music as a language

While language is usually spoken, written or signaled with words, there doesn’t seem to be a reason why music cannot be a language. It doesn’t have grammatical syntax, but there is structure — in art, there are “words” that logically follow others; in music, notes & chord progressions (a “third” to an “inverted fifth” of a scale); in dance, there are logical sequences (“prep” steps to a jump or turn); in art, there are color combinations & color theory (contrasting colors, making shadows with contrasts). In art there are rights & wrongs — the same way that in language you can’t have double negatives — and that’s important because syntax is what, some think, sets apart spoken/written language and art. Also, art skills & language aren’t natural, they have to be learned. While language is somewhat innate (learning acquisition device, Chomsky), so is art — people innately pick up on art skills as they are exposed to them without being sat down & taught.

In terms of original thought and the question of “who is the artist,” it’s very much the creator of the work who is the artist, but a “good” artist creates a piece that interests the viewer enough to spark a dialogue between artwork & viewer. Each person has a different perception so not every piece will call out, or speak (if you will) to every viewer. If it’s a recreation of a piece, you can approach it in the same way you would approach writing a paper; obviously it’s a new take on an idea otherwise it would just be plagiarism, but you still reference previous thinkers/writers in citations. It’s clear that no reproduction piece would be of any fame or interest if it were the exact same thing done in the same way with the same use of color or costumes or angles or brush strokes; each creator brings with him or her something new to an already existing piece, making him or her an artist.

sarah.