Interesting post over at Eric Beall’s Songwriting and Publishing blog. He talks in his post about songwriting as a form of communication, and contrasts this with music as a kind of personal expression.
He admits that songwriting very often begins as a form of personal expression, and this passage had me nodding in agreement:
In fact, when meeting with developing songwriters, the theme of personal expression comes up more often than anything else. There are lengthy explanations of the situation or relationship that brought the song about, then usually a long, introspective and hopefully in the end, cathartic lyric. Then finally, there is a defensive reaction to any suggestions or criticisms along the lines of “well, I’m not trying to be commercial– this is what I wanted to express”.
He then goes on to suggest that successful songwriters need to develop beyond that stage, to the point where they consider matters of craft, and the more objective ways of judging a songs success.
I agree with him here, but as I have written before, I’m not happy with this being called communication. I can write a song that causes us both to share an emotional journey. Calling that communication doesn’t quite work, communication need to be more specific than music can be.
I know it sounds like I’m splitting hairs, but I’d rather call music art, and accept that art is something different to self expression or communication.
What do you think?
And have you joined my mailing list? You get songwright articles sent to your inbox, you get access to my ebook on songwriting for the guitarist, and you don’t get any spam:
 |
 |
Related posts:
Yes you are splitting hairs. Successful art communicates. Hopefully it communicates what the artist intended but great art communicates infinitely more.
A work of art that does not communicate does not succeed. It fails. Be it a painting or a song. At least in my opinion.
I’m not sure T.C. I think art is something different.
Art evolved from a sort of pleasant misfiring of our ability to see patterns in the world. Any animal needs to be able to spot patterns, and it’s helpful to over compensate eg. If I see something out of the corner of my eye, it’s better to assume it’s a predator and run away. If it is, I’m safe, if it isn’t no harm done.
Art (might have) evolved from that pattern recognition so that we enjoy the act of understanding patterns. And I think that’s where it differs from communication. You can become lost in the patterns of a piece of music, take an enormous, almost physical satisfaction from seeing those patterns to the end.
But I’ve felt that from music that hasn’t communicated anything, in that it hasn’t been a specific emotion, it isn’t ‘happy’ or ‘sad’, and it has no specific lyrical message. All that has happened is that I’ve been swept up by the logic and patterns of the piece.
I’m not sure that communication is the right word for that.
Arguments can be made for and against both sides. I know that personally, I’ve written from both approaches. However, the music I record and perform live is there to communicate, whereas the expressive music is mostly for myself. But that has to do with my personality – I’m not the type to express myself and my feelings to strangers. I have no problems sharing ideas with them though.
There are two schools though, and I can appreciate both.
I know what you mean, Nolan. It definitely depends on the context that you’re composing for. “I’m not the type to express myself and my feelings to strangers.” – Me too. I think often people who are naturally introverted find artistic ways of expressing themselves.
What do you think about my idea that communication isn’t quite the right word for this?