Subject: Re: art not music
From: Eliot Handelman (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Feb 28 2005 - 16:47:36 EST
>When you're walking in the forest and a cute yellow bird sits in the tree by
>the way and wistles what you hear to be a beautiful tune, perhaps this bird is
>not 'singing' but doing something greater!
>It would be homo-centric of us to impose a musical limit on the sounds of
>nature's creatures. All you know is what you hear/percieve.
I'm not that up on this, and I don't know where my references are
buried, but we're coming to find
that bird song is much more like song than we previously thought. The
relevant work is in various bird capacities
to learn new tunes, and also, ifr. in some species to invent tunes. It
wouldn't surpise me if it did turn out
to be "singing" in a musicianly way after all.
>Life was so brutal back then that the first lullaby was a heavy-metal tune.
It might nit have been that brutal for us -- the current story is that
the neanderthals killed themselves off
while we sat it out in our groves and caves. We probably had beautiful
ceremonies with body paint, dancing, music, the
cave appointed in most artistic wise with good fare for all served from
vessels designed by our craftsmen ancestors, and
more, thanks to neo-cortical mom #1. We walked through the world guided
by our seers. We were the priestly caste.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:07 EST