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

[Exegene <exegene@xxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, aleks vasic wrote:
*snip*
> Literal communication is not music,  music  was never intended to be so by 
> itself.
>
> Music can be reworked into a language very easily.  Then literal 
> communication could take place, but then it would cease to be music, and 
> become literal language.
*snip*

Music has been used to convey specific, agreed on meaning(the word 
literal has no place describing meaning conveyed without word or text) by 
means of martial marches, battlefield orders given through drums and 
brass, communication by australian aborigines through didgeridoo across 
miles of desert. All blurring the lines in their own, more or less  verbal 
ways are also yodeling, the whistle language of the canary(?) islands, and 
throat singing of tuva.

It seems premature and unnecessarily restrictive to outright 
define music and language as entirely seperate.

--
Dear Patron Saint,
your lips are lopsided
www.devo.com/exegene

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