There is a multitude of points in the original post that could be debated, but most or all of them could be eliminated by the elemental question of the definition of "music," which is essentially highly subjective. Without being verbose or pedantic, over time humans have expanded/altered the traditional definition of "music" to include organizations of sounds and melodies that are, though heretofore discounted, considered dissonant or cacophonous, both meditated and 'spontaneously' occurring. Therefore, there is no concrete definition of music, rendering the original question somewhat obsolete.
I'm not sure if this is a consequence of the above rambling or a tangent, but SuchFriendsAreDangerous separates "music" and "language," and I'm not sure that's a correct presentation. In an oversimplified way of speaking (or typing), regardless of origin, complexity, or even vehicle, all music communicates something, therefore becoming a language in itself.
In an extremely rambling and simultaneously circuitous way of speaking, I suppose my point is that with the subjectivity of these terms, SuchFriendsAreDangerous's question is totally moot.
The End.
|