Here is my paper. I learned alot about music in writhing this paper. I’m actually really exited by the realizations that i talk about near the end. I have spent all of my life trying to understand music and working with Aristotle’s theory of music revealed alot of things about music that i think are very true. I know its a long read, if you just want to get the exiting theory, read the last two paragraphs or so. Thanks for reading.
The Soul of Music
What is music? First we must start with notes. A note is a tone that the ear hears and understands. It has pitch, length, volume and many other qualities. The note is the basis of music, but a single note is not music. Take a note and put another note soon after it and the mind creates a relationship between those two notes. That relationship is called music. Music has a power that is little understood. Music can control our emotions; the right song can change someone’s attitude from anger to joy in minutes. It has the power to awake memories of a time and place in our own history. It helps send messages that inspire nations and shapes culture. There have been many theories of music thorough the ages, but none have been as influential as the theory of music as mimesis that was put forward by Aristotle. By examining his theory and supplementing it with modern mimetic thought and personal experiences, the power and content of music may be better understood.
In order to understand Aristotle’s theory on music and mimesis, we must first understand what Aristotle’s conception of mimetic art is. Mimesis involves the creation of art and the reception of art. Mimetic art is modeled off of some piece of reality; its intention is to re-present that reality to a spectator. The spectator of mimetic art receives a piece of reality that the author intended to convey. The reception of the art by the spectator is an integral part of the art being mimetic or not. A work is non-mimetic if it is enjoyed as purely a material object. If the spectator does not have a reality brought to mind by a piece of art, that art could not be said to be mimetic. The piece of reality that is within the mimetic art is not the only aspect that the spectator enjoys, however. Aristotle has a picture of mimetic reception in which the spectator enjoys both the medium and the object of the mimetic art simultaneously. So when observing mimetic art the spectator enjoys the brush strokes, tones, or technique of the art and its representational significance at the same time. In Aristotle’s picture of mimetic art, the creator creates a piece of media in which a piece of reality is expressed, the spectator of the art takes in the object of the art and is affected by the piece of reality in a way that is directed by the creator.
There is one more piece to Aristotle’s picture. The spectator is not a passive receiver. In order to understand a reality expressed in mimetic art the spectator must have a certain amount of experience in the world to comprehend it at all. If someone from Aristotle’s age were to see a painting that intends to represent the frustration of a broken down car, they would not be able to interpret the piece of reality in the picture because they have no experience of cars. So it seems that the reality that is in the mimetic work is not presented in a self-sufficient way. In order for the mimetic experience to work the spectator must contribute experiences of their own life to their experience of taking in the mimetic art.
Aristotle considers music to be a mimetic art. His argument for music’s mimetic quality centers around a ‘character’ that he believes is within music. This character is a piece of reality that is based upon the tunings, scales and melodic patterns in music. Aristotle talks about the creation of this character and the thinking behind his argument in The Politics (240 Halliwell (quoting Aristotle 1340a))
Rhythms and melodies contain likeness that are especially close to the real nature of anger and mildness, as well as courage and self discipline, and their opposites, and all other ethical traits. This is clear in practice, because our state of mind is changed when we listen to music.
Aristotle believes that ethical traits are within the constructive aspects of music. A composer can use the emotionally rich language of music to create a character in the music. Aristotle supports his picture by pointing to the result of the likenesses found in music. He has observed that music has the power to change your state of mind. He reasons that in order for this change to happen there must be ethical qualities within the music to cause this change. Music makes us feel ethical qualities that are re-presented in the music. This change in the spectator’s mind constitutes what it means to have a mimetic experience with the music.
To further delve into this theory, an understanding of what Aristotle believes musical mimesis is is necessary. A quick picture of this theory is as follows: The composer makes a piece of music. The tones, rhythms, tunings and other musical traits match emotional characteristics. These musical characteristics combine to form a ‘character’ in the music. The spectator hears the music and is moved by the music to such a degree that his state of mind is changed. There are a few parts of this argument that need to be explored more closely. First, how do the musical characteristics match the emotional characteristics? What is the connection between a note and an emotion and how is this connection made? Second, is art’s mimetic likeness self-evident? Or does the mimetic experience require understanding and involvement of the spectator?
