What a powerful statement it is to say that music makes people angry. As a first year graduate student in training to be a music therapist, many of my personal discussions and thoughts go into discovering which music makes people happy and empowered as tools for overall positive well being. However, Simon Frith's article, "Why does music make people so cross?" speaks to the opposite.
Music has a way of breaching cultural, racial, sexual and generational boundaries. It is valued for its ability to speak to us on a personal level. However, as Frith points out, directed and passionate lyrics must oppress one group or person in order to empower another. Is this what provoked the East Coast- West Coat hip-hop rivalry in the early 1990s that took the lives of musicians 2Pac and the Notorious B.I.G.? Musicians seem to thrive in the world of pop music, many times, out of pure controversy. Controversy is the essence of saying that which is taboo. We all have felt and researched endlessly that music can impact us in a positive way. But is there any space for music therapy, which explores music that leaves us in a state of unrest? Is there any benefit to stirring up anger in our clients as music therapists? In her book, Essays on Analytical Music Therapy, Mary Priestly (1994) brings to our attention the fact that many times these angry parts of our clients are underdeveloped or unrecognized.
Frith explores the technical aspects of music that will leave a listener angry. His examples only work for listeners that have a certain level of expertise or familiarity with the specific piece or genre performed or recorded. For example, coming from a classical background as an opera singer, I would feel offended to hear a male perform an aria intended for a female or a fifteen year old girl try to sing "Vissi D'Arte" from Tosca by Puccini. Both of these attempts to create these classical masterpieces would be dishonorable to the composer's intentions and the integrity of the work. However, if I heard a re-make of Metallica's "Enter Sandman" by a group of female singers or re-formatted for an orchestra I would feel indifferent. My point is, although Frith skirts around the issue of an individual's relationship to the music, he fails to explore the essential need for there to be a pre-determined bond between person and genre or song for anger to be provoked. This bond enables the listener to become angry due to the "ethical shortcomings" of the song as opposed to the technical, as the provoked anger would not exist without musical knowledge.
Frith also discusses how attending a live performance might lend itself to making an audience member angry due to the person feeling that the musician is "selling out," cheating by using recorded music, lip syncing, or worse, is just not prepared. I agree, that sometimes as a listener and attending concerts of favorite musicians, I have felt angered by the fact that the musicians sounds different live. Many times, when I have fallen in love with a song and know all if its idiosyncrasies, hearing a descending phrase instead of an ascending one or a harmony I was not accustomed to may ruin my experience or expectation of what the piece is "supposed" to sound like. To tie this back into Frith's point, this is because the music has spoken to me on an emotional level and has empowered me in a certain way. Changing the song may change the listener's sense of control.
Next is the issue of angry music. Music that makes us angry because in a technical or theoretical sense, it is composed to be harsh, brash and filled with rage. Such techniques used by musicians can be loudness, minor keys, high pitches, unresolved chords or structures, and tempos that edge us forward. Other techniques that Frith does not mention could also be suspensions, half cadences, deceptive cadences, or reverse picardy thirds. Open fifths can create a sense of emptiness and alberti bass or broken chords can create feelings of unrest such as in Schubert's "Gretchen am Spinnrade." The constant forward motion of the bass line can illustrate racing thoughts or sentiments.
One of the most important points of Frith's paper is that listening to angry music does not correlate to experiencing real anger. Perhaps this is because listening to angry music puts us in the role of the performer. We are more prone to identify with the emotion of anger than to feel subject of someone else's anger through music. As Frith points out, this makes us feel excited and energized as listeners. What actually makes us angry as listeners is hearing music that is tailored towards making the listener feel cheated. Surprisingly, this is generally mellow in sound, sarcastic in lyric content and contains an undertone fueling protest against political forces.
