This somewhat unconsciously applied metaphor for the harmony of the spheres from Brian Greene:

Early scientific study focused on the kinds of things one might see or experience in everyday life.  Galileo dropped weights from a leaning tower (or so legend has it) and watched balls rolling down inclined surfaces; Newton studied falling apples (or so legend has it) and the orbit of the moon.   The goal of these investigations was to attune the nascent scientific ear to nature's harmonies.  To be sure, physical reality was the stuff of experience, but the challenge was to hear the rhyme and reason behind the rhythm and regularity.  Many sung and unsung heroes contributed to the rapid and impressive progress that was made, but Newton stole the show.  With a handful of mathematical equations, he synthesized everything known about motion on earth and in the heavens, and in so doing, composed the score for what has come to be known as classical physics. (7)

For Schafer, "the most important revolution in aesthetic revolution in aesthetic education in the twentieth century was that accomplished by the Bauhaus...  By bring together the fine arts and the industrial crafts, the Bauhaus invented the whole new subject of industrial design" (205).  He continues in no uncertain terms that an "equivalent revolution is now called for among the various fields of sonic studies.  This revolution will consist of a unification of those disciplines concerned with the science of sound and those concerned with the art of sound.  The result will be the development of the inter-disciplines acoustic ecology and acoustic design".  Further, he proclaims the function of art is "to open new modes of perception and to portray alternative lifestyles.  Art is always outside society and the artist must never expect to win popularity easily" (239).  In my mind then, the revolutionary artist is one attempting to bring into the loop of society, to reintegrate it with the commons such that it might achieve some social change.

If we turn to Luhmann, we find that the "unity os society is not to be sought in ethic-political demands, but rather in the emergence of comparable conditions in systems as diverse as religion or monetary economy, science or art, intimate relationships or politics--despite extreme differences between the functions and the operational modes of these systems" (2).

Perhaps the answer to the question of revolution lies in a change to the way we relate with concepts, and in the way we understand our understandings.  For it is here that Deleuze sides with Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, saying of them:

They want to put metaphysics in motion, in action.  They want to make it carry out immediate acts.  It is not enough, therefore, for them to propose a new representation of movement; representation is already mediation.  Rather it is a question of producing within the work a movement capable of affecting the mind outside of all representation; it is a question of making movement itself a work, without interposition; of substituting direct signs for mediate representations; of inventing vibrations, rotations, whirlings, gravitations, dances or leaps which directly touch the mind.  (8)

more to follow..