For Copland, the idea of "musical meaning" is a label that
helps to explain the transcendent quality of music. Copland believes that there is a
level of musical appreciation that can transcend words. This transcendence represents
what he terms as "musical meaning:"
It [Music] may even express a state of meaning
for which there exists no adequate word in any language. In that case, musicians often
like to say that it has only a purely musical meaning. They sometimes go father and say
that all music has only a purely musical meaning. What they really mean is that no
appropriate word can be found to express the music's meaning and that, even if it could,
they do not feel the need of finding
it.
In this, Copland wishes
to make the argument that the definition of music does not have to be limited to
words.
It is a fairly postmodern argument in that it
asserts that there is a level of expression and understanding that exists outside the
realm of language. In the most strict of terms, language is a limiting function. For
example, a piece of music might reveal some aspect of consciousness to a particular
listener. Yet, when they try to express this to another person through language,
Copland maintains that they might not be able to fully express the experience because
language is a domain whereby its full appropriation by all will only result in a limited
understanding of all. This means that while we all communicate through language, we are
not able to fully communicate our experiences through it. If I listen to a piece of
music and it expresses a condition that means something significant to me, my use of
language limits it because I am not able to fully convey its meaning to someone else.
In this, Copland argues that "musical meaning" is a way in which we can convey meaning
without the limiting function of language.
No comments:
Post a Comment