What Is Not "Normal Non-music?" (2005)

As Milton Babbitt said, "There is no such thing as 'serious' and 'popular' music. There is only music whose title begins with the letter 'X,' and music whose title does not." While Babbitt is correct that an absolute classification of "weird" and "music" cannot be reached, a categorization can be determined on a personal level. As well, because humans share common traits and general experiences as a species, the majority of humans could easily find the same thing both weird and music. Granting that there will always be exceptions to any classification, it is not pointless nor hopeless to attempt to find a definition of the term "weird music," and, by dividing it into two terms and employing backwards reasoning, I intend to do so.

First, I will begin by defining "normal," which I will use as the opposite of "weird." Before going further, I should note that any discussion about the terms "weird" and "normal" or "music" and "not music" must invariably consider both; the backwards approach is mostly a mind set. To be normal is to be expected or, more specifically, to be within the realm of our everyday encounters and interactions with the world. Because of the cultural environments in which humans develop, expectations arise for what food tastes like, how people talk, how a person should act, and so on. For instance, I think going sledding in January is "normal," whereas going to the beach in January is "weird." But, in Hawai´i, sledding any time is "weird" and going to the beach in January is quite "normal." This being said, it can be drawn analogously that this same phenomenon applies to music. Some types of African music with unwritten, irregular meters seem "weird" to any westerner, but the same is true of some African opinions of western music. In sum, "weird" is anything that deviates from one's expectations which come from personal, everyday experiences – the more it deviates from expectation, the "weirder" it is.

Second, I must define music because something could still be weird and not music. Again, though, I will take the backwards approach by first defining what is not music. Something is not music when it is not primarily listened to. Let me illustrate with a concrete example. Driving on the highway is not music. Listening to driving on a highway is. Due to the nature of highways and the amount of stress they can withstand, assuming one is traveling at a constant pace (and, therefore, not within a 50-mile radius of Chicago), the breaks in the road surface occur quite regularly and one can quickly find a beat as the shocks of the car thud on each fault in the pavement. If the "thud" sound is the focus, all of a sudden, the trip has a musical accompaniment. More than once, I have found myself not only tapping my foot along with but suddenly sticking a "popular" (another subjective word) melody on top of the thuds. Once one accepts this as music, suddenly speeding up and slowing down become accelerandi and ritardandi. Some bumps are larger, and therefore accent their notes. And as for the cracks that do not fit in with the pulse? I think of them as highly syncopated rhythms. For those parts of newly-paved, crackless highway, just remember that some of the tensest moments and biggest reliefs in already-accepted music come from silence. With all of these musical characteristics suddenly being attributed to a "non-musical" event, it is a challenge to claim that it is not music. To quote John Cage, "everything we do is music, or can become music through the use of microphones" (qtd. in Kostelanetz 70). Cage cites the use of microphones so as to include normally inaudible sounds (such as the vibrations produced by an inanimate object); but, more importantly, where there are microphones there are people using their ears more than any other sense. Using the driving example and Cage's quote, a definition of "music" can be derived. "Music" is anything where the primary focus is listening and not one of theother four senses.

Now the big moment has arrived: the synthesis of "weird" and "music." Using the definitions from above, "weird music" is any event "that deviates from one's personal, everyday experience. . .where the primary focus is listening." For one final example, I return to Cage. His composition 4'33" is, in a way, the ultimate example of weird music. Doubtlessly, some people do not listen to his piece, and, therefore, it is not music to them. Those who do listen, though, experience it is as music because they are primarily listening. To almost anyone, 4'33" is weird, and, to many, it is both weird and music. However, it should be noted that a small percentage of the population finds Cage's composition normal: Cage scholars, most people who have seen or performed 4'33" before, and others familiar with the school of thought surrounding Cage and his colleagues' work. They are the lucky Hawai´ians strolling down the beaches on New Years Day. And so it seems that, oddly enough, weird music turns out to be both absolute – on the individual level – and subjective – on a societal level. So just listen to this: "isn't that weird?"

Was that just weird music?

Bibliography

Babbitt, Milton. "Who Cares if You Listen?" Palestrant Music Engraving. 5 Dec. 2005. http://www.palestrant.com/babbitt.html.

Kostelanetz, Richard. Conversing with Cage. London: Routledge, 2003.