Klarinet Archive - Posting 000054.txt from 2001/04

From: Bilwright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: RE: [kl] Meta-music?
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 13:12:31 -0400

<><> David=A0Kumpf wrote:
I think we're in the realm of musical semantics, rather than syntax.
[snip] I have a MIDI file of Mozart's clarinet concerto. [snip] It
has all the notes, rests, etc. My MIDI playback uses sampled
instruments. So, I should have a reasonably authentic representation of
K.622. Yet, most would agree that it sounds pretty awful and is only a
semblance of the Concerto.

That's a good example. It has clarified my thinking.

The sentence "I didn't say he stole money" can have 6 different
meanings depending on vocal emphasis:

_I_ didn't say he stole money.
I _didn't_ say he stole money.
I didn't _say_ he stole money.
I didn't say _he_ stole money.
I didn't say he _stole_ money.
I didn't say he stole _money_.

Written textual language includes symbols that affect semantics:
underscore, italics, bold font, punctuation including "!" and "?" and
".....", sometimes capitalization (and if you are e.e. cummings, even
white space). Written musical language includes such symbols also:
dynamic markings, expressional instructions, and so forth.

Therefore it should be possible to create a paradoxical statement by
confusing the 'expressional' or 'semantic' features of a language with
those of the meta-language that describes it --- just as it is possible
to do this syntactically or grammatically.

Let's talk about K.622 for a moment. The concerto begins with a
musical 'statement' from the orchestra while the clarinet remains
silent. Do you agree that this statement is long enough (30 seconds? I
haven't time it) and assertive enough to define a 'dialect' of musical
language, such that the dialect is a well-defined language of its own?
And therefore if the clarinet comes in with a totally different style or
dynamic or tone, the clarinet conceivably could create a language vs.
meta-language paradox?

Some people may say, "For crying out loud !!! If the clarinet enters
K.622 with a jazz tone or klezmer style or too loud or with staccato
instead of legato, of course it's wrong!! We don't need formal
linguistics to know this." However the issue of honoring a composer's
intent comes up often enough that it's worthwhile to discuss what part
of the composer's 'language' is being violated. Perhaps we can draw
distinctions between which freedoms are or aren't permissible.

Dan Leeson's post about vibrato is a good example of this question.
Vibrato is essential in some clarinet playing. Presumably we've all
listened to Pete Fountain in a jazz context. For him to play jazz
ballads totally without vibrato is inconceivable. Yet to play K.622
with vibrato (the Richard Stoltzman recording that I own does _not_
include vibrato) would certainly be a 'language error', the equivalent
of illiteracy. Illiteracy sells sometimes, as in Mark Twain's
characters, but we understand that we are reading a portrayal of
illiteracy. If we thought that Clemens actually believed that
Huckleberry Finn was speaking the king's English, we wouldn't value his
fiction as much.

Thanks and cheers,
Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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