The “Cultural Influence” Myth

[fundrazor]

There is, of course, as in everything else, a "crossover" music - I am referring of course to the great Le Petomane, a Victorian music hall performer who could fart at will and was particularly well known for his rendition of La Marseillaise.

What all of the contributors have also forgotten is that it is a well known and researched fact that foetuses respond to music whilst in the womb and that therefore prior to birth they have been subject to a myriad of cultural influences.

There can be no other explanation for the continued popularity of the polka in the mid-west or punk music anywhere.

[chckn8r]

I'm not really pushing my kids into any style or type of music at all - and they get an earful of just about every and any style with me in the house.

My eldest (7.5) doesn't really have a burning interest in music - he enjoys it, but doesn't seek it out. He's a sports nut and academic (I thought it was an oxymoron as well...). Our middle child (4.5) seems to really like listening and participating in music - especially the percussive participation. And our littlest one 3 seems to love singing and dancing to music, but nothing beyond that yet.

We'll see what develops out of all of them as I'm like a couple of folks on this thread. I came from a family of non-musicians - not even in the extended family. My dad plays the radio really well. I grew up with very little music being played for me - when it was, it was '60's folk. I took piano lessons starting at 5 and kept going with it 'cause I liked it.

In terms of styles, I was a typical '80's kid - liked Police, Tears for Fears, etc. I secretly listened to other mainstream music outside of the "accepted" genres by my peers like Metal (Van Halen, Metallica, Motley Crue) and the alternative side (Smiths, Cure, etc...), so I guess I was into variety even back then. It wasn't until I went to music school that I got exposed to non-mainstream stuff like jazz and progressive rock - that's where my acceptance of a wide variety of music styles took off...

So, given my background and what I've read here, I'm pretty convinced that, yes, NATURE is the predominant driver in enjoyment of and participation in music, but I'm not convinced that the "talent" reveals itself at any particular point in a person's life.

Cheers, D

[stevel]

Originally Posted by chckn8r

I'm pretty convinced that, yes, NATURE is the predominant driver in enjoyment of and participation in music,
Cheers, D

Yes, but cultural influence is usually a limiter - or a "decision-maker". How many people each day have never heard any atonal music, but, hear the word "atonal" and immediately form negative connotations about it - our language - independent of music - automatically guides us to understand that "a-" words have a negative connotation (note, there are always going to be some who do the exact opposite - grab on to it because it is "a-" something, but they're doing it for cultural reasons too).

So my point is, while "NATURE is the predominant driver in enjoyment of and participation in music", CULTURE is as much a player in what people consciously decide they like.

It is a great person that can overcome their cultural biases and follow their nature. It is an even greater person that can overcome their nature - but then there's the story about the scorpion and the turtle :-).

Steve

[chckn8r]

Originally Posted by stevel

So my point is, while "NATURE is the predominant driver in enjoyment of and participation in music", CULTURE is as much a player in what people consciously decide they like.

Oh - totally agree! Music, is much like language (although, our popular western culture doesn't quite view it as more than an entertainment option) and very young children imprint that which is introduced to them through their culture. Take for example, music from India and the middle east with micro-tonal scales. Although, "foreign" (or atonal if you will) sounding to us, children who have been exposed to those scales do not find them as such - much like language, they "understand" that genre of music.

So yes, I agree, that there is some "nurturing" aspect upon which a person bases their likes and dislikes of music, but as you pointed out, there is nature at play regarding the level at which an individual participates in the art.

Originally Posted by stevel

but then there's the story about the scorpion and the turtle :-).

That scorpion had some issues I'm thinking...

D

[Thorolf]

Originally Posted by chckn8r

Take for example, music from India and the middle east with micro-tonal scales. Although, "foreign" (or atonal if you will) sounding to us, children who have been exposed to those scales do not find them as such - much like language, they "understand" that genre of music.

Which brings me full circle to my point: Just the way children aren’t lingually “calibrated” for any language @ birth, and can learn *any* language as their mother tongue, they are generally receptive (or not!) to *any* ‘language’ of music that can be presented to them… and if given the opportunity to choose, they might choose just anything to go with their nature… and they actually do, to my experience. But when the exposure to music reaches linguistic proportions; this is the “cultural influence” of course.

I was very lucky as a kid: My parents let me ruin their record collection for my listening pleasure from the age of 3 or 4; I could listen to folk music from all over the world, western or other classical music, many aspects of pop culture… you name it! So my ‘linguistic’ exposure to music was extremely broad from the outset, and I know that the exposure was chosen by myself, to a great extent. In general before the general cultural peer pressure hit me. And by that time, I suppose it was already too late. I had had the chance to choose to be me. And I never could seem to aquire the mass culture for what it seemed to be to everybody else.



Regards