Musical Autopoiesis and Its Relationship to Nature, Environment, and Environmental Issues

Christian Morgner, University of Sheffield

Banner photo by Yurii Stupen on Unsplash

ABSTRACT

The paper invokes the concept of autopoiesis or self-referentiality to provide a new understanding of the relationship between nature, environment, environmental problems, and music. As noted in the existing literature, contemporary music increasingly references environmental change, but it remains unclear how we might conceptualize this relationship and these changes in the musical landscape. To that end, the conception of music as mirroring supreme and divine nature and of music-making as a direct link to nature is contrasted here with the conception of music as self-referential. While the latter might seem to have lost this direct connection, it can be said to possess greater freedom in selecting its own subjects and themes. At the same time, this greater freedom imposes new constraints on music production, as evidenced by an analysis of a popular heavy metal song. We find, then, that connections linking music, nature, and environmental reform may result in a paradox, one that encourages environmental activism while simultaneously creating limits on such activism.

INTRODUCTION

This paper delves into the intricate relationship between nature and music through the lenses of autopoiesis and self-referentiality. The burgeoning research interest in the interplay between nature, environment, and music is exemplified by initiatives such as the National Musical Arts (NMA) BioMusic Program (see Gray, 2014). Such interest stems from the extensive incorporation of nature-related elements in contemporary music. Instances abound, ranging from the integration of sounds evoking nature, such as ocean waves and bird songs (as explored by Schafer in 2001), to the exploration of songs expressing environmental concerns (as examined by Hart, 2018), and research delving into the intricate relationships between music, sound, and the natural environment (a topic explored by Allen and Dawe, 2015).

While this burgeoning research landscape has enriched our comprehension of these multifaceted phenomena, there remains a lack of universally accepted conceptual or theoretical frameworks that could elucidate the intricate connection between music and nature, the environment, and environmental challenges, particularly for contemporary music. To that end, I propose the theoretical concept of musical self-reference or autopoiesis to elucidate this relationship. I have chosen this framework because it not only offers a greater theoretical potential to understand the constitution of music in contemporary society, but it also facilitates the comprehension of the burgeoning musical expressions related to environmental themes. It enables us to frame the relationship between music and nature and discern the broader implications for ecological concerns. Special attention is dedicated to distinguishing music as influenced by an external ontological notion of nature, prevalent in music theory during the “pre-modern” European world from 1300-1700, from the conception of nature emanating from within music based on the framework of musical autopoiesis.

In the first section, I outline some general considerations regarding music and nature (or music versus nature) and include a brief discussion of nature and environment as the primary aesthetic model for music-making during the period between 1300-1700. This emphasizes music’s externally induced relationship with nature and the environment. In subsequent sections, I focus on the importance of self-reference and autopoiesis in a modern musical context. The focus, here, is on music creation that delves into nature, the environment, and environmental issues from within the music itself. This discussion draws on a range of illustrative musical examples.

MUSIC AND NATURE FROM WITHOUT

Conceptions of music that dominated the pre-modern European world from 1300-1700 embedded music in a general worldview that emphasized the continuity of nature, humankind, and the divine. In this period, music was seen as a branch of natural philosophy, as defined, for instance, by John Bullokar (1574-1627): “Naturall Philosophy teaching the nature of all things, and containing besides Arithmetick, Musick, Geometry and Astronomy” (no page number). The term nature extended beyond plants, trees, and the uncultivated environment to encompass the universe and life itself, including the relationship between God and human beings. Nature was assigned this supreme status because of its divine creator. Consequently, the musician’s primary role was to imitate or complement that relationship with Gioseffo Zarlino’s (1517-1590) music theory or Josquin Lebloitte dit des Prez’s (c. 1450-1521) compositions being prime examples of that relationship (Carapetyan, 1946).

