“I Care that I don’t Care”: Post-postmodernism in ‘Wilco (The Album)’

Culture, Music, Worldviews — By Robin Dembroff on May 26, 2009 at 12:01 am

“Meh.

…I wish I didn’t mean that.”

Welcome to post-postmodernism, a new reaction to believing in epistemic tragedy: that is, that nothing can be known-for-certain.

In the period loosely described as post-modernity, men like Foucault and Nietzsche asserted that timeless, absolute knowledge was nonexistent. During—and despite—the subsequent relativism, the 60’s produced angry songs about industrialism, and the 80’s about the travesties of nuclear weapons. The hippies cared enough to become Communist; the punk rockers enough to become anarchists.

In the 90’s, apathy took over and music turned inward (see Elliott Smith or Nirvana.) This introspection continues, but with a new twist, in Wilco’s latest album release, Wilco.

Wilco (The Album) is raw, minimalist, and candid—yet is also produced, complex, and confusing.

wilco2

The sound is professional, intentional, and jarring. Nels Cline’s use of  distorted, discordant guitar solos presses the listener into a surreal world of clashing colors and glistening spider webs: deconstructive construction, both carefully crafted and unsettling.  The lyrics reveal a heavy ‘production’ (obvious in careful syntax, irony, and vivid imagery) while still conveying an emotional ‘rawness’. Jeff Tweedy’s words are vulnerable and blunt:

Are you under the impression this isn’t your life?
Do you dabble in depression?
…Have you had enough of the old?
…Wilco will love you, baby.

The serious trials of life are presented genuinely, yet climax with the empty suggestion, ‘Oh well, Wilco loves you.’ Tweedy sings later, “This is all of our arms open wide, / Sonic shoulder for you to cry.” A cynical distancing, yes, but one that resonates with our experience of isolation.

Musically, many of Wilco’s songs use tone repetition, the tones only varying in degree of distortion and discontinuity, revealing a minimalist core.  These simple patterns are then layered to create rich, complex sound. Rythmically, Wilco’s music confuses by mixing multiple modalities and time signatures, or by inserting abrupt pauses throughout songs (see “Deeper Down” or “Sunny Feeling”). Yet all the chaotic characteristics transmit their message that knowledge is not absolute.

It is this sort of agnosticism that lends itself to the cynical, apathetic ‘meh’ that characterizes so much of the contemporary culture and the music that defines it.  From “You Never Know”:

Every generation thinks it’s the worst,
thinks it’s the end of the world.
It’s a secret I can’t tell, there’s a wish down a well.
I don’t care anymore. I don’t care anymore…
I don’t care anymore that you never know.

Compare with philosopher Noam Chomsky:

If there is a body of theory, well tested and verified, that applies to the conduct of foreign affairs or the resolution of domestic or international conflict, its existence has been kept a well-guarded secret.

However, there is a constant tension in Wilco between the postmodern “Meh” and the desire to escape agnosticism.  Nor is the tension limited to Wilco. In Bright Eyes’ song “Waste of Paint,” Conor Oberst concludes, “And I have no faith / but it’s all I want, / to be loved / and believe in my soul.”  Or Wilco:

Once I thought without a doubt I had it all figured out.
The universe with hands unseen; I was cold as gasoline.
It took too long to see that I was wrong to believe in me only.

That which is so candid and clear to others eludes the speaker, or at least, he thinks it does. The postmodern cannot comprehend how others find knowledge so convincing.

Wilco is an interesting album not because the music or lyrics are phenomenal, but because it gives an accurate reflection of the current state of mind in the ‘subculture’ that is the burgeoning indie scene. Moreover, Wilco is still classic alternative rock, going strong for fifteen years with talented music and better lyrics.  They may not have anything particularly ‘new’ to say, but that might be the point: there is nothing new, only the ‘same old’ question of “why ‘this’?” and a growing propensity to shudder after the apathetic answer, “Meh.”

