|
Thursday, 01 December 2005 05:22 |
| Seamus McNerney
|
Music is not a language. I??ve had several interesting conversations with folks concerning this issue and have always taken this position.
First off, why is this important? In my dealings with some people concerning this topic, they instantly launch into a sort of postmodern deconstruction of hierarchies: Humans aren??t the only ones who can communicate with meaning if the natural world can express itself through language (see the 1980s nauseating obsession with whale snorts).
In other words, humans cannot make the claim to full ownership of this art form called music. Call me a traditionalist, but I happen to think of music as a specifically human affair. Because we are cursed and blessed with the ability to reflect, we are allowed certain privileges not granted in the natural world. But enough.
I??ve written about the musicality of birdsong and its profound influence upon many musical dignitaries. And here is my point: Birdsong is no more language than Velveeta is a cheese or Scooter Libby is a scholar. And therein lies the beauty. Why?
Music contains a fundamental feature not shared by language, namely its
ability to communicate in retrograde. Here we go... Retrograde motion
in music is one of the most sophisticated devices available to the
composer. In the hierarchy of creativity, it is only matched by
polyphony. Sadly, it is also the most difficult device to detect,
especially for the casual listener. To experience this phenomena is
truly amazing.
Let me give you a linguistic analogy of musical retrograde: Retrograde
musical of analogy linguistic a you give me let. Got it? Much like
an acid-addled Yoda swaying in the breeze. Doesn??t make sense. In
music, however, it not only makes perfect sense, it is impressive to
the ear. This is but one example of how music is not a language. Yes,
music has syntax ?? meter, rhythm, harmony, etc. Yes, it has semantics,
e.g. the meaning behind a piece. But it transcends the linguistic by
offering a starkly limitless realm of possibilities through its
deployment of the retrograde move.
I would anticipate vigorous objection from the poets. But poetry
itself is nothing more than the mimickry of music, beholden to the
varieties of musical experimentation. Language is limited ?? music is
not, especially when one considers the frontiers opened by the advent
of electronic music in the 1930s. But there are troubling similarities
between music and language, the most obvious concerning the reduction
of real communication to idle chatter and the parallel removal of
meaning from pop cultural artifacts known as ?®music.?∆
I have yet to verify the following claim, but I do find it interesting.
There is a white/blue finch that inhabits some of the fjords of
northern Norway. This bird reportedly ?®sings?∆ in retrograde motion
during mating season. In other words, it keeps its tune straight while
celibate and sings backwards when horny. Sound familiar to any of you
out there? Hmmm...
?ÿ
Seamus McNerney is
a lecturer in the humanities with an emphasis on music history at the
University of North Carolina at Asheville.
|
