tHAT wAS a nAUGHTY bIT oF cRAP: “HOWEVER, I’ve always thought the way music works backs up this ‘vision’, THE PAST AINT HISTORY! In this sense ‘Enlightenment’ (and thats where I come unstuck, who’s to say what is ‘Enlightened’?) always constitutes the future, and is from time to time stretched a little further “
I think he’s critiquing his own argument before he’s finished explaining it. Clearly I would argue viz someone like Merlin Stone that the 18th century enlightentment myth of progress (and indeed its lefty descendants with their faith in one-size fits all solutions — suckers!) is based on faulty premises. In other words, the (pre-platonic, socratic) past ain’t that backward. And I say that without, I hope, falling into noble savagery. Quite the reverse actually.
What I would also say is, I thijnk, identical to what Matt is trying to articulate: that the “progress” of music, of culture, is not linear, but elliptical, fractal even.