Point of Discussion: The Semiotics of Music - Music

RockyRaccoon · 2016-02-29T10:27:43-05:00

POINT OF DISCUSSION This is Point of Discussion, a thread for people to discuss issues and topics related to music in a thoughtful and productive way. The goal of this is to make you think, to make you take a look at what you believe, why you believe it, and what others believe. Good discussion is the key to any society, and this is a place where, hopefully, that can be fostered. If you would like a certain topic to be discussed or question to be posed, PM me or post here and I'll toss it in when I can. All of that being said, there are a few guidelines. The Guidelines: 1. Don't be a dick - it's fairly simple, just be civil. Say what you want, believe what you want to believe, that's fine, just don't be a dick about it. 2. All opinions are welcome - no matter how unpopular you may think your opinion is (or how unpopular it eventually proves to be), post it. It's welcome. Just be prepared to defend that opinion if it's challenged. 3. There are no wrong opinions - like, it's literally impossible. These are opinions, so no matter how strongly you feel about it, it's neither right nor wrong, it's just an opinion, so keep that in mind. 4. The conversation can go anywhere - even if the discussion goes off of the original topic, that's fine. All kinds of tangents are possible, just try to keep it semi-relevant. The Topic: So this is kind of a re-hashing of an old topic with new people and new angles. There was a thread that I had posted a while back talking about what I called the semiotics of music. Here's what the prompt said: Semiotics, if you're unfamiliar with it, is the study of meaning-making, how we add meaning to things (typically language, but other things too). One of the examples I was given when learning semiotics was this: there is nothing inherently dog-like about a dog. A dog is merely some kind of animal, but all of the adjectives we give to dogs are just that, given to those dogs. We as the English language have given that animal the identity of "dog" and all of the things that go along with it. Also, it deals a lot with connotation and denotation, many academics of semiotics would say that there is no true denotation, that everything we say has some kind of meaning attached to it. We attach meaning and feelings to everything. So my question is, how do we do this to music? We often tie emotion to music, in fact it can be an incredibly emotional experience, but what makes music, just a collection of organized sounds (that definition subject to opinion), mean something? What makes a "sad" song, or a "happy" song? An "angry" song? What makes you as a listener relate emotionally to a song? Like, for example, many people say "I Am A Bird Now" is incredibly sad because of his voice (among other reasons), but why is that sad? What makes that voice sad, what makes that music sad? I'm not necessarily speaking about lyrics, though I realize those play a major part in emotional relation, as the answer seems too obvious. Someone singing about an emotional topic (e.g. death or loss) that you as a listener have experienced is emotional for you, I get that. But I'm more talking about the music itself, the notes, the composition. In addition, Mecca mentioned an article he wrote about an experience he had with a band, and wondering what goes into our enjoyment of music and what outside factors affect that. He also asked: And a slight offshoot from that discussion, How does our own personality relate to the art which we enjoy? For example, I'm a very mellow person, so I've often struggled to relate to more aggressive forms of music.

RoundTheBend I miss the comfort in being sad Profile
Ground Control

Applerill, I thoroughly enjoyed your quotes you shared.

Also, they brought up Wagner, and I remember learning that he wanted to create the Gesamtkunstwerk (complete artwork) where music, art, poetry, etc. all came together. And I don't mean just an opera... I mean the mother of all operas where his stage work was much more than operas of the time, his poetry was quite intense (using the old Norse alliteration ) and of course a 16 hour opera.

Part of the motivation behind this was that with Kant, the idea of ranking aesthetics and what is beauty etc. came to the conclusion that music was the least aesthetically strong because it required little to no cognitive power (think their time period, it was only instruments and no lyrics, etc. and so music was VERY emotional, if not mostly limited to emotion). On the opposite side of the spectrum was poetry because not only could poetry affect us emotionally, it also required the most cognitive power.

Just another thought to share.

Applerill Autistic Princess <3 Profile
Chicago

We dun fucked up, BEA. Anyone else got stuff to say about this that doesn't involve calling Satie a formalist?

RoundTheBend I miss the comfort in being sad Profile
Ground Control

No response to the statements questions I brought up or about reader response, possitive reinforcement or music therapy?

I honestly think this topic is VERY VERY deep. It is not a simple subject, and so that might be a put off?

Tap to resume download Profile

my simple way of looking at it is like the whole thing with the Theremin. I remember seeing some documentary about the instrument and the inventor, and either the inventor himself of someone close to him expressed frustration that the instrument was used in sci-fi movies a whole bunch, and that that established an association with the instrument's sound and the idea of spookiness or whatever. So there's that way of looking at the semiotics of music, that it's something that is built through usage (especially in movies). But I think that even if it weren't for that usage, that it would still have that association. I think people build up a library of the timbres they've heard in their heads, and new ones get filed away in relation to the others. So when the theremin sound is heard, the qualities that make it significantly different than other familiar timbres put it in a position of representing an otherworldly sort of spookiness.

RoundTheBend I miss the comfort in being sad Profile
Ground Control

Tap wrote:

my simple way of looking at it is like the whole thing with the Theremin. I remember seeing some documentary about the instrument and the inventor, and either the inventor himself of someone close to him expressed frustration that the instrument was used in sci-fi movies a whole bunch, and that that established an association with the instrument's sound and the idea of spookiness or whatever. So there's that way of looking at the semiotics of music, that it's something that is built through usage (especially in movies). But I think that even if it weren't for that usage, that it would still have that association. I think people build up a library of the timbres they've heard in their heads, and new ones get filed away in relation to the others. So when the theremin sound is heard, the qualities that make it significantly different than other familiar timbres put it in a position of representing an otherworldly sort of spookiness.

It's also used in a really cool way on Good Vibrations... I feel it is more or less a organ/keyboard sound than a theramin in the sense you mentioned above... don't feel it being spooky at all. On another note... those are REALLY hard to play... you don't even touch anything, it's just positioning of your hands next to it.

But yes, I think we have assumed/agreeed certain sounds go with certain meanings... the "church" organ (another one in Good Vibrations). Almost like we have done the same with Archetypes... and that whole Jungian philosophy.