The fact that music has the power to stir emotions is never questioned. Does that mean that music can ’ move our soul’ or does it mean that it can actively engage us? Such responses, however, seem to have defied psychological explanation. No answers have been written to explain why it is music can cause a sudden rush of emotion and why it can have such an impact on our minds.
The term “Music” is actually a fluid term; what one may call music another may call simply noise. In turn this means that reactions elicited by music differ vastly depending upon a wide range of variables. Unconsciously, upon listening to music, associations begin to form, which often remain intact over long periods of time. Listening to ‘Rio’ by Duran Duran that you once listened to in childhood will trigger the same associations than when you first listened to it back in 1982. This so named “baggage” affects the emotions that you feel upon listening to music, perhaps causing memories and feelings to recur. Is this one explanation for music eliciting emotions or is it simply a description of the process?
The link between music and emotions is strongly established but somewhat overlooked in academia. Perhaps scholars avoid such a complex matter because there is simply no definite answer. With such fluid and subjective range of reactions to music, it is less than simple to define a cause and unjust to unify the vast range of reactions to music into one simpler term. And so the question remains to be answer of why music and emotion are so mutually exclusive.
(Source: notationnotes)
Perpetuum Mobile - Penguin Cafe Orchestra
(Source: calmdownyoungone)
Inspiration and motivation can often elude you. However it is how you overcome this challenge that helps define who you are.
Why is music used in film? Does is not perhaps distract from the action on screen? After all there are no soundtracks to every day life, so why do directors choose to have music in their movies? Are they not aiming to emulate reality on screen? And if so, why do they then choose to use non-diegetic music?
Gorbman’s ‘Unheard Melodies’ (1984) was the first book that attempted to explain this question. She proposed two theories, each with four main arguments. The first she coined ‘Practical’ uses of music in film.
Practical uses of music in film include:
The psychological argument of using music in film is questionable, since the images onscreen should already posses “life”, unless the director and actors are not fulfilling their job. However, psychologist Don Campbell published his research into the effects music has on the human brain, theorising what is now known as the ‘Mozart effect’. Campbell claims that listening to the works of Mozart increases many brain functions, including concentration and memory. This has been applied to all types of music, which may suggest why music is so utilised in cinema. If music helps to increase memory then perhaps the film will remain on the viewers mind, which may then lead to increased advertising through word of mouth and in turn the increase of dvd and other merchandise sales.
Music has accompanied Drama for centuries, believed to originate in Ancient Greece. From Aeschylus’ ‘Seven against Thebes’ to Tenessee Williams’ ‘The Rose Tattoo’, music has been a key element of creating the moods of tragedy and romance and everything in between. The continuation of this tradition in cinema, such as plots, character types and stereotypes, are being embraced; evidently in Frickman’s 2006 teen rom-com ‘She’s the Man’ which is based upon Shakespeare’s ‘Twelfth Night’.
However, there appears to be no physical evidence to suggest the reason why music accompanies drama, and certainly no evidence in which one can assume the reason music does so is due to heritage. Many traditions are rejected in modern cinema, with post-modern and art films deconstructing the mainstream conventions. It can, therefore, be argued cinema is not continuing in historic traditions.
Perhaps Pragmatic uses of music in film are more applicable to the days of early cinema and silent films, or is it possible to generalise to non-technical noises? Noise in a modern cinema; spectators rustling food, or the technical noise from the projection room, may perhaps be inaudible until periods of silence or quiet. Periods of silence during a film can often be purposeful however, used to create dramatic effects and often coupled with slow motion camera. This technique is often found in post-modern and social-realist films, since they attempt to create a strong sense of realism and reality and thus do not use music. Lang’s ‘M’ thriller in 1931 features no music at all, including during the opening and ending credits. Instead, every scene works to either complicate the initial problem or propel the story to engage and maintain audience attention. Hitchcock’s ‘The Birds’ has also no music, yet still grossed over eleven million dollars. However, is it accurate to say that Gorbman proposed that music is needed to replace silence? Or did she instead suggest that it is often used, but not needed to replace silence and periods of no dialogue?
