Definitional Text | Amanda Royek

Definitional Text Video

https://youtu.be/FEwQQdZy9S0

Music and Intellectual Property

Music is a universal language that has been “spoken” for centuries. It can be produced, heard and interpreted. Just as languages have branched apart and evolved, so have different genres of music. Music unifies all human experience and knows no language barriers. It can be as simple as a four chord pop song, or as complex as a Mozart mass, as consonant as a tonic chord or as dissonant as the plucking of random strings.

So what differentiates music from noise? What makes some of these alarming pieces by Schoenberg and Stravinsky different from noises coming from a construction site? Some people clearly can’t see the difference. When Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring premiered, one of the largest music riots in history broke out. Well, I argue that music is noise with a purpose. Just as someone speaking words out of normal syntax may not be seen as language, noise without meaning can be seen as just that: noise. But as soon as the composer gives it meaning, that noise becomes music.

This may seem like a strange idea. How can I compose something and call it music? Well, not everyone has to agree with you. I personally don’t see the value of some abstract art. But, I am not an artist. And a curator may be willing to drop sixty grand on a red line drawn through a black circle. That is the beauty of all art forms. They are yours to interpret, yours to find value in. If you don’t find meaning in Stravinsky’s work, fine. Don’t listen to it. And I won’t pay twenty dollars to go to a museum to stare at shapes for two hours.

That being said, I am often reluctant to call some things that are music (by my own definition, no less) music. So, in order to include less bias in my definition of music, and to gain more insight into how others view music, I asked Dartmouth students, both musicians and non-musicians, how they define music. Everyone listens to music, whether it’s listening the radio, going to see the Boston Philharmonic, or composing and performing their own music. Although musicians may know more about what goes into creating music in terms of theory and practice, it is important to gather viewpoints from both sides.

When I was creating my definitional text, I included each student’s name, major, and extracurricular activities in order to show the diversity of viewpoints. Some of the students are involved in music on campus, both vocal and instrumental. Others are athletes or partake in other activities. Brian offered a different viewpoint because he is a composer, so he knows firsthand the creative process that goes into creating music. I began the video with him playing an original composition to further show his credibility as a source. Also, in between various questions I used a transition to show movement to another idea.

First, I asked my peers: “What is music?” To many of them it seemed like a simple question at first. Some answers included “a composition of silence and noise…” and “…a combination of pitches and rhythms that sometimes create harmony, sometimes do not…” The general consensus was that music is an art form and means of expressing emotions. One student even said it was “a way of thinking.” However, a few students said that music should be pleasing to the ear, and that is what differentiates music from noise. Students who said that music doesn’t have to be consonant said it at least needs to be able to portray an emotion or have a purpose. There was also a debate as to whether or not music has to be made with voices and traditional instruments. At first, Jason said yes, but then decided otherwise. Abigail cited an example, Stomp, in which musicians use everyday objects, like brooms and trashcans, to create music, further emphasizing that music is sound with purpose, and that instruments are not required.

In order to make my peers question the difference between music and noise, and maybe even change their definition of music, I had them listen to Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima, composed by Krzysztof Penderecki in 1960. Penderecki wrote it as a lament to the victims of the atomic bombing in Japan during World War II. The first time I listened to this piece, I didn’t think it was music at all, but rather a catastrophic storm of noise. I was taught by society (and my seventy-year-old piano teacher) what music should be: pleasing to the ear, consonant, and rhythmic. Penderecki’s piece consists of un-pitched sounds, time notation in seconds rather than meter, beating of instruments, and unnerving crescendos. The musical notation itself is untraditional as well. But, these elements work to tell a story. The horrifying pandemonium evokes the sirens, the falling bombs, and the screaming victims. It has meaning. It is music.

I asked my peers to react naturally to what they heard, to look at the score, and then to decide whether or not it was music and why. I did this project in a video interview style because I wanted the audience to see my peers’ reactions and hear their words as they said them. Also, I wanted the audience to see the copy of the musical score that the students saw. The initial reactions to the piece were similar to mine: strange faces and comments on the abnormal nature of the piece and the score. However, once they knew what the piece was about, and that it was meant to portray an emotion, they all agreed that it was music. Tony changed his definition of music after he listened to the piece, saying, “This clearly is not pleasing but it has purpose…. So I’d say it’s definitely a work.”

In addition to defining music as an art form, I asked my peers to define music as intellectual property. With the modern debate on artists’ rights brought about by rampant music piracy and streaming sites, it’s important that we consider how music is seen as intellectual property, and who owns that property. Coming into this class, I was very stubborn about my view on music piracy. Here’s a fun fact about me: I have never pirated anything. Prior to this class, I believed that music was the property of the artist, and that streaming sites were unfair to artists in terms of compensation and publicity. However, when I thought about music versus other art forms, my view changed, and my peers’ comments reinforced this transition.

Most of the students said that creating an original pattern of sounds makes music intellectual property. Some said that music is intellectual property if “someone created it and it’s someone’s ideas” and it has “originality and design.” Abigail offered more insight by saying that the listener decides whether or not it is intellectual property based on its value, and that the listener determines its value based on the hours spent creating it, the lyrical content, the musical talent and other factors. However, one student brought up something that never occurred to me. Michelle said “Music can be performed by anyone, so it’s hard for me to think of it as something that’s owned.” Anyone can cover any song. I can simply sing a song in my car, or do a cover of it with piano on YouTube. It’s hard to “own” music because it’s not tangible, like a book or a painting. So can anyone, even the artists themselves, really own music?

I closed the text with a quote from Ellen, a musician herself, who believes that music should be accessible to everyone and that it’s okay to pirate music. She said “I think the whole reason that music exists is to be shared. Because what’s the point if you compose something and its just yours? You’re trying to communicate a message with your music. Why not share it?” I chose to end the text with this quote because it ties together the definition of music itself as a means of expression with the idea that music should be shared.

In order for music to be music and have value, it has to have meaning. In reality, the value and meaning are interpreted by the listener, based on this listener’s background, culture, and knowledge of music, which is why music is a unique form of communication. And it’s hard to “own” a means of communication, so it really can’t be seen as property. Music is meant to be for everyone.