What is musics PURPOSE?

Um, OK.

The purpose of any art is pretty simple really, it is the transfer of emotion and feeling from one human to another. Interestingly, music is an exceptional case in that the emotional transfer is is accomplished entirely through sound vibrations (unlike literature where the written word is used or painting and sculture where images transfer meaning)

When You think about it, this is a very abstract vibrational concept which one might wonder how it is that it works at all? How is it that certain sounds make us feel happy, while other sounds make us feel sad, and yet others move us to where we must tap our toes or move our bodies? Isn't that weird and amazing?

But still it is obvious that while music is an abstract vibrational concept, it's communicative functions clearly show that the statement that it 'cannot, therefore, have any purpose' is incorrect! Even if you play drums alone in the forest, there is still emotional communication *with yourself* on different levels.

Therefore, in conclusion it is clear that....

[Time's up! Teacher grabs paper!]

Go Benj

This is quite different from the original question. For instance the original question is meaningful to tone deaf people, but your modified questions are not. Your questions presuppose music existed to please humans, either psychologically or physiologically. But it need not be.

According to a less popular theory (the ''non-adaptive pleasure seeking'' theory), music has no adaptive value, and musical behaviours are simply addictive behaviours. To paraphrase an infamous quote, ''music is the opium of the people''. But of course there are plenty of other theories too.

The question does not mention that music is art. Answer the question. 0 points.

*takes off pedantic a*se h*le hat*

To

'Music is a beautiful opiate, if you don't take it too seriously'- Henry

Being tone deaf is no barrier to music.

Culture most certainly has immense adaptive value. Since music was once the principal means of transmitting culture, music was probably pretty critical to culture's survival.

I am not some multicultural theory guy, but sagas around the campfire used to *be* school. The elders taught with it. This would have been one of the more valued things in a culture. Even after Europe went sort of post-pagan, song was considerd too important to be considered as secular. Serious music was religious. No doubt there was folk music, but it wasn't given the same weight.

According to what I know of some 'primitive' cultures, like the Morroccans Jimmy Page visited, most of those villages were 100% musical - everybody played.

I like the corollary 'Music is religion that works'.

If we're going to wax academic here, it's actually an abstract perceptual, not vibrational concept. Just about everyone can hear a musical tune in their head,, but there's nothing vibrating... Some people can read scores and 'hear' the piece - but once again, nothing vibrating. Beethoven composed while deaf.

Plenty of not easily defined abstract ideas have purposes, anyway. Truth, beauty, etc.

It's that simple, huh? Well, I'm glad someone finally figured it all out after thousands of years.

Seriously, that concept has only really been so popular since the 'Romantic' era. You're ignoring plenty of other purposes art has had and continues to have - religious, ceremonial, monetary, social commentary, coded messages, etc.

Besides, everyone knows music is made so you have something to listen to while you watch videos on MTV! Come on now!

Do I get 10 points? 1 maybe?

Dave

Almost anyone would get better by sheer willpower if threatened to be subjected to fifty performances of Mahler's Eighth.

ever look deep into the eyes of female lion just before she breaks your neck

Yeah wouldn't want to do THAT again

LOL

I agree with your point Dave, sound is a perceptual concept, it is subjective- the old example is: if a tree falls in a forest, does it make a noise? Without an ear to hear it there is no sound, just vibration in the matter that surrounds the source. But without vibration there is no music or sound. Evelyn Glennie will have a different sense of 'music' than you because of her almost complete deafness, she 'hears' through her feet (and partially through her ears), mine is different from Evelyn's and everyone else's as is yours.

Here are some more thoughts:

Music is the deliberate organisation of sound vibrations into a recognisable and repeatable pattern, but without actual physical vibration, there is no music. (discuss 10 marks)

Is avant garde or experimental music actually music or is it 'sound art' (5 marks)

There is no difference between music, sound and noise. (discuss - 5 marks)

Is 'music' as a term, a description of what we hear or is it what arises from the source, at what point does it become music? is it at the point where it becomes sound vibrations? is it at the point of perception? is it at the point of making sound with intent? Can what we hear plausibly be different dependent on the individual listener? (discuss - 15 marks)

Just about everyone can hear a musical tune in

If you hear music in your head it surely can't be 'music' because it doesn't physically exist, it has to be a memory of music. Which is intrinsically different from music itself. It's like saying that lucid dreams are actual events, whether recalled events or imagined it makes no difference, neither is real, you can make a reference to them by speaking or writing but those are forms of communication, not the event itself. Beethoven's writing when he was deaf was based on his years of hearing the notes and instruments to the point where he had a sampler-like bank of sounds accessible and available, he knew the theory inside out and therefore could compose in his way confident in the knowledge that it would sound as he intended when played by musicians. We all have such imagination, I have a head full of wonderful 'music' I very much doubt if any of it will translate accurately to any recording no matter how well I try to execute it.

Music, like many things, is a semantic concept borne from abstraction, we all understand what it is to us *individually* but as this thread shows it is incredibly difficult to put into words. Science and technology leaves us a couple of steps short of a proper understanding, semantics take care of that for now. The effect of music is different from both its purpose and from its description. My tongue in cheek initial question merely sought to highlight the fact that it is not a straightforward question. I think I did that

Full marks to everybody (FWIW)

Great stuff

Dear PM; You mentioned,'If you hear music in your head it surely can't be 'music' because it doesn't

Of course it physically exists, for the individual experiencing it. Ms.Glennie hears with her brain, same as everyone else.(she simply takes the LongWayRound). jmt