Beethoven "knew it all along". Just kinda made an observation ig? Like how the movie recontextualizes the piece.
But I don't really know anything about academic philosophy or whatever this is so Im not really too sure either. I just stumbled upon this from watching the movie and I got genuinely curious.
Now, I understand why he's a genius: he drinks synthemesc 😁
Re: 5:05 what if going home to play fuzzy warbles was a fish?
Damn! How is this for a song review?
At the very end Zizek says that through his work he practices critique of ideology - i'd like to try to understand that in greater detail.
If it is critique, then how come the 9th serves to strengthen ideology like no other?
Or am I missing the point somewhere?
Please help this really interests me lol, even start a discussion :)
+Tristan All the regimes and personas of different ideologies who celebrate the piece focus on the first part (sublime beauty, hymn to universal brotherhood etc.), they ignore the second part, the carnevalesque rhyhtm, which is intended by Beethoven to represent those who are excluded from the ideal of united humanity. Beethoven pretty much anticipated what would happen with his music later, i.e. being abused by false propagandists of progress who in reality always exclude others from their utopia.
+Allzumenschliches44 You can't say he anticipated. The change from good times and light to sorrow and darkness is seen in many classical piece. This one is just stronger. I think that the meaning of the song is not limited to ideology and politics, but more to life in general. He could believe that light was only temporary, and that darkness would always catch up with it.
it's way more complex than light and darkness though, way more precise
I always thought while hearing ode to joy, did Beethoven really want all humanity to unite ?
Was he really thinking about Aborigines, Blacks, Browns when he thought about united humans ?
especially considering the time period he lived in.
Does it matter? Was Cleisthenes thinking of the US, UK, Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia etc. when he helped to institute the first democracy? Probably not, but look how widely applicable it now is. Was Maxwell thinking of satellites and the internet when he devised the equations of electromagnetism? Probably not, and yet look how far it's come. Some of the best creations are those that have been reshaped and adapted by many others.
@@desudesudesu5326 fyi those things developed later on from their basic ideas,these non Europeans coexisted with them because atleast he may know about Africans, Asians. Im not necessarily saying Beethoven should think about non European people but refuse to believe most people of his time really cared for a universal human brotherhood.
@@niranjansrinivasan4042 Beethoven originally dedicated his Kreutzer sonata to a black violinist: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bridgetower
@@desudesudesu5326 good to know now that I'm clear of doubt
I like this take, but listening to the symphony, I'm not so sure. The "second part" he talks about strikes me more joyous than subversive. And also there's the fact that that part is a very small part of the whole and it goes back to the earlier mode not soon after..
Exactly. Carnival can also function as ideology. That's when an ideological edifice tries its best to unify us all into a single joyous moment of freedom and liberation. It's a very brief expected exception that perfectly fits ideology. Beethoven cam be read as an ideologist precisely when he tries to denounce its failure through a very brief carnivalesque way.
The host did have me for a while until I thought, somewhere amidst the clip from A Clockwork Orange: "I don't think Beethoven was thinking this at all- that ideologies that ingest this tune will ultimately fail blahblah- I think he was working through its musical variations." Maybe I'm just shallow but not everything's political, my goodness! I see this comes "From 'the Pervert's Guide to Ideology' (2012)". Oookay >_>
Beethoven was a highly political artist, you know? For years, he was rooting for revolutionary France and Napoleon day in and day out and devoted his works to them, up until Napoleon crowned himself Emperor. That was the day when Beethoven ripped to pieces his dedication of his "Eroica" symphony to the man.
When I first started to get into classical music, it surprised me that there wasn't a grand reprise of the theme at the end of the 9th symphony. Why that? Wasn't the creation of this theme Beethoven's central achievement? Beethoven is keen on repeating the great moments in his music. In the 9th, you get instead a bunch of highly esoteric variations, eventually culminating in a beautiful interplay of different voices. Then music stops, for just a moment, and starts again in what Zizek rightly calls a kind of carnavalesque mode, ending the piece with a bang. It's very strange. Zizek is definitely on to something here.
@@lavamatstudios If tlatosmd is correct, then Żiżek might also be correct. Otherwise, Żiżek is inserting his own agenda into what could be summarized as "satire," "irony," or "mockery."
@@MrCantStopTheRobot Sections of the 9th are literally dedicated to making fun of Napoleon.
@@xylophone897 That would be delightful if it's true, so I'll look into it. If it's true, it will be yet another little lie by omission from my childhood and youth. I guess everyone just ignorantly wants a positive song with no caveats, and so they never try to mention the other face of the song to schoolchildren.