I would like to see further exploration on the issues that Frith brings to our attention. How can we use anger to benefit our clients? What kind of music would be the most effective? Music that provokes empowerment or energy because it is overtly aggressive or music that is subtle in its messages of oppressed relatable individuals? With this information being brought to our attention as future or current clinicians, I believe it is important to discover how it can be used as a tool to further coping skills in an array of client populations. After all, as Bruscia in Defining Music Therapy (1998) explains, health is a "holistic condition" (p. 78). Threat to overall health includes discrepancies in physical well-being as well as emotional and mental state. If we fail to address all avenues for emotional experience and expression through music in therapy, we risk missing the possible musical facet that could unleash a plethora of emotion waiting to be navigated.
Bruscia, K.E. (1998). Defining music therapy (2nd ed.). Gilsum, NH: Barcelona Publishers.
Priestly, M. (1994). Essays on analytical music therapy. Gilsum, NH: Barcelona Publishers.
What first drew me into this article were the explanations of how various individuals have used music to provoke angry images and thoughts in others. While I have never considered the fact that classical music could be used to drive teens out of a subway station, I especially would not have assumed that the U.S. army has used music as an interrogation technique. Reading this reminded me of the movie and book, “A Clockwork Orange”, and how frightening it is to see something we base our lives around as a form of torture. During this book/movie, music is played during scenes of violence and conditions a murderer to become sick whenever he thinks of becoming violent or sexual in any form. Also, anytime he heard a certain symphony he would experience deep turmoil. I find myself that I do not find these real life or fictional techniques tasteful, since I generally don’t associate music as having a negative connotation. I agreed with Frith when he stated that this goes against what we are taught from day one of our profession, that music is a inherently good thing. I believe it also goes against everything we stand and fight for in relation to music therapy. As therapists we are trying to use music to promote wellness through music. However, these real life and fictional stories use music to promote negative characteristics in people, which I find unfortunate and sad. I do not like to see or think about such a beautiful tool’s power manipulated negatively.
Frith presents another interesting concept in his writing, that music often has the power to make people cross. While we do not put much thought into it, music does seem to have a quality that can drive people to anger. Even in ancient music, certain modes were believed to promote poor conduct and unhealthy lifestyles. Frith presents a bill that was presented to the Parliament called Pipedown. Reading about these angry individuals who believed it was their right to have silence in public places made something clear to me: these people did not like the majority of the music that was being played. While there are some people who dislike music, I have found this to be very rare. I am sure if the supporters of this bill had their favorite artists playing in malls and restaurants every day they would not complain. This bill was not about a personal invasion of privacy; It was about a group of individuals who did not identify and relate to a certain genre of music. I do not think this bill presents a valid argument, since noises of all kinds can be offensive to people. We have all been in situations in which we have rather not have heard a certain conversation and the subject matter within it. However, just because this bothers us we can’t propose a bill for public silence. A popular quote arose in my mind when reading this argument:
“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”
Though this could easily have been written by someone in our modern day, it was written by Socrates. Ever since ancient times, people have had trouble relating to generations and styles that are different from their own. In terms of music, however, even people in the same generation can enjoy completely oppositional styles and genres. Best friends and family can find one another’s music inferior to theirs. Frith presents an idea that I agree with, the idea that the music’s style and genre is not actually what provokes certain peoples’ anger with music- it’s the idea of identity and what music your being relates to.
An interesting concept I have learned through psychology is that when we dislike certain qualities in someone, it is because those qualities actually exist inside of us and our unconscious is trying to fight them. I believe this can be related to dislike of certain genres or styles of music. On these terms, we should try not to jump to conclusions and say to someone, “Can you turn this off? I really hate this song.” Instead, we can use this dislike as a learning tool for our personal growth and examine why we (and our clients) associate negativity with certain styles of music.
I believe that Frith presents a very intriguing and thought provoking article. I do agree with the two authors before me, however, when they state they wish that he would have delved further into relating the concept of musical hatred into music therapy. He also did not present reasons for why the human connects on a deeper level with certain styles of music, and what this process entails. I would have enjoyed to hear him state some more of his opinions on this subject.
