Universalisibility in Music

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Micca
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 11:49 AM

OOps, Sorry line 2 of verse 3 should read
"Never spent a drunken night with doxys or with whores"

fixed it
el joe clone

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Scoville
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 10:50 AM

Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika: Never heard of that in my life. Wouldn't know it if it hit me in the face.

I'm with Scrump that if nobody identifies with a song, what's the point? Of course, the variety of personal experience in any given audience, even if they look similar on the outside, is almost limitless so it's very likely that any decent song will mean something to somebody.

There are a long of songs/types of music that I like even though I don't necessarily relate to them. I don't really identify with most, say, sea chanteys or with the specifics of a lot of the old British broadsides (although I think they are very interesting historically, mythologically, and anthropologically). I can think those are great songs but, even if I understand why they might mean a lot to somebody, they may never feel like "mine". The women's music thing that was so "in" when I was in college eluded me completely, no matter how many people told me that it would absolutely change my life. I thought a lot of them were very talented, I just never had any use for Ani DiFranco, Indigo Girls, Patti Griffin, etc., but they sure meant a lot to my college friends and I understood why even if I, personally, didn't need them.

Conversely, there are songs I don't like that still mean a lot to me for sentimental reasons. I would hate Malvina Reynolds' "Little Boxes" (which I think is a good song, I just don't like it stylistically) and Rosalie Sorrels' "Baby Tree" except that my dad sang them to us all the time when we were little.

I've always been a travel song person--trucker songs, train songs, some cowboy songs, that sort of thing. My feminist college roommates were irritated to no end that all of my favorite songs were recorded by men, but men more than women seem to record that kind of thing. Oh, well. I grew up in a family that loved to travel and feel very much at home on the road. I also lived near railroad tracks and my dad has always been into cars and trains. It just happened that it was his daughter that shared this interest with him more than his son (my brother is temperamentally much more similar to my mother; I take after Dad). I grew up in the West and the South and when people sing about mountains (Kate Wolf's "Across the Great Divide" and "Telluride" come to mind), plains, deserts, dust storms, and "wide open spaces", I know exactly what they mean and it feels like home.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Micca
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 09:44 AM

well, it just would not lie down and shut up, there may be more, I dont know, but I think the last 2 verses are

I never been a whaling, or fished Iceland's frozen shore
Never spent a drunken night with doxys or with whores
But the songs have taken me there and to places, furthermore
That would stretch the minds of most right here in Bolton

my love of this folk music takes me where I want to go
with sailor or with soldier or where tramps and hawkers go
my mind shares their experience and that is how I know
I am still alive tho' here in Bolton

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: fat B****rd
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 08:42 AM

No axe to grind personally, but great post, Micca.
Yours psychofantically fB.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 08:23 AM

No apologies required Scrump.Another random thought is that I often find a song sung in a language I don't understand helps me appreciate what a beautiful musical instrument the human voice can be.
Micca I loved your last posting! Those are indeed the questions I was asking myself prior to initiating this thread.
BTW I DO like "Route 66" I just don't empathise with it.
I fully accept that other people do empathise with it & theoretically understand their reasons for doing so.
"Whatever floats your boat" as we say 'round these parts.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Scrump
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 07:45 AM

Well, yes, Alec. Thnking about it further, instrumental pieces no doubt have an advantage in a way, in that the absence of words makes it easier to 'relate' to, because there's nothing to 'disagree' with, or to find alien, in terms of a lyric. But then again, songs in a language you don't speak would have the same 'benefit' in that sense.

And again, many pop songs have nonsense lyrics that people will think are good fun and enjoy, without them making much sense.

Maybe whether an individual can relate to a song depends on his or her imagination. Many of us can imagine what it wass like being a sailor, a cowboy or whatever (even if we are wrong!) and relate to songs about old sailing ships, the wild west, etc. Maybe some people can't, and find songs outside the scope of their own experience difficult to relate to? Just a thought.

Apologies for randomness of these thoughts.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Micca
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 07:38 AM

Just for Songster Bob

I've never been a cowboy, Never roped a steer
Never travelled far from home or wandered far and near
So why am I in this old pub drinking flat warm beer
And singing of "route 66" in Bolton

I've never battled round Cape Horn or sailed the ocean blue
I've never hauled a bowline or fed on Lobscouse stew
Or journeyed east on P&O, or shipped on a Blue Flue
But I'm singing short haul shanties here in Bolton

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 07:09 AM

That may also be the case Scrump
People do relate differently though, I personally see some merit in some works of both Cage & Stockhausen,I have been known to joke about Revolution 9 but now & again I quite enjoy listening to it.
Their are people I love dearly who would maintain that none of those examples are worthy of the term music.
Subjectivity? Expectations colouring perceptions?
Who can say?