As Hans Blumenberg (18) notes, “Nature and ‘art’ are structurally identical” during the early modern period; that is, nature was the aesthetic model to be translated into music. For musicians and composers this involved uniting nature’s various realms (visible and individual, material and non-material) through the use of harmony (Huck, 2003; Prins and Vanhaelen, 2017). In his treatise on natural history, Francis Bacon (29, paragraph 101) asserted that only harmonious sounds could be referred to as music: “whereunto there may be harmony, which sounds are ever equal.” Nature was central to this concept because it represented the ideal form of harmony; consequently, many musical pieces described engagements with nature. For instance, the French chace or the Italian caccia (both meaning “hunt”) created music based on singing and melodies that imitated the sounds of a hunt, including the barking of dogs and the whooping of hunting horns, as well as the cannon, with voices “chasing” each other in musical imitation (Rich, 1970). In these examples, the sounds of the chorus, the instruments, and the dogs come together harmoniously. Birdsong imitations are another important instance of the incorporation of nature in the vocal music during this period. It was believed during this period that birdsong was the original source of human music, and the nightingale is often cited as the prime example musical composition – not only because of the complex sounds but because “the nightingale sings of Christ’s death and resurrection and is itself the symbol of the greatest love” (Rowland, 30).

As these examples suggest, nature exerted its influence on music from without. Nature, in this context, possessed a pre-established significance that music was meant to imitate rather than creating or inventing its own interpretations of nature. Consequently, musical composition adhered to a model constrained by these predetermined boundaries, preventing music from defining itself independently. This paradoxical relationship between music and nature becomes evident. On one hand, nature was regarded as the foundation upon which music stood, playing a vital role in its existence. However, this foundational quality also imposed limitations, restricting the expressive scope of music to predefined parameters.

SELF-REFERENTIAL MUSIC

Establishing the ontological foundation of music based on predefined meanings rooted in a divine nature poses challenges when applied to the conception of music in contemporary culture. To counter such an external definition of music, a theoretical framework that has gained prominence in recent years conceptualizes the unity of music, or its distinction from non-music, through the concept of self-referentiality.

There are three ways one might define self referentiality in terms of music (Bartlett, 1987). In the first, the term self-referential music can be applied to songs that reference themselves such as Prince’s My Name Is Prince or Queen Latifah’s Icemen Law (Fischer, 2016). A second approach conceptualizes self-referential music in terms of music that references other music through allusions or quotations (Bernhart and Wolf, 2010) or non-music (e.g. John Cage’s 4′33″).  A third paradigm conceptualizes this self-reference in terms of autopoiesis (Luhmann, 1987; de Carvalho, 1999, 2001; Chagas 2005). My focus here is on the third approach.

The term autopoiesis was coined by the biologist Humberto Maturana following a philosophical exchange regarding the distinction between poiesis and praxis. Maturana favored the concept of poiesis because it expresses more clearly how a product can be the outcome of its own activity but not of simple self-sufficient activity. Such products are formed “through the basic circularity of their production of their components” (Maturana and Varela , 1980: XIV). For instance, a living cell cannot find within itself all the causes required for its own production, but it can control the selection of external causes by internal operations. When applying this idea to music, we can recall the meaning of the word ‘tone,’ which roughly means ‘tension’. This term signifies a difference between two entities; otherwise, there would be no tension. In other words, a musical tone or sound is not to be understood as a singularity but as an interval between two points in time. The identity or meaning of a musical tone or sound, in turn, derives from faded, future, or expected sounds.

Niklas Luhmann (104) summarized this idea of musical autopoiesis as follows: “the form of the musical work creates its own ‘reservoir’ of selection, a space of meaningful compositional possibilities, which the specific work uses in a way which is recognizable as selection.” The pre-modern conception of music, on the other hand, conceptualized music based on the external footing of divine nature. The self-referential or autopoietic form of music conceptualizes music as through itself. This does not mean that external circumstances could not impact on music, but these external circumstances would be determined by the autopoietic form of music and not some ontological footing.