There are two ways that one could explain the connection between a note and an emotion. The note could have the emotion contained within it or the emotional qualities of a note could be the product of experience or social tendencies. A case can be made for both views. For the view that the emotion is contained within a note, one could appeal to the qualities of sound wave interaction. The ear can ‘see’ the interaction between sound waves in a certain way. The clearest example of this is found in dissonance. Dissonance is a relation between two notes in which the curves of the two sound waves produced do not match up. The ear ‘sees’ that the sound waves do not fit together. A feeling of tension and dissatisfaction is felt when one hears dissonance. It seems that this feeling is within the relation because there is an actual tension within the notes themselves. Their sound waves do not compliment each other like they do in consonance, (in which there is something like a 4:1 ratio of the periods of the two notes) in dissonance the waves fight each other (no ratio is present). Whenever the tension of dissonance is heard the listener will recognize this tension and feel dissatisfied and uneasy. In this example, culture and experience do not play a factor in arousing the emotions in the listener from listening to a musical relation. Assuming that there is a fully functional ear, the sound waves themselves seem to be the basis for the emotions. So, one could say that the emotions that come from dissonance are ‘in the note.’
There are a few other tonal relations for which their emotional content can be explained by appealing to their sonic structure, such as unison and consonance (in general), but it seems that the emotional reactions to most tonal relations come from experience and culture. A strong argument for the power of culture in affecting emotional reactions to musical relations comes from Indonesia. On the island of Java, there is a tradition of Gamelan music. In Gamelan ensembles the instruments are tuned apart from each other to create dissonance. Fans of the Gamelan genre do not describe the dissonance as uneasy or jarring. Instead they often say that the dissonance creates a shimmering effect that generates a meditative peace in their mind. It seems that the culture of Gamelan music has trained listeners to interpret dissonance as a thing that brings peace.
One might be tempted to say that this example disproves the earlier point that the emotion of tension is within the notes of dissonance. They could argue that because the fans of Gamelan music do not feel the emotional reaction of tension to a dissonant relation, tension must not be within the relation as a necessary consequence. A response to this worry is that the tension of the dissonant notes is still there, Gamelan culture has just taken the base emotion of tension and taught spectators to find peace in it. This point can be supported by the fact that the reaction to dissonance that fans of the Gamelan experience is very rare.
Almost all other cultures respond to dissonance with feelings of tension and unease. Each culture has different constructions of what effect music is supposed to have. Asian cultures find the 5-tone scale most pleasing to the ear, while Western culture prefers the 8-tone scale. In the Middle East the complex 12-tone scale is most popular and in Africa, music is based around rhythm. The sound waves remain the same. Culture helps guide peoples emotional response to the sound. The role that culture plays in shaping a spectator’s response to music sheds a little light on the question of the spectator’s involvement in experiencing music, but most of the spectator’s involvement is based off of personal experience.
The spectator has two categories of personal experience that affect their mimetic experience of music. The first is their experience in the world. The second is the relation of music to something in the world. Experience in the world helps focus the spectators understanding of the ‘character’ that the author writes into the music. For example, in the 1812 Overture the composer intended to write a song that has the emotional qualities of victory, excitement and accomplishment. An inexperienced spectator will be affected by a base sense of excitement, but without experience of victory or accomplishment they will not be able to focus in on the richer qualities that construct the character of the 1812 Overture. With experience and understanding of what victory is the spectator will be able to focus their base feeling of excitement to better match the true victorious character of the 1812 Overture. In order for art to affect the spectator in the way that the author intended, the spectator must have experience and understanding that is roughly similar to the experience that the character in the song is intended to recreate.
The second category of personal experiences that affect the spectator’s perception of music is based on relation that the spectator makes between music and the world. Music has an interesting quality in that the listener can attach their own experiences and emotions to a song. Once the experiences and emotions are attached, the song will carry these qualities for the listener and the listener’s experience of the song is forever affected. This is interesting because it seems like in this scenario the spectator is doing the work of the author by working to mold the character of the song. If this is truly the picture of the spectators experience of mimetic music, then it seems that the composer and the audience co-ordinate in a very substantial way in the formation of a mimetic art.