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Scrump
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 06:57 AM

It could be argued that if a song doesn't have at least some degree of "universalisability", it probably isn't any good. If people can't relate to it, what's the point? Discuss.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 03:28 AM

I vote for the Alcoholics Anthem - EVERYONE who's ever been drunk can relate to that one.

Aberrhations metabolic, ceilings that are hyperbolic, these are for the alcoholic, lying on the floor.

LTS

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Elmer Fudd
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 03:23 AM

I vote for "The Universal Soldier" by Buffy Sainte-Marie.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 03:17 AM

Kinkability,Dave Sunshine & MG All good points & examples.Thanks.
Azizi, yes what you advocate would progress this.
CR,I'm sorry you feel that way. I think your capacity for over-reacting to your own misconceptions,dealing in sweeping generalisations & insulting entire Nation States has helped to elevate this thread above the level of "wifty wafty nonsense".
Will you not reconsider? After all a Thesis requires an Antithesis in order to achieve Synthes... OOPS! Sorry, I forgot. He was a German as well,wasn't he?

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: mg
Date: 26 Jan 07 - 12:30 AM

well I disagree somewhere along the line. I think the more specific a song is as to place and time, the more it can be universal.

My name is Peter Amberly...in 1880 when flowers were a brilliant hue..I landed in New Brunswick my fortune to pursue.

He could have said I landed in a rocky forest and left it at that..he could not have said the date. He could not have said his name. But he did and so other people can really get a grip on where he was and can I think relate their own experiences more easily...I had a cruel father, I left the farm, I had to work harder than was healthy..some pretty universal problems there but specific situations...getting hit by a great timber... mg

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 08:50 PM

universability doesn't mean the same thing as universality

Didn't say it did, merely that the former is some vague, fairly meaningless philosphical term while the latter at least meant something. Azizi PMed me to say that s/he had addressed some commments to me but as this thread is an even more advanced example of wifty wafty nonsense than is usual even for Mudcat, I have simply given up reading it.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: GUEST,Dave Sunshine
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 07:16 PM

And a longing for places only dreamt of is the theme of 'Eldorado' sung with such feeling by Martyn Wyndham-Read - great song, great singer

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: GUEST, kinkability
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 07:04 PM

"...Take me back to those Black Hills that I ain't never seen." So sang the Kinks.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 06:41 PM

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Azizi
Date: 25 Jan 07 - 05:44 PM

It seems to me that one positive outcome of this discussion could be an exploration of song themes and song elements-perhaps including music structures, styles, and tempos-that might make the whole world kin.

I have to admit being surprised,countess richard, that you would raise the issue of cultural imperalism in this thread. I'm not sure how cultural imperalism relates to this discussion. I didn't get the sense that Alec was trying to force his culture or his view about which songs might be universal on others.

Also, countess richards, I find it interesting to read your comment that "A tune such as Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika would seem to fall into such a category [of universalisability]: everybody (almost) knows it and would support (I hope) its function and importance."

Everybody? Everybody knows Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika ? With all due respect, I'm sure that's not true. But love for one's family, and love for one's ethnic group or nation is [or should be?] a universal trait. And that national anthem expresses that. So I can see where you're coming from regarding that.

I'm interested in reading more about this concept of unversalisibility or universality {or whatever it's called and however it's spelled} as it relates to songs and instrumental music.

For instance, lullabies seem to be found in most places in the world. And these types of songs to 'lull' a child to sleep are usually not uptempo, right?

Also, in the USA and most of the Western world, isn't it true that songs that are about death or other sad topics [there's a cultural mindset for you], are usually slow or moderate tempo? However, I've read that some Nigerian Afrobeat songs that are very much uptempo have serious if not very sad themes.

I'm interested in any thoughts folks here might have about the connection worldwide between songs themes and the tempo of songs.

**

Click here for information about Afrobeat music.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 06:13 PM

Kant was a pretty smart lad. And universability doesn't mean the same thing as universality, any more than applicable means the same as applied. There's an implication there about having to be ready to search out the relevance of a song in a different context, and it might not always be obvious.
.............................

