Re: [microsound] being 'political' in non-verbal music

[graham miller <grahammiller@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

just to play devil's advocate here, but isn't spoken language just
'signals' too? more complex and multifaceted, yes. more open to multiple
interpretations and ambiguity? yes. but signals none less encoded into
sound deep within the larynx... ditto for written language... every form of
communication, which includes art, falls within the scope of semiotics...

i'm not sure there is such a thing as a 'literal language' aside from
mathematics, the only form of communication that holds true throughout the
universe (more or less...)
g.

aleks vasic wrote:

> Well the use of music on the battle field is not "Literal
> communication"  Its a form of cumminication that would be better labeld
> as "Signals"  Because thats what they were.  Just because music can be
> used in ways other then it was intended to, does not make it a literal
> language.   I think you can come up with a better example then military
> use of music, which at the time was the best way to communicate over
> small distances.
>
> I never defined music or launguage.  Please reread my original post.
>
> aLEKs
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org