Towards a non-vehicular idea of music

[some guy]

Well, that music without tiers thing certainly has had its ups and downs. Well, its downs, anyway.

And very few people seem at all interested in a horizontal way of thinking about things. Why, even the mere suggestion that there might be such a thing--forget any invitations to try it--seems to have been taken as some sort of threat to the freedom and well-being of right-minded people everywhere.

So instead of going to hell, where I've surely been consigned by now, I thought I'd start up another thread. Perhaps my personal life is so complicated and uncertain, I have to come up with strategems for not dealing with the complications and uncertainties.

Ahem.

So, how about that vehicular idea of music, of meaning generally? How's that working out for you? Any interest in any other ideas? Any ideas as to what a non-vehicular idea would look like?

If not, it's OK. I've got a really complicated and uncertain life to deal with.

[Sean]

Aesthetic relativity stinks.

[Karl Henning]

And the absolutism is easy to deflate.

[Harry]

What is this all about, much too complicated for me. I say, keep things simple.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Perhaps I'll write my own thoughts on analogies......

Sometimes I get the feeling that there are people who don't like the idea of using analogies with music. Personally I don't see what's bad about analogies as a vehicle to talk about how someone perceives music (take note: perceives music).......everyone uses analogies to explain things that they otherwise don't really understand initially, or to get a broad idea on something. It's about perspective, and I like to read posts on this forum because of the diversity of perspectives that people have, especially if I don't automatically agree with it.

Unfortunately problems arise when people become so close minded as to truly believe an analogy is directly linked with the music itself............


Is this the kind of thing you are talking about, some guy?

[prémont]

And very few people seem at all interested in a horizontal way of thinking about things. Why, even the mere suggestion that there might be such a thing--forget any invitations to try it--seems to have been taken as some sort of threat to the freedom and well-being of right-minded people everywhere.

Ahem.

Not at all. I very often listen to music supine. 

[some guy]

Not at all. I very often listen to music supine. 

Well done!!

OK, here's the thing about the vehicular idea; it assumes that meaning is a thing that exists. A thing that exists can be carried or conveyed, by words, by pitches, by structures. I want to explain something to you, so I find a meaning, I put it in a vehicle by which it is carried over to you, maybe in a nice box, too. You take the box out of the car or the wheelbarrow or whatever you're using as a vehicle and open the box and, voila, the communication model is complete.

Well, that simple and often discredited model is complete.

A non-vehicular idea would not start with the assumption that meaning exists outside of or apart from what gets called a vehicle, whether an essay or a symphony. It would possibly start with the idea that meaning is something that is made. Putting letters together into words or words together into sentences creates meaning. Of course, with language there are some assumptions we do make prior to the sentences. One is that we already know what words mean. Dog means a certain kind of creature. Or it means a certain activity. In English, "dog" as a creature appears in the noun slot. A big, brown [noun] was chewing on my sister's doll. "Dog" as an activity appears in a verb slot. I will [verb] your footsteps until you stop chewing on my sister's doll. Or perhaps "until you stop chewing on my sister's doll, you [noun].

Plus, there's even more making involved--by all parties involved. Why, it's very involved, no?

Music doesn't have such specific associations, that is, notes are not like letters or like words. And musical structures don't convey meaning like sentences and paragraphs do. I think it's useful to think of language without the whole conveying thing, too. But this thread is for music, so....

[Brahmsian]

It seems like it would be easier, much easier, to not discuss music.   

[(poco) Sforzando]

And very few people seem at all interested in a horizontal way of thinking about things. Why, even the mere suggestion that there might be such a thing--forget any invitations to try it--seems to have been taken as some sort of threat to the freedom and well-being of right-minded people everywhere.

So instead of going to hell, where I've surely been consigned by now, I thought I'd start up another thread.

Why all the hostility and sarcasm?

So, how about that vehicular idea of music . . . .

I often listen to music in the car.

[Brian]

I often listen to music in the car.

Since this is the first thing in the thread that I think my brain has successfully grasped: I listen to music in the car a lot, too, but I prefer jazz for this, since classical music has just too much dynamic range. If I had a tricked-up Tesla S, with no engine noise, minimal road noise, and the fancy 5.1 surround sound system package, then sure, I'd probably be listening to more classical music. But in the meantime, 50s-60s jazz is my go-to for daily commutes and shopping trips.

The best classical music for the car or plane, in my experience, has been Mozart concertos and Haydn symphonies.

[Karl Henning]

The best classical music for the car or plane, in my experience, has been Mozart concertos and Haydn symphonies.