MUSIC AND NATURE FROM WITHIN

In the following discussion, I apply the framework of autopoietic music to the concepts of nature and environment. Within this framework, music derives its identity or meaning from past, present, and anticipated sounds—a concept referred to as the autopoietic form of music. According to this perspective, music is perceived as a network of interlinked sounds, where each sound references and builds upon its predecessors and successors. Consequently, the meaning of musical elements is established in relation to both themselves and what they are not. It is within this context that we can distinguish a sound as music as opposed to something such as noise or language. When guided by this principle, diverse elements such as time signatures, tempos, scales, rhythm, tonality, and expectations regarding musical terms can be constructed. Once these expectations are firmly established, they create the potential for alteration or rejection. A classic example of this can be heard in atonal music, which breaks the traditions and expectations of traditional harmonious compositions.

This perspective sheds light on a transformative understanding. It challenges the traditional view of music as a branch of natural philosophy, where nature and environmental issues are perceived as external entities. Instead, this approach posits that the meanings of nature and environment are constructed within and through music. The shift towards musical autopoiesis emphasizes invention over imitation, as the meaning of music is continually shaped through recursive networkings. These recursive networkings are made possible by the open-ended multiplicity of sounds that allow for diverse combinations, such as the countless meaningful musical sequences that can be generated from a C major scale. Consequently, if music originates from within itself, it follows that it must invent meanings related to nature and environment based on these internal foundations. This conceptual shift challenges conventional notions and invites a deeper exploration of the intricate relationship between music, nature, and the environment.

A premodern listener who heard this autopoietic turn, in which music is produced through music, might conclude that the connection between music and nature had been lost. As discussed above, medieval music was based on a conception of divine nature. However, this close relationship to nature also meant that musical production was simultaneously constrained by that same relationship. However, while divine nature may no longer be understood as the source of musical meaning, contemporary music has infinitely greater freedom in its choice of subject matter. At the same time, it is also self-constraining in the sense that any musical piece must work within the context of other musical pieces if it is to be recognized as music.

Many current musical trends serve to illustrate this paradoxical simultaneity of freedom and constraint. Mason Bates’ 2009 “The B-Sides,” for example, blends electronic music with the traditional orchestra. “The B-Sides” incorporates sounds of nature such as recordings of crickets and birdsong into the electronic elements. The piece exemplifies the freedom to merge electronic and acoustic elements while conforming to the structure of an orchestral suite. In another example,  Björk’s  2011 album “Biophilia,” is an innovative project that combines music, technology, and nature. Each track explores a different natural phenomenon, demonstrating the freedom to experiment with both musical and thematic elements within the constraints of a conceptual album, a pre-existing format she inherited. Similarly, Bon Iver’s  2011 “Holocene” explores themes of natural beauty and human connection within the context of indie folk music. The song incorporates intricate acoustic guitar patterns and ethereal vocals, thus demonstrating artistic freedom in lyrical expression and musical arrangement while adhering to the song writing conventions of the genre. As these examples show, the concept of musical autopoiesis can illustrate the ways contemporary music about the environment reveals the paradox of the freedom to experiment while simultaneously working within the restraints established by well-established genres.

A detailed examination of the heavy metal band Metallica’s 1998 song “Blackened” offers a paradigmatic example of the complex dynamics of working with this tension. Indeed, even a casual listen to the song reveals the way the band intertwines the themes of nature and environment within the song’s musical structure and lyrical content. In terms of the song’s structure, the concept of self-production and self-maintenance aligns with the composition’s repetitive and cyclical nature. The recurring riffs and rhythmic patterns create a self-sustaining musical structure that mirrors the idea of internal processes within an autopoietic system. These musical elements represent the foundational components of the song, analogous to the self-producing components of a biological system. The musical tones and intervals in “Blackened” represent the differences between forces and resemble the tension between nature and humanity depicted in the lyrics. The dissonant guitar riffs and intense drumming form intervals that symbolize the conflict between the natural world (“Death of Mother Earth”) and human actions (“Deadly nicotine/Kills what might have been”). The musical tension reflects the discordant relationship between the two entities, thus emphasizing the ecological imbalance caused by human activities. One might even hear in the heavy guitar arpeggios the musical analogue of lyrics such as “death of mother earth – never a rebirth – evolution’s end,” a notion that exemplifies the existentialist themes common to heavy metal (Irwin, 2007).