Route 66? My favourite road song, the one that gives me itchy feet, is the Sawdoctors' N17:

And I wish I was on that N 17
(Stone walls and the grasses green)
Yes I wish I was on that N 17
Stone walls and the grasses green        
Travelling with just my thoughts and dreams

Now as I tumble down highways,
Or filthy overcrowded trains,
There's no one to talk to in transit
So I sit there and daydream in vain.
And behind all these muddled up problems
Of living on a foreign soil,
I can still see the twists and turns on the road
From the square to the town of the tribes.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 02:21 PM

The term does indeed come from Kant,Countess Richard though if I thought it were incomprehensively stupid I wouldn't use it, this however may be attributable to my (somewhat remote) German ancestry:)
In respect of your questions "Why do you expect everybody to like the same sort of stuff?" I don't. I'm merely interested in why piece of music "A" might survive & prosper over time & distance & piece of music "B" might not."Doesn't this smack of lowest common denominator & dumbing down?" If that was what I was doing then yes it would.
"It's not compulsory, or in many cases even advisable,to incorporate it into your own" I think I knew that already.
"...the assumption that all musics are the same or up for grabs is cultural imperialism."
All musics are not the same.
All musics are not up for grabs.
I am not suggesting otherwise.
Amos & M.Ted I think you are both spot on.Murray a valid & fair criticism,Ernest I think you're a goner 'ere.: )

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Songster Bob
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 02:14 PM

"... what importance, if any, you all attach to a song corresponding with your own experience?"

Well, a universal song should mean something to anyone who hears it (assuming enough "universality" to things like language, shared experiences, etc.). So a song about an experience I've never had would have to have some "hook" into something I HAD experienced. Love songs don't mean so much to prepubescent children (though with today's pop culture, they have been exposed to a lot of sex/love/whatever ideas that "prepubescent" can be about five or six years old at times).

I've never been a cowboy, never roped a steer (sounds like the opening line of a song, doesn't it?), but I can still empathize with and appreciate the feelings of someone doing hard work in the great wide open. But if the song were about, let's say, translating medieval texts, the "message" wouldn't be about the translating, but about the work. I've done puzzles and solved problems, so that part of my life would resonate; knowing how to read fraktur or ancient Greek wouldn't in itself resonate.

What I think I'm trying to say is that the parts of a song that make it universalisible ("able to be universalized?" -- why not just "universal"?) can only be those that can be shared by others. The more common these elements are, the more universal the song. If I write a song about a beach cottage, I had better use descriptions that show the listener what I am seeing, so that someone who's never been to a beach cottage can get an idea of why a beach cottage is a nice place to be. If all I say is "I love this place," then the listener is allowed to think, "so what?"

I can think of lots of songs that have specifics of time, place, character, and action, but are at least somewhat universal. But the more specific the time/place/action, the less likely to be or become universal. What is so universal about an old Scottish border ballad? What is universal about "Robin Hood and the Peddlar?" "Barbara Allen?" "Four Maries?" (I've never committed infanticide, never waited on a queen, never faced the gallows -- but there's a core to that song and the others I mentioned that is "universalisible" in some ways. For my money, the Scottish border ballads are less universal than Robin Hood, mainly because I can understand resisting authority better than I can cattle-raiding among competing inbred clans.

So if you hear a song for the first time, and it has little in it that you can "relate" to, it's harder to like it (and, to my way of thinking, harder to learn). I play in a group that occasionally performs "To Anacreon in Heaven." I can play it all right, but I doubt I could easily memorize the lyrics. The classical references and in-jokes from the 18th century don't resonate with me, so I would, indeed, have trouble remembering the words. It's easier to remember the other words that Francis Scott Key wrote to the tune, and even then, the other verses (than the first) are harder to learn.

If you're a writer, keeping universality in mind is hard; a large number of the songer-singwriter crowd are not very good at it, I'm afraid. Too many times, the writer's feelings are expressed, but not the reason for those feelings, so it's hard for the listener to give a good God damn about the feelings, even if that same listener has those same feelings. Method actors recall things from their lives that made them happy, sad, angry, etc., to call up the emotion needed for a particular scene. If a song requires an emotion, it had better provide you with the image you can relate to in order to call up the proper emotion. Otherwise, it isn't universal enough to make the link. Just saying, "you should be sad because I am" doesn't work, but "for sale: baby shoes, never worn" (to quote the shortest novel ever written) evokes a whole raft of emotions because it is univeral.

I've blathered long enough, and probably haven't said anything I couldn't have said in four lines, in rhythm, with rhymes at the ends of lines two and four.

That's the way it goes,
My life, or the story of it.
When I express myself in words,
Nothing comes out but ...

Sweet violets.
Sweeter than the roses.
Covered all over from head to foot,
Covered all over in
Sweet violets.


Bob

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Cluin
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:49 PM

Universalicylic Acid is what I take after listening to some music played on the radio today.

I MUST be getting old. I'm sounding more and more like my Dad every year.



You call that music? I call it CRAP!

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Ernest
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:43 PM

What term would you use to describe the song "The sick note"?

Universyphilis?

