Good one, I agree with you, music is definetly not a universal language because people don't like the same kind of music or like music at all. A simple demo of this is in the place where I work, where we are allowed to switch on the radio. Most of us like pop music, or adult contemporary, or classical. And then there are those who can't seem to stand any kind of the music on the radio at all, not even the soft and easy genre. Says music interferes with their thinking. Annoyingly to the rest of us, the radio must be turned almost all the way down in their presense. The rest of us wonders, how can anyone dislike music but there they are.

Another example was at a My Friend the Chocoalte Cake concert recently, the singer recounted this story: Apparently a friend of his had played a piece of MFTCC's instrumental music to his 2nd graders. The children then wrote down what the music made them feel, what it made them think of. Now I personally find it a peaceful and joyous piece. Some of the kids agreed, saying it reminded them of a caterpillar coming out of its coccoon as a new butterfly, or of birds on a crisp Saturday morn. One child said it reminded them of when his parents split up. I could see how in a certain light it might be depressing music. I myself find some music I own uplifiting some days and depressing on others. This usually depends on my mood at the start.

But I think the point Langer was getting at was that music can communicate meaning to all of us. We don't have to learn it to find some meaning in it. After all, languages can also be misinterpreted, even by people who understand them. Remember writing an email calmly, only to find the person on the other end thought you were being argumentative? Or not quite using the correct intonation in your speech and finding that someone takes a different slant from what you intended? Whatever we put out there, be it music or words or art is open for interpretation and we have little control over that interpretation. But with music, you don't have to first sit down teaching them the scale for someone to have any hope of understanding you.

What I'm saying though is it's not universal because that means there would be one universal meaning. For example, let's step outside the realm of music for a second. When I type the word GLASS what do you think of?

She does mean that music raises emotional pitch. When I reading your post, I was listening to post-punk visionaries Mission of Burma. I wonder what emotions Susanne Langer would feel in response to "That When I Read for my Revolver", probably not any sort of emotion that civilized folk are supposed to feel. Now I'm listening to the Orb's album Orbus TerrarVm, I'm not so sure she'd count ambient techno as being music at all.

In a day or two, I imagine this page will be in the top google picks for Susanne Langer and Punk Rock.

--C

You're right, music is open to interpretation, and everyone has different tastes and different moods. For this reason I don't think music is a universal language, in a 'clinical' sense, so to speak. But from a broader point of view, one could say that music is universal.

For example, imagine that you got 100 people in a room and played various pieces of music, and asked each person to write down how each piece made them feel. I think that there would be a common, majority intepretation. The melodic, flowing ballads would probably cause most people to write, "soothing", "peaceful", or "tranquil". Anthemic music might cause the majority to write words such as, "uplifting", "moving", or "inspiring." And weird or darker pieces, (lots of minor chords, sparodic off-key stuff, for example), would probably cause the majority to write, "depressing", "uncomfortable", or "irritating". In this sense, music might be universal. I'm not sure which context Langer's comment was made. Alison, do you have the actual quote?

When I type the word GLASS what do you think of?

A beer glass.

I understood what you were saying, but I am saying that I think you are misinterpreting what Langer's point was.
When I hear "glass" I sometimes think of a clear drink holder, and other times I think of ice cream (because I speak French and the words sound almost exactly alike). It is open to interpretation, like with all languages, including music. But again, the point was that you have to actually learn languages to understand them. Music is an innate thing. Although there are symbolic representations (sheet music) and people can become linguistic experts in it (play an instrument), all of us can speak it (humming) and all of us can make a correct interpretation of it (listen to it) because there is no one interpretation available. You may argue that this is not what universal means, but that is a semantic debate over what universal means. I interpret Langer's point differently to you. If you interpret it your way then yes, she's a nincompoop. If you interpret it my way, she has a point.