I am apt to agree.

[EigenUser]

Since this is the first thing in the thread that I think my brain has successfully grasped: I listen to music in the car a lot, too, but I prefer jazz for this, since classical music has just too much dynamic range. If I had a tricked-up Tesla S, with no engine noise, minimal road noise, and the fancy 5.1 surround sound system package, then sure, I'd probably be listening to more classical music. But in the meantime, 50s-60s jazz is my go-to for daily commutes and shopping trips.

The best classical music for the car or plane, in my experience, has been Mozart concertos and Haydn symphonies.

Haydn's baryton trios make great car music, too! So does a lot of Messiaen. I got a convertible last summer and had great fun blasting the Turangalila-Symphonie with the top down on nice days (as well as some Beethoven symphonies) .

[some guy]

Why all the hostility and sarcasm?

Ahem.

I often listen to music in the car.

Oh, also well done.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Ahem.

Yes, you said that already. I am as much in the dark about this ahem as I was about your previous ahem.

[Madiel]

Well done!!

OK, here's the thing about the vehicular idea; it assumes that meaning is a thing that exists. A thing that exists can be carried or conveyed, by words, by pitches, by structures. I want to explain something to you, so I find a meaning, I put it in a vehicle by which it is carried over to you, maybe in a nice box, too. You take the box out of the car or the wheelbarrow or whatever you're using as a vehicle and open the box and, voila, the communication model is complete.

Well, that simple and often discredited model is complete.

A non-vehicular idea would not start with the assumption that meaning exists outside of or apart from what gets called a vehicle, whether an essay or a symphony. It would possibly start with the idea that meaning is something that is made. Putting letters together into words or words together into sentences creates meaning. Of course, with language there are some assumptions we do make prior to the sentences. One is that we already know what words mean. Dog means a certain kind of creature. Or it means a certain activity. In English, "dog" as a creature appears in the noun slot. A big, brown [noun] was chewing on my sister's doll. "Dog" as an activity appears in a verb slot. I will [verb] your footsteps until you stop chewing on my sister's doll. Or perhaps "until you stop chewing on my sister's doll, you [noun].

Plus, there's even more making involved--by all parties involved. Why, it's very involved, no?

Music doesn't have such specific associations, that is, notes are not like letters or like words. And musical structures don't convey meaning like sentences and paragraphs do. I think it's useful to think of language without the whole conveying thing, too. But this thread is for music, so....

No, that is total rubbish. Total, total rubbish.

Your distinction between a proposition that meaning "exists" and that meaning is "made" is just completely false, and bears no relationship to what anyone said.

Notes are not like letters or words? Which is it? Because letters and words are not remotely the same thing. Letters are simply units used to construct words. They certainly don't have very specific meanings on their own. And words... well, they vary a heck of a lot in how specific they are. And if I say a word from another language, it might not have much meaning to you.

And your characterisation of how language works is also wildly off beam. If putting letters into words and words into sentences "creates meaning", then you should be able to get meaning out of any sequence of letters or sequence of words that I type. But you can't. You can only get meaning out of it when I select, carefully, which letters and words to use. Those "assumptions" you admit we make beforehand are the whole point when it comes to communication. We have an idea first, then we select the letters and words to communicate it based on what we know will work for others to grasp what we are saying.

Which, ironically, is EXACTLY what you are doing in order to put forward your own theory! You are trying to put forward a "meaning" that existed in your head before you started yet another thread designed to communicate to us all how terribly, terribly wrong we are to not simply absorb music the way you do, like a blank recording device.

[Sergeant Rock]

The best classical music for the car or plane, in my experience, has been Mozart concertos and Haydn symphonies.

I've been listening to Berwald symphonies (Kamu) in the car for the last couple of months. Works as well as Haydn.

Sarge

[Sergeant Rock]

No, that is total rubbish. Total, total rubbish.

Sarge

[Madiel]

Sarge

I'm sorry, I'm a little in the dark about the meaning you've created there.

[Sergeant Rock]

I'm sorry, I'm a little in the dark about the meaning you've created there.

A thumbs up. I agree with your post.

Sarge

[Madiel]

A thumbs up. I agree with your post.

Sarge

And I'm being ironic.

It's amazing how often our posts blend together as each of us separately creates meaning, isn't it? It's almost as if you could read them in sequence and get something out of it. Almost as if we're responding to each other. Almost as if ideas are, however imperfectly, being conveyed between us.

Nah, but that's impossible. Some guy has told us words don't convey.