Lecture Response
Music or listening to music tends to yield subjective appreciation to individuals depending upon each one’s aesthetic sense, music sensibility and interest in music. Copland’s argument that it is the objective approach to music that is to be given priority over the subjective approach assumes significance as well as controversy in this respect. The term objective is universal and is equally applicable to everyone whereas the term subjective offers scope for individual difference and variety of appreciation to the same piece of music when it is enjoyed by many divergent listeners. The concept of “authorial intent” or “the composer’s intended meaning” seeks to provide a universal appeal to music, and based on a thoroughly objective approach it is possible to arrive at an objective meaning that is brought out by a particular piece of music. However, how far the composer’s intended meaning is apprehended and appreciated by the listeners varies from person to person, opening wide horizons for the subjective approach to music.
The perceptions and the observations of most music lovers tend to be subjective as “the ‘meaning’ of a piece of music can be associated with an ’emotional’ or ‘affective’ response” and can be influenced “by subjective introspection and the verbal reports of others.” (Marriott). The composer breathes meaning into a piece of music and it cannot be taken for granted that the composer’s meaning is always grasped by the musician and is transmitted effectively by him to the listeners and that they also grasp the same meaning while hearing or listening to music. Even music criticisms very often turn out to be mere personal opinions because of the subjectivity of one’s assessment. Music is very often regarded as a physical process that necessitates the proper blending of “vibrating instrument parts, physical sound vibrations transmitted through the air, and physical brain processes in both the performer and the listener.” (Marriott). This physical process, no doubt, offers common structural and semantic properties to the piece of work and acts as the primary contributing factor that affects the appreciation of the music. In other words, the physical properties of the music provide a framework or rather create an atmosphere that is quite objective for the appreciation of the music. However, one cannot expect all the listeners to go through the same emotional, psychological, or mental experience as the exposure and the experiences of each one is unique.
It can be concluded that whether the composer intends meaning or not, no objective transfer of meaning takes place during the performance or listening as meaning is “ ‘affected’ in the listener – not ‘conveyed’. Any meaning intended by the composer can be elided by the performance, and masked by the listener’s pre-existing psychological pre-dispositions.” (Marriott). Thus, these pre-existing psychological pre-dispositions exert great influence over the listeners’ appreciation of a piece of music and provide scope for a subjective approach. It is because of this subjectivity of the human mind that people have different levels of experience each time they listen to the same piece of music under various circumstances and points of time. Thus, it can be said that music offers abstract meaning to various listeners. As Copland postulates, music has the potentiality of offering objective meaning to the listener only if the same level of abstract concepts like “triumph,” “victory,” or “joy is evoked in the minds of everyone who enjoys a particular piece of music. However, the myriad feelings and perceptions evoked by a piece of music vary considerably with individual differences. Thus, it can be concluded that the concept of objective meaning and the composer’s intended meaning can only provide an outline for the appreciation of a piece of music and these factors do permit maximum flexibility and individualization, resulting in wider and diverse levels of experiences to different listeners who have developed unique pre-existing psychological pre-dispositions and musical sensibility.
Works Cited
Marriott, Adrian. Theory. Opus +. 2008. Web.