*edit* The Evangelical Outpost extends thoughts and prayers to the family and friends of Jay Bennett, former member of Wilco, who unexpectedly died last Sunday.

1 Tweet

    7 Comments

  • Digimo says:

    Postpostmodernism? Try digimodernism.

  • ZSDP says:

    Obviously, this isn’t all you have to say on the subject, but your treatment of PoMo gives the impression that you see it as nothing but skepticism, agnosticism, or apathy (and maybe a little anti-intellectualism). If that impression of your beliefs is accurate, I think you have shortchanged PoMo.

    Further regarding PoMo, have you considered the arguments of persons such as Bruno Latour and Quentin Meillassoux? Latour, in particular, argues that “We Have Never Been Modern”, making the Post-Modern designation rather meaningless.

    I’m also not sure what your use of Chomsky really does for your argument. First of all, it doesn’t seem to be in meaningful conversation with the Wilco quotation to which you instruct us to compare it. Second of all, Chomsky seems to be making the rather unquestionable assertion that no political theory is perfect or will work all of the time, while Wilco seems to be expressing apathy and the prevalence of generational disillusionment. Could you clarify how Chomsky plays into this discussion?

  • ZSDP says:

    Also, I’d like to point out that some of Chomsky’s most famous ideas, such as the context-free grammar, are decidedly not-PoMo.

  • ZSDP [zach...?],

    I definitely do not see PoMo as purely apathetic, and certainly not anti-intellectual. My recent readings of postmodern philosophers and literary theorists, especially Heidegger’s “Concept of Time” has been fascinating and often enlightening. In many ways, I would classify myself as a postmodernist, in fact.

    My point was more that there are different modes of reaction to the idea that absolute, transcendent knowledge is inaccessible: one is apathy, though it assuredly is not the only possible reaction. A fitting Christian reaction, I believe, would be wonder, awe, and humility.

    Whether or not the entirely of Chomsky’s writings concern PoMo is somewhat superfluous. He is categorized as a fundamental voice of PoMo, and the quotation I used would fall into the category as well.

    Regarding the comparison: Wilco expresses that every generation deems that its actions—recognized as detrimental—will be the cause of final devastation. I assume that the ‘secret’ Wilco references is the same as the one referenced by Chomsky, that is, the “body of theory” that would prevent each generation from falling into a pattern of destructive existence.

  • ZSDP says:

    Robin -

    Yes, it’s me.

    I must take issue with designating Heiddeger as PoMo. He and Nietzsche may have provided a theoretical inheritance for PoMo—much like Hegel and Husserl bequeathed a theoretical inheritance to Heidegger—but it is not until his appropriation by French post-structuralists that anything Heidegger is made to be PoMo.

    As for Chomsky, I would like to see the sources from which you have culled Chomsky’s classification as “a fundamental voice of PoMo”, because, frankly, the closest he has ever gotten to PoMo was his stated friendship with Foucault, despite their disagreements and heated debates. Further, Chomsky has explicitly and on numerous occasions denounced PoMo as meaningless, vacuous.

    As for the comparison, and for more on Chomsky not being PoMo, you might want to take a moment to have a look at the original article from which your quotation is culled. It seems very clear that he believes truth is there and can be spoken about, and he sees the [post-]modern intellectual as largely denying that.

    I apologize for the brevity of this response. I had written something much larger, but, through my own incredible ineptitude, I managed to lose it, after which I was too discouraged to once again write something so detailed.

  • Robin Dembroff says:

    My apologies, Zach. I meant to say “on postmodern” and wrote “of” instead. I realize that Chomsky himself is not fully of the postmodern school, but nonetheless, he provides useful and lucid commentary on the movement.

    In my article, I did not claim that Chomsky was postmodern; I merely quoted him regarding his critique _regarding_ postmodernism.

Leave a Reply

Trackbacks

Leave a Trackback

    Additional comments powered by BackType