Introduction Summary and Continued Abstract Development

(Mars Rover)

I’d like to think that we have yet again reached an age of exploration. This always happens during transitions between eras—a time where there is no obvious direction. People are confused by the present, reminiscing over the past and dreaming of the future. There is room for experimentation and there is room for forgiveness (or perhaps too much room), as we have yet to form new guidelines.

The purpose of the book is to make an attempt to “better understand the dynamic relationship between the various levels of musical significance”. That is, Dr. Ferrara makes an effort to methodically organize the levels individually and their interaction. The three main categories are phenomenological (sound in time), conventional (explanations of musical form/syntax) and hermeneutic (interpretation of musical reference).

He distinguishes the difference between actual musical experience and music itself, stating that although the two are related one cannot describe the other. He also reminds us of the difference between the “ordinary usage” of the word music versus its’ meaning for “music listeners”. This refers to “bridging”, a term which describes the movement between intrinsic levels of musical significance and referential levels. Music has the ability to draw out human expression/feelings, represent the historical world of the composer and provoke thought. This concept demonstrates referential meanings with regard to their psychological associations.

(Steinway Model-B)

Listeners of music and musicians themselves understand music on a more comprehensive level. Listeners develop their taste and knowledge of the musical language through exposure to the art. Performers, on the other hand, must consider sound in time (phenomenology), how sound is formed into musical syntax and the unfolding message of a work’s reference. This allows the performer to provide a more successful analysis and performance of the work at hand. This shows the intimate connection between words, musical experience and education, enabling the musician to project his/her understanding into the unfolding referential message of a musical work.

Finally, the eclectic method describes how movement through the justification, formulation and implementation of the method endeavors to provide bridges for musical sound, form and reference. Traditionally, history provides an understanding of the present. In other words, all musical understanding is rooted in particular historical perspective, also allowing us to understand the present.

The attention span strays within a matter of seconds. The transformation of music has developed through time, changed and molded itself to fit (or corrupt) the current period. As we travel through the space of change, one can see that pieces by different composers become more distinct, even pieces by the same composer become rather unique from each other. Clearly, physical movements in performance have also changed, as musical genres give birth to musical subgenres. Movements that are acceptable now at a rock concert would hardly pass in Mozart’s time. Like memories of the mind, we wonder how a Baroque and Classical past, connects spiritually and physically to our Contemporary future.

(Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart 1756-1791)

We have reached a point where we are buying into performance, gestures if you will. People attend shows to see exaggerated emotion or a physical movement that separates itself from the uniform crowd. They are paying for a feature that cannot be imitated or preserved by anyone except the performer. I think the most efficient start would be to explore the audience, psychologically analyze what makes them react in order to answer the question of connectivity. What visually or aurally holds audience attention and why? Are they only pretending to enjoy what they see, swayed by majority reaction? And if not, are they simply amazed?