Basil Vendryes
Analyzing Musical Language
The
podcast I chose to listen to, RadioLab’s “Musical Language”, discussed the
biology, psychology and inherent nature of music and how humans process it. I
found it particularly interesting how they shed light on the observation that
our language is inherently musical, though this is not readily noticeable
(which is part of the charm of the revelation). It’s exciting to realize the
underlying musical foundation that’s ingrained into the human mind; now I can
pick up on the musical quality in any one person talking, even myself. Saying a
word or phrase many times in succession makes it seem less like a word or
phrase and more like strange noise, but now it’s also able to be pushed further
into a string of notes to create a melody. It may not always flow beautifully
like a masterful symphony, but it’s groundbreaking for its concept alone.
It’s
funny too, because listening and hearing make all the difference in realizing
things like this. Whereas hearing is simply picking up the audio stimulus and
processing it, listening is intensely focusing on and analyzing said stimuli.
If I were to have simply “heard the lecture”, it would’ve been a collection of
sound that would have not had provoked any analytical thought, nor would it
have given me any newly drawn conclusions. But listening allowed me to take in
what was said, process it, test some of the theories myself and increase my
knowledge base and observational skills. Similarly, when they were on the
section explaining differences in musical emphasis used with language, listening
played a large part. Mandarin is a language which has a surprising amount of
reliance on tonality to convey meaning. Those who grow up speaking it
inherently know the system of how these tonalities affect the language; this is
something that we in the west highly overlook. It was a grand discovery to
realize the “universal melodies” that we convey when speaking towards infants,
but this is a common, every day practice in certain parts of the world, such as
those that speak mandarin. It is part of their language; something they
practice from infancy to old age while it quickly becomes buried during the
childhood years in an English speaking country. Where we only hear, they are
clearly listening.
Equally
amazing is our brains methodology for interpreting and sorting sounds into
types that we like and dislike. RadioLab used the example of Stravinsky’s Rite
of Spring as an instance of how humans process music and how it affects our
reactions towards it. Rite of Spring was mold-shattering for its dissonant,
chaotic chords, irregular and aggressive tones. The 2 different performances of
it yielded polar opposite results with the first performance driving people
into a maddened craze from the music; whereas the second performance invoked
praise and adoration for Stravinsky’s work. RadioLab discusses this phenomenon
as the brains ability to eventually make sense of a disturbing, unfamiliar
noise. When people were able to properly synthesize this piece into their mind more
smoothly, they found it staggeringly beautiful and fresh.
My first introduction to Rite of
Spring was via Disney’s Fantasia, and I instantly loved the piece. While this
was partially due to my childhood obsession with dinosaurs, there was something
that struck me about it as I experienced that segment in the movie. It amazed
me how the music and the animation seemed to fit hand in hand. The fact that
Disney animators created this rich, imaginative narrative with nothing to go
off of but a piece of music was both perplexing and engaging for me. I was
bridging the connections between the sounds of the piece and the various
aspects of the animation that were clearly inspired by these sounds. The sharp,
blasting noises at the beginning were clearly suited for volcanoes. The
chaotic, menacing bleats of the middle segment embodied the terror of fleeing
from a hungry T-Rex. The absolute cacophony of the end complimented the
disorientation of a sudden, apocalyptic combination of natural disasters
tearing the earth asunder. But my mind would’ve never come up with the images
that now are almost trademark for Rite of Spring. Yet they make sense to me.
They synthesized nicely because of that. I wonder if initially hearing it
through Fantasia is the reason it clicked with me so nicely. Is it comparable
to the second performance of Rite of Spring where those who went in had prior
knowledge of what happened the first time around? It’s hard to say. Knowing
that the piece is dissonant before listening to it doesn’t make it any less
dissonant. I’ll probably never know the answer to that one, but I find it
intriguing nonetheless.
In order to bring additional
attention towards the subjects they discuss in the podcast, RadioLab employs a
lot of direct, contextual editing to their programs. For example, the
dangerously catchy phrase-turned-to-song “Sometimes Behave So Strangely” was
made as such through a lot of repetition throughout the piece. Through
repetition, we experienced (and also internally converted) the repetition’s
transfer from language to sound to music. Simply describing it would have not
been nearly so effective, as the specific tones and melodies that we would
individually create would differ from the singular one that we witness being
transformed. It’s also quite likely those who aren’t well versed in musical
theory wouldn’t be able to decipher the melodic sequence hidden away in their
own voices. The method is very interactive and intuitive and makes for an engaging
and clear method of demonstrating their audio concepts.
While it’s hard to think of methods
that could be used to improve the already excellent production quality of
RadioLab’s podcasts, one possible addition I would make is the inclusion of a
few additional sources to illustrate the theories they discuss in their
podcast. Rite of Spring is a classical example of a mold-breaking piece that
forced those who listened to it to accommodate the strange new audio stimulus;
in order for it to have a more pleasant synthesis within their mind, it took
extra time and a more open mind to make nice with it. I would have been
interested to hear some additional examples of dissonance in music. Perhaps implementing
one that I wasn’t already familiar with in order to try and induce me to
undergo the rocky synthesis myself. Of course, as a producer of the podcast
that would be impossible, but had I been in their scenario, I would find it
beneficial to present a piece of music that isn’t quite as well known but also
quite dissonant itself. This would continue to push the interactivity and have
them learn through a kinesthetic means.
1 comment:
I really appreciate your comments on Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring," and how you make the personal connection to your own original exposure to the piece via Disney's Fantasia. This reminds me of one thing that I find a bit lacking in this RadioLab podcast, though, which is a tendency not to address cultural conditioning in any significant way. There are not just biological or neurological factors of reception, but rather -- or at least also -- cultural receptors. Just the fact that we first experienced "Rite of Spring" via a well-synchronized animation would make it different from a crowd watching some of the first modern ballet. I wonder what features of production might allow some of these cultural conditions to shape the listening experience here.
Post a Comment