One can do a cynical reading and displace the very praise of Zizek for Beethoven here. What if the second part is at the very heart of ideology by already including in itself, in a cynical way, its own failure in advance? Like, "yeah, yeah, we know it's a failure! Here, take your carnivalesque exception as "objet petit a" in order to suture this signifying chain of ideology with its own exception!". It's cynical reasoning at full disposal of post-ideological ideology for you!
GoddeSS God BleSS LudWiG
Ii WormHolT GeeZerGod
What if listening to Ode To Joy was a fish?
What are the names of the parts in Beethoven’s Symphony?
The symphony is comprised of four movements, which Wikipedia refers to, from first movement to fourth and last, as 'Allegro ma non troppo, un poco maestoso', 'Molto vivace', 'Adagio molto e cantabile', and 'Finale', respectively
I can't understand Zizek's conclusion at the end of the video.
@Elpistoler09 Basically attributing relevant meaning where there is none.
@Elpistoler09 I mean it doesn't have any meaning related to ideology.
@Elpistoler09 What gives you confidence in that Beethoven was in fact consciously (you didn't state 'consciously', but it seems implicit) depicting ideology / a specific ideology? I can't find any source for this. Serious question.
@Elpistoler09 You said
"The first part of 'Ode to joy' is the 'superficial' glimpse of ideology which looks 'normal' and harmonious, the second part represents the real chaos happening behind the curtains of ideology"
I'm wondering what he was portraying and/or criticizing and how we know that he in fact was doing that and not only making music that sounded good in his head.
@Elpistoler09 Oh ok. Since you told Nessie Andrew that he didn't know what he was talking about when he said that the symphony had no meaning related to ideology, I thought that you knew Beethoven's intention in his symphony for a fact.
Re: 7:25 what if critiquing ideology was a fish?
Zizek is a smooth talker rather than a deep thinker.
its the opposite,Alex`s Ode to Joy is not his exclusion it is simply translated into his own language no matter how silly it is, which is why he says brother, but ok Zizek, relax not everything is politics
I'd have to disagree. It's not carnivalistic, it's military
Illuminati anthem?
we hear this vulgar music xD
we could have lived without this explanation from GiGek.
Monsieur Zizek, un de ces touche à tout, qui s'improvise critique de film , de musique classique, d'art, de théologie ( dont il ne connaît pas une ligne), et que sais-je d'autre. Il raconte n'importe quoi sans avoir la moindre formation sérieuse dans ces domaines. Pseudo philosophe et admirateur de Lacan (un autre arriviste psy) , il ferait mieux de se limiter à sa sociologie au lieu de raconter n'importe sur qui est bien plus grand que lui !
EU INTENSIFIES 💙🇪🇺💛🌹
I guess the current ruling party in Turkey (AKP) could be the only exception to this.
*sniff* *sniff* *oink*
and so on and so on
If someone would still have doubts whether Mr Zizek is indeed as crazy as he seems to be, then this short video would quench all doubts.
For instance: if a work of art, be it a piece of music, or a novel, or a philosophical text, or a poem, is misunderstood by underdeveloped listeners / readers, that does not mean that the cause is to be found in the work itself.
And then, revisiting the old klischées of the nazis, of the Chinese cultural 'revolution' (calling B 9th bourgeois music!), Peruvian lefties, and in one breath the hymn of the 9th as the hymn of the EU (suggesting the EU is about ideology), is simply absurd and utterly primitive.
Also he makes the grave mistake by claiming B's 9th is a neutral, empty framework to be filled with any ideology whatsover: not only the music, but Schiller's explicit text clearly states a humanist ideal. Such empty framework merely exists in the empty minds of people who are too underdeveloped to understand a work like this, and it is them who filled their own empty framework with their own misconceptions. So, Mr Zizek does a good job by counting himself among those empty-headed masses which he uses to illustrate his clims.😄
You still haven't made a point against him
Never liked that melody. There is some annoying germanness in it, I can't figure out what.
Part of the fourth and concluding movement of the symphony is actually inspired by Ottoman Turkish military music.
this is bullshit. The 9th allows us to see the humanity in the people shown even though they were part of horrible regimes. It allows us to forgive them. To imply that the 9th can motivate people to perform horrible acts is a big leap in logic.
This Is good thing that's not the point he's making then :)
"this is bullshit. The 9th allows us to see the humanity in the people shown even though they were part of horrible regimes. It allows us to forgive them. "
What? No.
That s exactly what is said in this video, and that s how this piece is used ideologically by those mentioned in the video.
Did you feel something very humane when looking at the faces of those nazis, ect ect.... being absorbed in the sublimity of the piece? It works then, that s what Zizek is trying to convey brother.