They’re sisters, aren’t they? They’re really close sisters who have a strong, intimate, bond. And yet.
And yet they’ve also got two distinct, mutually exclusive, essences. Radical? Yes, but true. Or at least that’s my theory!
The rules & regulations which structure language can be bent, modified, and/or eliminated; those which frame music are not subject to endless tinkering & prodding, they’re firm and fixed. Grammar, syntax, prosody… they’re susceptible to the changes which occur in society and in a given culture over a period of time; but music’s rules are perennial. Though they may vary from one civilization to another, the internal rules of a musical tradition remain the same over time.
Feel free to disagree, but consider this for a second first:
Language is a slave, Music is a slavemaster.
Language is flexible -- too flexible. It is both her charm and her deepest flaw. She bends according to who is using her at any given time and can be made to say anything. She can be beautiful or she can be beaten to a bruised and bloody pulp, be badly hurt and scarred, tortured, brutalized. She has no life of her own, but rather depends on the qualities of her “handler”.
Though remarkably faithful when understood well, treated with tenderness & loved fully, she will not hesitate to give herself entirely to another, more powerful or richer owner if he summons her, and allow him to take from her whatever he wants. She doesn’t know the concepts of eternity or free will, and can also succumb to the promises of false prophets and usurpers if they offer temporary and superficial pleasure. She can also give much pleasure, and not only the shallow kind, but long-lasting and genuine, though probably not infinite.
Language is bound to whoever owns her at the time; she’s gagged unless allowed to fully blossom. Her fate is sad; she will never stay with anyone forever… she’s unable to belong fully to any one person. Her nature doesn’t allow it, it would violate what makes her attractive to begin with, her charm; the intuitive knowledge one has that she’s hiding something all the time - she has many secrets. If she were able to belong to only one owner, she would fade and finally disappear in the air… like rainbows. Like rainbows she is intangible, and her temporary owner, if he is wise, knows he will not have her forever, knows he can manipulate and abuse her but that eventually she will flee, though he never knows when or for how long. This is why all potential and current owners want her, because even though she is a submissive and loving slave, they must contrive to give her some pleasure and show her some admiration and respect, make an effort, however hesitant, or else she gives only the bare minimum and does not hide her cold side.
Often, Language asks her older, wiser sister, Music, for advice. Sometimes her sister takes pity on her and helps her. She shines under the bright light which emanates from her sister, but nothing Music does can help Language for good because her nature is to obey and serve.
Music can’t grasp these precepts by which her sister lives. Music rules, never obeys. Many think they have an ascendancy over her, but they’re wrong. In these instances, they were simply fooled by the sweet prelude which may accompany Music’s full ecstasy, but it is in reality merely a collection of mermaids singing: for a moment, the sailor thinks he will be able to have a mermaid because she sings for him - such sublime, delicate notes! So full of promise! So dizzying! - and then he falls into the water and drowns. Disgracefully. Duped & humiliated. The mermaid is not real, but a mirage announcing the grotesque demise of fools with delusions of grandeur. This prelude Music allows some to see is not her actual climax.
Music, like Language, is not married to only one person, cannot be; but her nature allows her to be fully faithful to several of her slaves at the same time. She gives herself entirely to each of them in an egalitarian manner, provided her slaves do the same. This is not an ordinary exchange in which the slave is not needed: he is, because it is the only way in which Music can express herself and show her beauty, in a symbiotic way. But she’s demanding and doesn’t show her full beauty easily! One must work hard to please her sensibility.
She keeps few slaves, all things considered, the better to control their lives with her impossible charms and ability to satiate even the most gluttonous appetites. Nevertheless, no slave who seriously dedicates his life to Music can have the guarantee of eternal happiness, only of satisfaction - of the most significant order; curiously, though, the ones who do choose this path do so because they simply can do no other. Music then decides who among them is worthy of possessing a fraction of her attention. There is a fine-tuned balance in this exchange. Those whom she does not pick are given the mermaid (Music is generous!) as a proxy, and may even live long enough to realize this is an illusion…
2 comments:
Quite a case. For me, I always viewed music as pure mathematics. The digitization of music and synthesis of sound reduced to 1's and 0's. Bytes in a complex but ordered matrix. Not recordings mind you, but the actual digitalized production of music or words. I think that is why there is such a problem generating the spoken word. It doesn't digitize well. Just me thinking. (ain't that a scary thought?!?!)
Language is subject to daily transformations, some nuanced others less so. Human creativity makes it v hard indeed for language to be digitalized because it is first a means of communicating thoughts. I don't believe a computer can generate a coherent discourse on anything without a human having programmed the ideas along with the positions onto the machine.
Language is like a lathered up trout; you try to grab it, squeeze it into a box, but it escapes every time. Jumps out of your hands. You must let it come to you...and let it develop as it will inside your brain.
That's my view, anyway.
Thanks for your comments, I rillly do appreciate them.
x
Post a Comment