Jade Ballard
Finite Music
When we began to discuss the concept of infinity during HP 102, one of the first things that came to my mind was, “Music is infinite.” After further exploration, I began to understand the point of view of that music, when looked at as a series of possible combinations, is actually finite. Although it was very hard for me grasp this concept, there is a mathematical way to measure the possibilities of music based on using a formula. Although music is considered finite from a technical standpoint, I think if you’re too concerned about the possibility that we might run out of music or that there will be a time when the musical combinations will be exhausted, you’re missing out on the beauty of music.
In the Autobiography of John Stuart Mill, he writes about his great love for music but after discovering the idea of music being finite, he becomes depressed. For instance, he writes, “The only one of the imaginative arts in which I had from childhood taken great pleasure, was music; the best effect of which (and in this it surpasses perhaps every other art) consists in exciting enthusiasm; in winding up to a high pitch those feelings of an elevated kind which are already in the character, but to which this excitement gives a glow and a fervour, which, though transitory at its utmost height, is precious for sustaining them at other times” (7). These words express how music makes Mill feel joyful, enthusiastic and excited from hearing music. Furthermore, Mill writes, “And it is very characteristic both of my then state, and of the general tone of my mind at this period of my life, that I was seriously tormented by the thought of the exhaustibility of musical combinations” (8). This idea of “the exhaustibility of musical combinations” refers to Mill’s his discovery that music is finite.
However, Mill perceives this idea of finiteness as a terrible, depressing concept. He elaborates by writing, “The octave consists of only five tones and two semi-tones, which can be put together in only a limited number of ways, of which but a small proportion are beautiful: most of these, it seemed to me, must have been already discovered, and there could not be room for a long succession of Mozarts and Webers, to strike out, as these had done, entirely new and surpassingly rich veins of musical beauty” (8). These words illustrate how Mill feels that because music is finite, there are only a limited number of ways in which music could be expressed. His tone of voice implies that the fact that music is finite is a hopeless thing, because there would no longer be any musical greats such as Mozart or Weber to arise. I would argue that Mill has a limited point of view when it comes to music and he has a distorted perception of what musical beauty is. I believe Mill is solely basing his ideas on musical beauty from a Western standpoint, and keeping a narrow minded perspective when it comes to music. Many years have passed since this piece of work was written and there are still thousands of musicians creating music today. Although the number of musical combinations is considered finite, it doesn’t stop thousands of musicians to continue to create works of art.
I feel that music is a subjective experience, and that being said, everyone has their own unique interpretation of what music means to them. I think this is also true in how you perceive the idea of music being finite. Just because music is finite and has a set number of possibilities does not mean it is not valuable or important as a whole. Even though there is a way to measure the large number of possibilities of ways to create musical combinations, does that mean everyone should give up making music or enjoying music? I have to disagree with Mills and I don’t believe this is true at all. To me, the number of possibilities for musical combinations is so vast it is very difficult for my mind to even comprehend this idea. It seems like it is such a large number to even fathom. Even if you were to calculate the number of possibilities for music, the number would surpass the possibilities to be created during my lifetime. And besides, music means so much more to me than a mathematical formula. I feel that we imbue meaning onto the music we love and can relate to. Listening to music, actively engaging in music and experiencing music is hard to define, but I feel it would be most akin to a spiritual experience. To me, the meaning of music is something that is difficult to pin down, but I know it something that stirs the emotions and is beyond a limited definition of a mathematical formula. If we are too concerned with the idea of “exhausting musical combinations” in the future, we fail to recognize and acknowledge the musical beauty in our present lifetime. Creating meaning is part of what it means to be human and I feel that the joy which resonates from music can be universally experienced by everyone.
Bibliography
Stuart Mill, John. Autobiography. N.p.: n.p., 1873. Print.
Bibliography
Stuart Mill, John. Autobiography. N.p.: n.p., 1873. Print.
Jade, I agree with your statement about music being subjective, infinite, and meaning more than a mathematical formula.
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to emphasize that a specific song or music piece that is created has a different impact on a person emotionally because a person forms associations and a unique experience with the piece (both the artist and audience).
If we can measure emotion, will music still be infinite?