This modification of character is a common thing, I’m sure almost everyone has experienced the character of a song being affected by the experiences and emotions that surrounding them when the song is played. I will pull an experience from my own life to use as an example. When I was moving to College I listened to “Tiny Dancer” by Elton John quite a bit. Because it was the soundtrack to the move I attached the emotions and experience that I felt while I was moving to college to “Tiny Dancer”. Whenever I hear “Tiny Dancer” now, it elicits an emotional response that is in line with the emotions that I was feeling during the move. These emotions were not originally in the character of “Tiny Dancer.” I changed the character of the song through my experiences with the song. Personal experiences with music have a strong and sometimes constructive effect on the spectator’s experiences of music.
In Aristotle’s picture of mimetic art, he has a nuanced view of the spectator’s experience with mimetic art. He thinks that the spectator enjoys both the medium and the object of the art at the same time. So far we have only discussed the character in music. This character is best interpreted as the ‘object’ of the spectators experience of music. The spectator’s enjoyment of music is based upon a coalescence of the object and the medium. Consequently understanding the medium of music is a key piece to understanding what constitutes a mimetic experience with music
The medium of music must be the notes, rhythms and melodies. They are the colors with which the composer paints. It is somewhat hard to accept this view at first because the notes, rhythms and melodies have already been defined as the things that construct the object of the music. Could they also construct the medium? In order to find an answer one must explore what the character in music is and how it is constructed. The character in music is the successfully functioning composition of component parts (notes, rhythms and melodies). The function of the character is to carry a piece of reality that is transmitted to the spectator in a mimetic experience. The character is built from the component parts of music – notes, rhythms and melodies. The component parts do not construct a character on their own. A composer takes the component parts of music and arranges them. If the parts are put together with skill and a clear emotional goal, the parts construct a character and the song is a mimetic work of art. If the parts are put together sloppily without a clear emotional goal, the notes do not connect to form a character and the song cannot be called a mimetic work of art. But this is not to say that the spectator cannot receive and enjoy the song. The spectator can still enjoy a non-mimetic song. This enjoyment comes from appreciation of the medium of music – notes, rhythms and melodies.
For music the labels of medium and object describe different ways of enjoying the same materials. In non-mimetic music the spectator enjoys the notes, rhythms and melodies (the medium of music) in themselves. In mimetic music the notes, rhythms and melodies have been combined to produce an emotional character, the spectator enjoys the parts of music (the medium) and the product of their successful construction – the character. A useful analogy can be found in the construction of a Rolex watch. A Rolex watch is constructed of beautiful parts. If one were to see the parts (analogous to the medium) of a Rolex watch laid out on a table before it was constructed they would appreciate each piece for its precious metals and clean design. After the pieces are put together by a master watchmaker (or a machine programmed by a master watchmaker) a functioning watch is made and the observer’s experience of the watch changes. An observer will still appreciate the parts of the watch, but at the same time they will appreciate the function of the watch, (analogous to the object) they will appreciate that the watch tells time. From this example we can see that the same objects can be enjoyed in themselves and for their function. The notes, melodies and rhythms of music are enjoyed in a similar way, in themselves (the medium of music) and for the character that they create (the object of music).
It seems now that we have a completed (and supplemented) Aristotle’s picture of music as a mimetic art. In summary: The composer writes a song using aspects of music that have emotional parallels. These aspects of music, if combined with skill, create a character in the music. The spectator enjoys the music and feels the emotions that the author wrote into the music. These emotions can be affected or sharpened by experience and culture. Furthermore the spectator can affect the character of the music for himself or herself by connecting the music to an emotion or experience that they are feeling.
So what is music and why is it so powerful? Music is a vehicle for carrying emotions. It makes sense when you think of your experiences with music. What are we looking for when we buy music? We want to have an interesting or powerful emotional experience. Artists put their emotions into song and we buy the recording because we know that our psyche will change to match the emotional experience that the artist creates when we listen to the song. Music can carry your own experiences as well. I often chose to listen to music because I want to be bought back to a certain place in my life and feel the emotions that I had back then. Music stores our memories for us, my ipod is a photo album for the different emotions I have had throughout my life. It is clear then, why music is so powerful; the music is as powerful as the emotions that it carries. Right now thousands of graduating students are listening to Pomp and Circumstance as they walk to accept their diplomas. For many this song is awakening a powerful nostalgia, sadness and pride. Many remember their previous experiences of hearing Pomp and Circumstance in their previous graduations. And for many, this song transmits emotions that are so powerful that they are brought to tears.