Regards
Ernest

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:31 PM

I think you might find the term "Shared Experience" to be a bit more understandable. And--part of the appeal of some songs is that they validate a shared experience--on the otherhand, some songs are about "faraway places with strange sounding names"--

Which appeals, and in what measure, is a matter of taste that ties somewhat to personality, and somewhat to life situation--"Route Sixty Six", for instance, has a certain appeal to the office bound--

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Amos
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:15 PM

It's not dumbing down to address tings that are common to all human beings -- it's the nature of the art, when it succeeds. What does and does not translate is a fascnating study. Lili Marlene translates beautifully as a tune, but calls for regional versions of the lyrics, for example. Guantanamera, because the lyrics are from an independent viewpoint, can be translated into any language and still mean something. Obscure Anglo-saxon metaphors probably have problems reaching into cultures that are built on different cogntiive frameworks (knights, crows, silver daggers, ladies in lakes, and such).

A

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:11 PM

Oops, Guest above was me with biscuit on the blink.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 01:02 PM

My Concise OED fails to acknowledge the existence of such a term while Wikipedia blames Kant (spelled 'universalizability' but concedes that we English can use 's' instead of 'z'). Why not use 'universality' which at least means something not incomprehensively stupid and German? A tune such as Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika would seem to fall into such a category: everybody (almost) knows it and would support (I hope) its function and importance. But that's a bit like motherhood and apple pie.

Actually, I think Route 66 has a fairly universal significance, especially to those of 1940/50s vintage. Spin-offs were National 7 from Wizz Jones, Strolling Down The Highway from Bert Jansch and even The M1 Waltzfrom Nigel Chippindale.

Otherwise, why do you expect everybody to like the same sort of stuff? Doesn't this smack a bit of lowest common denominator and dumbing down? You can behave like a tourist (or even interested observer) around other people's cultures. It's not compulsory, or in many cases even advisable, to incorporate it into your own. Fusion is one thing; the assumption that all musics are the same or up for grabs is cultural imperialism.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 12:46 PM

"Route 66" is just about the most "universalisible" song ever written.

It conjured up visions of an America which must have inspired a longing to visit the country in many a young heart.

It certainly did with me, many years on I was able to realise that yearning, and I wasn't disappointed. (although Route 66 itself is nothing like as significant as it was when the song was written ...)

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 12:00 PM

Yes Scrump, I very much think it is the resonance of those old songs that draws people to them. (Do we take them up or do they take us up?)"Dirty Old Town" is an excellent example of a song which transcends national & generational boundaries.
As for where & why the line is drawn between songs which do & do not do this I am a little uncertain myself (It's probably entirely subjective)
Universalisability is a bit of a mouthful my misspelling of it throughout my previous posting doesn't help either.

Subject: RE: Universalisibility in Music
From: Scrump
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 11:05 AM

This sort of came up in the "Dirty Old Town" thread recently, though not formalised as "universalisibility" (what a mouthful - I can't say I like the word!). Although written about Salford, the song was written in such a way that (perhaps apart form the Gasworks croft) it could apply to just about any industrial town - I think that was more or less the consensus. For that reason, many of us could relate to it, even though we may not have been to Salford itself.

But a song like Route 66 mentions many places that, if you haven't been to them, perhaps mean little - they may be just names. I've never driven along the famous highway, but I can still relate to the song to some extent, as I picture (probably wrongly, not having been to most of them) the towns mentioned. I guess I've seen enough movies to be able to visualise driving along the road (and I've been to the USA and driven along what I imagine are similar roads - again, probably wrongly, but as long as I can picture it that way, I can relate to it).

As for songs about relationships, love, etc. I guess these are pretty much universal. Even if they're about a sailor or a soldier, you can still relate to the characters even if you've never served in the navy or army. Things may have changed since the 18th century or whenever, but a lot of the sentiments expressed in these songs still resonate today (maybe that's why we keep singing them).

I suppose this is all a bit rambling and inconclusive. I'm not really sure where you draw the line between "universalisibility" and "non-universalisibility". I'll shut up now and see what others say.

Subject: Universalisibility in Music
From: Alec
Date: 24 Jan 07 - 10:49 AM

Apologies in advance if this thread title seems a bit pretentious.
I was just wondering about what importance,if any, you all attach to a song corresponding with your own experience?
This slightly abstract question came into my head because I was thinking about songs of North East England (which is my own region.)
These songs are charactered with young women boasting about their beau,young men coming to terms with unrequited love,people who express regional pride,value their family & domestic life,take pride in work but pleasure in socialising.
Sitting here a couple of centuries on I very much recognise their world as being the same one I live in.
Empathy in a word.How important is that to you that you can empathise with a song? I was thinking of how much I love "When a Man Loves a Woman" Which is universalisable,but "Get my kicks out on Route 66" which is non-universalisable means little to me.
There are exceptions.I feel & am moved by the yearning in "Shenandoah" despite that song dealing with events I was not part of in a place I have never been.
Also I find a responsive chord in me is struck by a great deal of Indian classical music though I would be lying if I claimed to fully comprehend that music.
Anybody else?