Klarinet Archive - Posting 000370.txt from 1995/03

From: "Victor M. Wyman" <wymanvic@-----.COM>
Subj: Re: Dark vs. Bright
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 02:55:49 -0500

Andrew Grenci wrote...
>Dan Leeson has initiated a fascinating exchange on the use of verbal
>descriptions of musical sound. ...(clip)...
>Here are some of my thoughts on this matter.
>
>By chance I have been reading John Locke's "an Essay Concerning Human
>Understanding", ...(clip)...
>I propose, then, that we use whatever terms are meaningful to us when
>describing sounds, clarinet or otherwise. If a particular description
>resonates with our students or colleagues, continue to use it. And when
>reading advertising or the writings of others, realize that all words only
>have meaning in context, and that context expands far beyond the other words
>in the sentence.
>
>Andrew Grenci
>
>
I agree with Dan Leeson's expressed views about dark and bright sounds (I
don't know if he agrees with me, but...). The crux of the matter is not
relativism of terminology, but concensus. The basis of language is a matter
of concensus. The common understanding of a word or terminology sets its
meaning. Without common understanding the noise or the combination of
letters has no meaning. The nice thing about concensus is that it doesn't
require 100% agreement, and what takes place on the margins (when there
isn't complete agreement), is part of what makes language, words and our
humanity so interesting. We can talk about 'hot jazz' and 'cool jazz' and we
may have a very stimulating conversation. In such a conversation,
relativistic concepts, as expressed by Andrew, would be significant.
-Vic Wyman

MediaCity World http://www.mediacity.com

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org