Klarinet Archive - Posting 000292.txt from 2000/05

From: Audrey Travis <vsofan@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Tone descriptions
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 09:51:14 -0400

> Dan Leeson wrote:
>
> Instead of enjoying a sound because they like it, they are searching for
> a holy grail that has different meanings to different people."
>

Dan has written about descriptive words such as "dark" (his favourite) which to
him are meaningless as a method of accurately pinpointing what clarinet sound
is like. I'd like to approach this discussion from a different point of view.
Please - no flames - I'm a bit of a redhead and burn easily! Much of human
life (maybe all of human life) is about communication. Our attempts in all
phases of life to communicate with others - our thoughts, ideas, feelings,
knowledge, love, desires. We do it through a variety of techniques such as
speech, body movement and body language, physical action, music, art, poetry,
prose, silence. When a poet or an author uses a metaphor or another literary
device to paint a picture in our minds, to urge us along the path of thought,
he/she doesn't NOT paint that picture because we might not understand it in the
same way the poet or author meant it. He/she does everything possible to help
us see what they see, but certainly cannot know if we do. Neither can we know
if we've understood what the poet/author understood and tried to communicate.
Instead we attempt to open our hearts and souls and derive meaning from the art
form. And that poet/author opens up a chamber in our minds for thought and
dialogue, because now we begin to think and feel outside our everyday human
cares. We don't say to the poet/author don't write anything unless you can
scientifically prove to me that we will all understand your writing equally
accurately. This is an 'attempt' to communicate, not a guarantee of
understanding. Why would we then not see musical expression (whether producing
or listening) in the same way? We are attempting to communicate. People quite
naturally (many, at least) want to discuss what they have heard and felt as a
result of being exposed to music. When people communicate, they start from
where they are. If someone else's words allow them to think, and make them
listen to their heart to see whether those words strike a responsive chord, can
we say this is wrong? We build understanding and connect with people by
opening a dialogue, not by shutting it down because we don't find meaning in a
particular descriptive word. If one word doesn't work for you, try another or
try to see what the other person understans by that word. Dark may not mean to
one person what it means to another, but it opens a dialogue, and can lead to
further attempts at clarity. We all teach each other - if we continue to talk,
we eventually hit a response of understanding. We are musicians, purveyors of
beauty or angst, attempting tocommunicate the recesses of the heart. Must we
be scientifically able to prove that we all hear or feel the same thing for us
or our music to be valid? Perhaps we've forgotten why we make, listen to, and
love music.

Best wishes
Audrey

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org