Music/Math

"The mathematician is interested in forms for their own sake, in their own
implications,apart from any realization in a particular medium or from any
particular communicative purpose. He may choose to analyze music and even
have gifts for doing so; but from them mathematical point of view, music is
just another pattern. For the musician, however, the patterned elements
must appear in sounds; and they are finally and firmly put together in
certain ways not by virtue of formal consideration, but because they have
expressive power and effects."

This quote is by Howard Gardner from his book on multiple intelligences:
Frames of Mind. I'm doing a report for a graduate class in emotional
illness intended as a minority report on the M.I. theory. I've lots to say, but
thought I would open this to the list first. Any takers?

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Afmmjr@... wrote:
>

> This quote is by Howard Gardner from his book on multiple intelligences:
> Frames of Mind. I'm doing a report for a graduate class in emotional
> illness intended as a minority report on the M.I. theory. I've lots to say, but
> thought I would open this to the list first. Any takers?

The quote assumes lovers of music and mathematicians, and even more composers of music and mathematicians, represent disjoint sets. Why?

Gene:
The quote assumes lovers of music and mathematicians, and even more
composers of music and mathematicians, represent disjoint sets. Why?

There are actually 8 different intelligences (though he has suggested it
might go up to 7000 intelligences) in a human. Gardner defined intelligence
as either culturally recognized or as a product that has recognized value.
These are the 8:

Music
Verbal
Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Spatial
Natural
Math
Kinesthetic
Their not disjoint sets because they blend; to his thinking each human
being blends these intelligences in differing proportions. Reading this
math/music reference I thought to post it to the List for possible comment. Any
takers?

Nevertheless the quote certainly does segregate "mathmeticians" and "musicians". This is caste-system tripe. Not counting the obvious objection that there are people who are clearly "both", so much for segregation, there's also the fact that for all I know, solving a thorny equation is as pleasurable to some, in a different way, as a roll in the doughnut batter with the hod-carrier's daughter would be to others.

Take a look at what is really going on around us. Turn on the radio: talk about patterns! There's almost nothing but very simple patterns, and extremely strict ones at that. And what happens if you break these patterns? Why, a great number of people will say you're being "cerebral" and your music is "intellectual" and "mathmatical". Black is white! Almost every chump I've come across whining about effect and expression listens almost exclusively to violently limited 4/4 12-tET pattern-bound music. Expression my ass, more like celebrating the rainbow of colors you can paint a policemen's baton.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Afmmjr@... wrote:
>
>
> Gene:
> The quote assumes lovers of music and mathematicians, and even more
> composers of music and mathematicians, represent disjoint sets. Why?
>
>
> There are actually 8 different intelligences (though he has suggested it
> might go up to 7000 intelligences) in a human. Gardner defined intelligence
> as either culturally recognized or as a product that has recognized value.
> These are the 8:
>
> Music
> Verbal
> Intrapersonal
> Interpersonal
> Spatial
> Natural
> Math
> Kinesthetic
> Their not disjoint sets because they blend; to his thinking each human
> being blends these intelligences in differing proportions. Reading this
> math/music reference I thought to post it to the List for possible comment. Any
> takers?
>