The song’s structure similarly embodies the circularity and meaningful compositional possibilities described in the concept of musical autopoiesis. The repetitive nature of the lyrics and musical motifs creates a reservoir of selection within the song. As the lyrics revisit themes of decay, termination, and human destruction, the song builds a recognizable pattern that reinforces the message of environmental devastation. This circularity emphasizes the inescapable nature of the consequences humanity faces due to its actions against the environment.

The lyrics of “Blackened” recognize and utilize concepts related to environmental decay and human impact. The specific word choices and imagery such as “Deadly nicotine/Kills what might have been” and “See our mother put to death” serve as selected elements within the autopoietic system of the song. These selections contribute to the formation of recognizable patterns, shaping the song’s thematic coherence and reinforcing the message of ecological crisis. In the autopoietic framework, the interdependence of musical elements and lyrical themes is crucial. The intensity of the music mirrors the urgency of the environmental message, creating an immersive experience for the listener. The dissonance and aggression in the music correspond to the direness of the environmental situation described in the lyrics, highlighting the symbiotic relationship between the musical composition and the lyrical narrative.

As is typical of heavy metal music, “Blackened” offers no meaningful explanation of the world. While there is no solution to be found in “Opposition…contradiction…premonition… compromise – Agitation…violation…mutilation…planet dies,” the song expresses an existential transgression beyond good or evil. This is the genre’s potency, and “Blackened” connects with and extends this heavy metal tradition. In that sense, self-referential music does not have the freedom of “anything goes” but is constrained by its own character. It must stabilize the meaning of the heavy metal music from within music while enabling a new projection of the environment as external to it. With the environment being on the outside of society it can be presented as being under threat from the forces external to it.

Based on such a construction, music can generate meanings that may lead to activism and greater ecological awareness (Prior, 2022). However, the construction of such meanings also has its pitfalls. For instance, the “popular” of popular music implies that it must reach a wide audience through examples such as medium-length songs in 4/4 tempo that are easily danced to, with repeated choruses and memorable lyrics. While a large audience can make music very powerful, it also means that its subject matter – even environmental destruction – becomes easily consumable. Indeed, even “Blackened” is now used to sell whiskey (Micallef, 2020). As Adorno noted in a sharp and aggressive tone in an interview discussing popular songs about the Vietnam War (cited in Buchenhorst, 2021: 96), “then I consider this song unbearable by making the horrendous consumable, wringing something like consumption qualities out of it.” To be sure, the construction of the environment in music may create new meanings and encourage people to engage with the topic, but as Adorno notes in his critique of anti-war songs, there is the concern that ready-made meanings take away the pressure to engage with the deeply troubling topic of environmental problems. To summarize, musical autopoiesis is a useful concept to explain how music in contemporary society constructs the environment and environmental problems, which lead to new meanings and potential for social change, but likewise, the ways these meanings adhere to musical genre, styles, and other formats and thereby can have a tendency to package meanings so that they fit into existing standards.

DISCUSSION

The aim of this paper was to articulate a framework for understanding the relationship between nature and music. This seems warranted by the growing academic literature and the global expansion of this theme across all musical genres. However, it was also noted that a theoretical framework that can help us to understand the relationship between music and nature, the environment, and environmental problems has yet to be developed. To elucidate this relationship, the proposed framework centers on self-referential or autopoietic music. The brief foray into contemporary music and its links to environmental issues highlights the contrast with earlier conceptions of music intended to mirror divine nature. This part of the paper could show the direct relationship between music and nature. The section on the self-referential conception of music, however, breaks this direct link with any external or divine nature.

While the idea of an autonomous reservoir of musical ideas and themes might seem to distance music from environmental concerns, this self-determination also means that music has greater freedom in terms of theme, format, and sound and can therefore react more powerfully to environmental concerns. Paradoxically, the “loss” of nature means that environmentalism has expanded globally across all musical genres. However, music must also operate within its own context and traditions, which inevitably incurs a cost. The two cited examples of heavy metal and pop music illustrate how music engages with environmental concerns and opens new doors while also remaining dependent on the reproduction of music itself (e.g. musical genres or forms of consumption). This conception of music as autopoietic accommodates the paradoxical alignment of freedom, expansion and constraint, highlighting the complex relationship between music and environment and how music can both help and hinder environmental change.

