And you, dear Dickens, demonstrate a breathtaking ignorance of the value of ignorance.
So much so that I 1st thought "What the Dickens!"
Wow.
I'm "an oppressor at heart." That's rich, buddy. I must have really struck a nerve telling you how off base you are. What's the matter? Still trying to recover from the trauma of some nun whacking your knuckles with a ruler because you weren't paying attention during choir practice?
Suggesting that wilful ignorance is a virtue and that knowledge is undesirable is absolutely ludicrous. Ignorance is Strength. How very Orwellian of you.
First of all, music theory is a
description, not a
prescription.
Music theory is not a set of "rules" that one must "obey" in order to write "proper" music. Music theory is a a description of how the composer did what he did and how a piece of music works.
Music theory is much like grammar. Despite the impression that ruler-wielding nuns may have left upon you, the language comes first. The grammar comes later and it's proper role is to describe how that language is used in actual practice.
Music is a language and just like a spoken language the fact is that one has to use it similar to the way others do if one wishes to be comprehensible.
Furthermore, your statement about the "western musical tradition" being "really only based on a couple of centuries of music that was controlled by the very rich and very powerful" is pure Bovine Excrement.
The formal study of music theory in the Western world started at least as far back as Pythagoras and has continued through 12-tone serialism,
Giant Steps and beyond.
And that is to say nothing of the music of other cultures.
Finally, knowledge is power. Knowledge engenders freedom, not "oppression."
One can not create music (or anything else, for that matter) in a vacuum, without reference to anything else.
Let's say I want to write a Jazz tune. First off, I have to know what Jazz even sounds like. Now, I could stab around blindly in the dark until I hopefully stumble upon something. But it will really help if I know that much of Jazz is based on a ii-V-I progression. However, for that to even make sense I kinda have to know what a ii, a V and a I even are.
Knowing how to get the sound I want is a lot less oppressive than wilful ignorance.
But let's say I want to create something new. Well, nothing can be created
ex nihilo. It has to reference something, somehow and use materials that already exist. That's just the way the universe works. At least for mortals like me.
If I want it to be comprehensible in any way, it has to be familiar enough for someone else to understand it while still being unique enough to be novel. If it is too unique, however, comprehensibility goes out the window.
More knowledge about how music works can only help in that endeavor. Making one's burden lighter is freeing, not oppressing.
If you think that knowing music theory is a " trap," that's your fault, not Music Theory's.