23 Feb 2008 03:21:29 | Emily Sigers
There have been many varied definitions of music, dependent on
the writer's idea of, or appreciation for, music. One man's
music is another man's noise. And he defines accordingly.
One says Nevin is music and Bach is noise. One declares Mozart
to be noise and Stravinsky, music. Another reverses the
definition. Even the dictionary tells us that "music is the art
of combining tones to please the ear."
Whose ear -- yours or mine?
A French writer, Jules Combarieu, is more general, and declares
it to be "the art of thought in tone." In other words, it is an
art, not a natural phenomenon; it deals with tones, and it
presupposes thought; that is, educated mental action and
discrimination. "Thought, using tone as its medium, creating an
art work."
And still, this leaves open to discussion, "What is an art
work?" We journey back to the starting point, you saying Mozart
created art works, and Schonberg didn't; while I may pin my
faith to Cadman and Herbert.
One might reduce the definition a little, and make it more
generally satisfactory, by saying music is "thought expressed in
tone." This would exclude noises -- casual, unbrained
combinations of tones -- and require definite mental
application, presupposing a knowledge of the essentials of
musical construction.
While this definition may be satisfactory to you and to me,
there are those whose idea of music is so different from ours,
that only a definition to fit their own particular style would
suit them.
One says music should be impersonal, abstract. Another school
declares that it should always tell a story. Still another
division of the musical public says that music should go much
farther than the dictionary definition above quoted; that it not
only is the art of "combining tones to please the ear," but that
music should represent the whole of life, whether it pleases the
ear or not.
In other words, if the subject portrayed is one of pain, horror
or calamity, then the music must be of clash, cacophony,
discord, entirely abjuring the idea of beauty or "pleasing the
ear." Out of all this, long ago, arose the question whether it
was the function of music merely to be beautiful, or whether,
like painting, its mission is to portray all of life -- good and
bad, pleasure and sorrow, happiness and horror.
That is a question no part of the world can settle for the rest.
Ever since music reached an advanced stage of development, it
has been a bone of contention among musicologists and composers,
and, no doubt, it will so continue for decades, and possibly for
centuries.
So, not to enter discussion of it, the simpler way is to accept
such a generalized definition as that suggested above, and
classify music as "thought expressed through tone," to which
hardly any school of music, or composition, can take exception.
About Author :
This article, written by W. Francis Gates, was taken from the
February 1922 issue of magazine "Etude Musical Magazine." This
article is featured at http://www.thepianopages.com<
/a>, along with free piano lessons, sheet music, products, and
lots more.