REFERENCES

Allen, A.S., and K. Dawe. Current Directions in Ecomusicology: Music, Culture, Nature. Routledge, 2015.

Bacon, F. Sylva Sylvarum: or a Naturall Historie. Printed by J. H. for William Lee, 1627.

Bartlett, S.J. “Varieties of Self-Reference.” Self-Reference, edited by S.J. Bartlett and P. Suber, Springer, 1987, pp. 5–28.

Bernhart, W. and W. Wolf, editors. Self-Reference in Literature and Music. Brill, 2010.

Blumenberg, H. “Imitation of Nature: Toward a Prehistory of the Idea of the Creative Being.” Qui Parle, vol. 12, no. 1, 2000, pp. 17–54.

Bullokar, J. An English Expositor Teaching the Interpretation of the Hardest Words Used in Our Language. Printed by John Legat, 1616.

Carapetyan, A. “The Concept of ‘Imitazione della natura’ in the Sixteenth Century.” Journal of Renaissance and Baroque Music, vol. 1, no. 1, 1946, 47–67.

Chagas, P. C. “Polyphony and Embodiment: A Critical Approach of the Theory Of Autopoiesis.” Trans – Revista Transcultural de Musica, vol. 9, 2005, 34pp.

Clark, S. and Rehding, A. Music Theory and Natural Order from the Renaissance to the Early Twentieth Century, Cambridge University Press, 2001.

de Carvalho, M. V. “`New Music’ between Search for Identity and Autopoiesis: Or, the `Tragedy of Listening’.” Theory, Culture and Society, vol. 16, no. 4, 1999, pp. 127–135.

de Carvalho, M. V. “Art as Autopoiesis? A Critical Approach, Beginning with the European Musical Avant-Garde in the Early 1950s.” Journal of Sociocybernetics, vol. 2, no. 1, 2001, pp. 33–40.

Fischer, P. “‘I Wanna Be a Rock Star!’ Lyrical Communication in Self-Referential Rock Songs.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, vol. 64, no. 3, 2016, pp. 335–351.

Gray, P. “What is BioMusic? Toward Understanding Music-Making and Its Role in Life.” Journal of Biomusical Engineering, vol. 2, 2014, e105. http://www.sibetrans.com/trans/article/179/polyphony-and-embodiment-a-critical-approach-to-the-theory-of-autopoiesis. Accessed 10 December 2020.

Hart, H. Music and the Environment in Dystopian Narrative: Sounding the Disaster. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

Huck, O. “The Music of the Angels in Fourteenth- and Early Fifteenth-Century Music.” Musica Disciplina, vol. 53, 2003, pp. 99–119.

Irwin, W. Metallica and Philosophy: A Crash Course in Brain Surgery. Wiley, 2007.

Luhmann, N. “The Medium of Art.” Thesis Eleven, vols. 18–19, no. 1, 1987, pp. 101–113.

Maturana, H. R., and F. J. Varela. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dr Reidel Publishing, 1980.

Micallef, J. V. “Metallica’s Blackened Is The Ultimate Fusion Of Heavy Metal And Whiskey”, Forbes, September 4^th, https://www.forbes.com/sites/joemicallef/2020/09/04/metallicas-blackened-is-the-ultimate-fusion-of-heavy-metal-and-whiskey/?sh=16d5732a1c08. Accessed 21 January 2021.

Prins, J., and M. Vanhaelen. Sing Aloud Harmonious Spheres: Renaissance Conceptions of Cosmic Harmony. Routledge, 2017.

Prior, H. M. “How Can Music Help Us to Address the Climate Crisis?” Music and Science, vol. 5, 2022 (online first).

Rich, A. Music: Mirror of the Arts. The Ridge Press, 1970.

Rowland, B. Birds with Human Souls: A Guide to Bird Symbolism. University of Tennessee Press, 1978.

Schafer, R. “Music and the soundscape” The Book of Music & Nature, edited by D. Rothenberg and M. Ulvaeus Wesleyan University Press, 2001, pp. 58-68.