The relationship between anger and music is often overlooked by music therapists. Like Melanie Lazar mentioned in her response, much of our study of music focuses on its positive aspects, such as its usefulness for improving mood or promoting relaxation. The idea that music can be threatening, dangerous, and even a “weapon,” is not one that receives a lot of consideration in the field of music therapy. As therapists, we often think in terms of minimizing negative emotions, including anger. However, therapists must be prepared to encounter great amounts of negative emotion in their work, and it is important that the “darker” connections between music and emotion be considered.
Frith begins his article by distinguishing between anger at music and anger in music. The majority of anger at music, he argues, comes from the feeling that one’s “own” music has been corrupted. For example, people often become upset when they feel that the meaning has been stripped from one of their favorite pieces of music through commercialization. Lazar clarifies in her response that in order for this to happen, a “personal bond” must exist between the listener and the music. Like her, I think Frith’s article could have benefited from further exploration of this concept. The article (along with music therapy in general) operates from the assumption that the majority of people form intense bonds with music, but it does not account for why this phenomenon occurs. What in particular about music allows us to feel so deeply connected with another individual’s art that we experience genuine upset and personal insult when we feel it has been contaminated? Music appears unique (in contrast with other forms of media such as television or movies) in its ability to transcend entertainment and become a means for self-expression and part of our identity.
The second part of the article, which covered “angry music,” seemed underdeveloped in comparison with the first, especially when considering its relevance to music therapy. Frith compares the experiences of listening to angry music and experiencing anger and points out how they differ. The actual experience of anger usually involves feelings of upset, fear, and loss of control, while the musical experience of anger is cathartic, expressive, and possibly even enjoyable. This has major implications for music therapy; with “angry music,” there is the potential for us to channel anger and all of its negative attributes into a positive, empowering experience. Considering that this article was written for a music therapy journal, it surprised me that there was no discussion of the experience of anger in music therapy sessions. Lazar asks in her response if there can be “benefit to stirring up anger in our clients.” To me, it is obvious that anger has its place in therapy. Many clients, even if it is not their primary reason for seeking therapy, experience anger that they may wish to express during a session. Music has the benefit of being a socially appropriate outlet for doing so. Music therapy (when contrasted with traditional “talk” therapy) seems particularly well-suited for the therapeutic exploration of anger.
Mary Priestly shares this viewpoint in her book, Essays on Analytical Music Therapy. She details a therapist’s attempt to have a client express anger using music: “If she could use this emotion in a controlled setting and allow this chaotic area of the psyche to be expressed and shared, she would be well on the way to losing her unpleasant symptom and using her aggression constructively.” Following this example, much of what I have encountered concerning anger in music therapy usually involves encouraging a client to improvise or compose their own music in order to communicate anger. In contrast, most of the musical anger I have experienced or witnessed outside of a music therapy context involves listening to others’ music. In general, the use of prerecorded music seems to be neglected in music therapy, despite its likely usefulness in exploring anger with clients. Frith acknowledges this when he discusses the positive impact of identifying as a listener with a performer’s anger. In my opinion, the “shared emotion” aspect of relating to another’s anger as a listener, intensified by the “personal bond” one may have with the music, may provide stronger therapeutic effects than creating one’s own music.
I believe that the relationship between anger and music remains underexplored, and more research must be done on this relationship and how to interact with it in a therapeutic context. In order to become effective therapists, it is necessary that we are comfortable and knowledgeable when it comes to exploring anger. Although Frith’s article provided a solid breakdown of the various ways in which anger relates to music, further exploration of this topic is needed. In particular, music therapists could benefit from the availability of more information on the use of “angry music” (both improvised and prerecorded) in sessions.
References
Frith, Simon (2008). Why Does Music Make People so Cross?. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy. Retrieved November 27, 2009, from https://normt.uib.no/index.php/voices/article/view/427/351
Lazar, Melanie (2008). Response to “Why Does Music Make People so Cross?” [Contribution to Moderated Discussions] Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy. Retrieved from http://voices.no/?q=node/add/comment/339
Priestly, M. (1994). Essays on analytical music therapy. Gilsum, NH: Barcelona Publishers.