No Code, Pearl Jam’s fourth album (1996), is usually not considered to be among the band’s most successful ones, both in artistic and in commercial terms. Despite this, or maybe, as I will argue, just for this reason, No Code offers some stimulating philosophical starting points, both in its general concept and in the songs it contains. My interpretation of the album focuses exactly on its apparent inconsistency and lack of organic unity, and on the general atmosphere of dissolution, contingency, heterogeneity pervading it. I read these features not as a sign of a temporary artistic loss on the side of the band, but on the contrary in terms of a paradoxical project, suspended between the bold rejection of codes and the risk of this very rejection becoming a new code. In doing so, I establish a connection between the intention structuring the album and one of the most famous and controversial concepts in philosophical aesthetics, namely the so-called “end of art” thesis. Given the nature and aims of this contribution, I will of course not attempt to offer a full-fledged, original discussion of this thesis. Instead, I will argue that No Code can be read as an illuminating, concrete instance of the thesis, and that, vice versa, employing the end of art thesis as an interpretive framework can have a therapeutic effect, helping us to deal with the feeling of bewilderment the album can generate in us, probably more so than other works by Pearl Jam. My argument will be structured as follows. First, I will sketch the meaning and content of the end of art thesis (§2). Second, I will offer a reading of No Code which, considering together the title, the lyrics, and the musical execution, attempts to interpret the peculiarities of the album in a philosophical perspective (§§3.1/3.3). Finally, I will reconnect this reading of the album to the end of art thesis and pursue a mutual clarification of these two and the development of the main threads and implications of what I will call a “no code aesthetics” (§§4.1/4.2).
No Code Aesthetics
Siani Alberto L.
Primo
2022-01-01
Abstract
No Code, Pearl Jam’s fourth album (1996), is usually not considered to be among the band’s most successful ones, both in artistic and in commercial terms. Despite this, or maybe, as I will argue, just for this reason, No Code offers some stimulating philosophical starting points, both in its general concept and in the songs it contains. My interpretation of the album focuses exactly on its apparent inconsistency and lack of organic unity, and on the general atmosphere of dissolution, contingency, heterogeneity pervading it. I read these features not as a sign of a temporary artistic loss on the side of the band, but on the contrary in terms of a paradoxical project, suspended between the bold rejection of codes and the risk of this very rejection becoming a new code. In doing so, I establish a connection between the intention structuring the album and one of the most famous and controversial concepts in philosophical aesthetics, namely the so-called “end of art” thesis. Given the nature and aims of this contribution, I will of course not attempt to offer a full-fledged, original discussion of this thesis. Instead, I will argue that No Code can be read as an illuminating, concrete instance of the thesis, and that, vice versa, employing the end of art thesis as an interpretive framework can have a therapeutic effect, helping us to deal with the feeling of bewilderment the album can generate in us, probably more so than other works by Pearl Jam. My argument will be structured as follows. First, I will sketch the meaning and content of the end of art thesis (§2). Second, I will offer a reading of No Code which, considering together the title, the lyrics, and the musical execution, attempts to interpret the peculiarities of the album in a philosophical perspective (§§3.1/3.3). Finally, I will reconnect this reading of the album to the end of art thesis and pursue a mutual clarification of these two and the development of the main threads and implications of what I will call a “no code aesthetics” (§§4.1/4.2).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