Sara Elfallah
Hi Sarah,
DeleteThank you for your comment. I believe that music, when looked at objectively, can be measured and is finite. This is why many songs can be measured based on their notes, beats per minute or with the "common meter" if you were to analyze them through music theory. However, being this analytic is not something I usually do when I experience music. And, I firmly believe that music is a subjective experience and I agree with your point, everyone forms their unique associations based on their experience. I think you brought up a good point by also mentioning how music is an experience shared by both the artist and the audience.
Your question is a very good one and I feel it is an open ended one. I would have to say that I believe the creative expression of music seems to be infinite. I believe this because there have been a huge variety of different interpretations of music over the course of history. With the onset of digital music, I feel that music is continually evolving and new musical genres represent new creative expressions.
I am not exactly sure if we can measure emotion well or realistically. But, a real life example I could think of would be the work of Paul Ekman. Paul Ekman is an American psychologist who has completed a lot of research on human emotions. Many artists and animators have used his research on facial expressions and human emotions with their artwork. Here is a short article summarizing his work on human emotion: http://www.heruni.com/words-lie-your-face-doesnt-about-emotions-and-micro-expressions/
I completely agree with you Jade. I flow in the category where the meaning of music lies. The musical notes can be finite, but things in time change. Mostly, new genres are born. If we go back through the American history of music, everything started from jazz roots. The notes at that point were limited and started to expand through time to get what we have now. Sure, the notes may be finite, but I think the possibilities of new music are endless (infinite).
ReplyDeleteHi Juan,
DeleteThanks for your comment, I agree with what you said about the jazz roots of American music. After I finished the reading, jazz was one of the first things I thought about when I was thinking of how to argue with John Stuart Mill's narrow minded point of view about music. Music is radically different from 1873, and new genres, like jazz, emerge over the course of history. Also, I feel the same way about how the creative expression of freestyle music is endless and continually evolving today.
Ms. Ballard,
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it doesn't matter whether there is a mathematically defined number of songs that could be produced. For every generation, music changes. Although different, there are a lot of songs that sound similar to songs previously made. As modern humans, we generally don't listen to songs made hundreds of years ago, just as the population hundreds of years from now will most likely not listen to the music we created. In this perspective, all music is new to the listener if they haven't heard it before.
Sincerely,
Jon MacPhee.
Hello Jon,
DeleteThank you for your comment. Yes, as stated in my post, it does not matter where there is a specific finite number of songs that exist or can exist in the future. I definitely agree that music is something that is constantly changing over the course of history and has different forms of expression for each generation. An example I could think of is within American music history and how blues developed into jazz and how jazz influenced many other genres of music like rock, hip hop and modern day music genres today.
I understand your point of view, and that in general, most people do not listen to the songs from hundreds of years ago. However, I think these songs from the past are more common than we might think. We can be exposed to music that has been made hundreds of years ago without even realizing it. For example, many TV commercials use classical music scores to accompany their marketing ad. However, many of us may not even realize that the violin concertos of "The Four Seasons" by Vivaldi have been in existence sine the 1700's. This is also true with many movie trailers that advertise new movies coming out. Even though we might not hear music from hundreds of years ago played on mainstream radio channels, I think you can find many examples of it within the realm of advertising and marketing.
Jade,
ReplyDeleteDespite there being a finite number of notes and songs, I don't think we should worry just yet.
I recently watched an interview with guitarist Joe Walsh in which he shared that depression of knowing that music might be finite, and how music is so different now than it was even just 20 years ago. With computers, songs are created and shared without anyone actually touching instruments. Record stores used to be a hangout, and people collected records or casettes. Now it is just stored in a folder on your desktop.
I think there are any number of musical interpretations of songs and the nuances of (in this case) reverb, feedback or analog tube amplifiers that make up the way that the songs are played.
I find it interested that Joe Walsh addresses this in his song/album "Analog Man" which can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWZJFy8VQQg
There may be a finite combination of musical notations for the instruments we currently play, but with the invention of new instruments and combination of musical interpretations of songs that number is nowhere near.
I wouldn't panic just yet. After all, how many times have you heard classics that we love with different interpretations like Amazing Grace, or the star spangled banner?
Some songs never get old...