On the shoulder of giants
I got very frustrated as I tried (unsuccessfully) to work on my thesis yesterday. Every point I started to write, I thought, "I need to address this other point first." So I'd start to write that, and then find, "I need to address the first point first." The chicken and the egg. And though I stayed at my computer for 2 hours, I didn't have anything of merit at the end of that time. I finally came to the point where I realized the first step was to identify what part of music elicits emotion in people. When I couldn't just sit down and write it out, I got frustrated.
So, today, that was my starting point. I was going to find out, if not what elicits emotion, at least where I need to look. As I was researching, I found out that not only is there an entire journal of "Psychology of Music," I also have full access to it on the web through the U's library! I ended up printing out about 15 articles on emotion and music. As I read them, I realized the question I was wrestling with is one that music psychologists have been wrestling with formally since at least 1914, and to which there's still no good answer.
I came away with two major pieces of info at the end of the day
Number 1: Emotional response to music is actually two-pronged. First, there's the emotion of "aesthetic emotion," I.e., the feeling you get when enjoying the experience of getting absorbed in art. This is separate from the other kind of emotion, which is the emotion of the piece of music or art itself. I think of it as the "sad movie" effect: you appreciate and are in awe of the masterful use of the movie medium (the aesthetic emotion), even though the emotions you leave the theatre with from the content of the movie and its intent are essentially negative. I often say, "I'm glad I saw it, but I wouldn't want to see it again." That's the two-pronged emotional experience of art.
This point was a major "AHA!"
Number 2: An individual's responses to art will be unique.
This point was a "Duh!" However, it's good to have quantifiable research to quote.
The bigger point, though, was from a study that tracked musicians' and non-musicians' responses to music. Those who lack musical training are more prone to be in tune with music's intrinsic effects, i.e., with emotions that music stirs in them that they can't explain. Musicians tend to be more self-referential when reacting to music, that is, reacting extrinsically; they imagine themselves in the situation of making music, recall music-making they have done, or recognize information related to the piece. Though they still react intrinsically, they are more prone to be emotional about the extrinsic stuff around the music than non-musicians are.
This makes sense, and is beginning to form a foundation for my thesis. Yay!
So, today, that was my starting point. I was going to find out, if not what elicits emotion, at least where I need to look. As I was researching, I found out that not only is there an entire journal of "Psychology of Music," I also have full access to it on the web through the U's library! I ended up printing out about 15 articles on emotion and music. As I read them, I realized the question I was wrestling with is one that music psychologists have been wrestling with formally since at least 1914, and to which there's still no good answer.
I came away with two major pieces of info at the end of the day
Number 1: Emotional response to music is actually two-pronged. First, there's the emotion of "aesthetic emotion," I.e., the feeling you get when enjoying the experience of getting absorbed in art. This is separate from the other kind of emotion, which is the emotion of the piece of music or art itself. I think of it as the "sad movie" effect: you appreciate and are in awe of the masterful use of the movie medium (the aesthetic emotion), even though the emotions you leave the theatre with from the content of the movie and its intent are essentially negative. I often say, "I'm glad I saw it, but I wouldn't want to see it again." That's the two-pronged emotional experience of art.
This point was a major "AHA!"
Number 2: An individual's responses to art will be unique.
This point was a "Duh!" However, it's good to have quantifiable research to quote.
The bigger point, though, was from a study that tracked musicians' and non-musicians' responses to music. Those who lack musical training are more prone to be in tune with music's intrinsic effects, i.e., with emotions that music stirs in them that they can't explain. Musicians tend to be more self-referential when reacting to music, that is, reacting extrinsically; they imagine themselves in the situation of making music, recall music-making they have done, or recognize information related to the piece. Though they still react intrinsically, they are more prone to be emotional about the extrinsic stuff around the music than non-musicians are.
This makes sense, and is beginning to form a foundation for my thesis. Yay!