The Acoustics of Existence

What is music? Is it listening, or is it singing? Is it feeling, or the exuberance of emotions? Who makes music, who plays it, who sings it, who listens to it? Where do musicians come from and where do they go, why does their place and value within society shift according to geography? Is it grammar? Can music be known without knowing language? Is it culture, or is it a lack thereof? In this site, where I intend to write about various topics concerning music, I wanted to say "hello" with a title such as this. Undoubtedly, there is no single answer to the question of what music is; it is a vast, comprehensive subject that a person could write about endlessly; it encompasses a literature of technique and emotion—harmony, expression, sound, instrument, melody, rhythm, self-expression, communication, ease, freshness, happiness, and sentiment. Very well. What is music to you?

Music is a major factor in our lives in sociological, psychological, and individual terms. Music is an idea, motivation, and identity; it is ideology, a stance, resistance. It is strength and power during times when one grapples with the hardships of life. In the era we live in, it exists to guide people toward art under the name of acquiring a "hobby," and thereby to cultivate healthy individuals and, in turn, healthy societies. Experts say as much. Indeed, the people who commit the fewest crimes are artists.

The word 'müzik' (music) has passed into our language and indeed into all languages from the French word "musique." In mythology, the word "Mus" or "Mousa" refers to the goddess of art, the muse, and the suffix "ique" conveys a sense of belonging. The word emerged from the combination of these two terms. Just like the connections and roots of words, people forge connections and bonds with music, thereby distancing themselves from stress, finding motivation for what they must do in daily life, and—sometimes without even being conscious of what they hear—they catch the sound of music everywhere. Music, without a doubt, draws people closer, makes them feel good, and just as it makes them feel good, it enables us to purge dark emotions by listening to music and singing the songs we love. In other words, it is sometimes a friend, sometimes a companion in grief. Every human's relationship with music is unique. For instance, children are happy when they sing songs with applause in the games they play; they laugh, for the exuberance of rhythm feels good. Music is play for children. Children do not have sad songs. That is to say, seeking meaning in music at all times and constantly burdening music with meaning is profoundly wrong and misleading. Music is the moment; it is memories.

Yaşar Kemal described the fact that music is everywhere and in everything with these words: "A folk song is heard... It is one way in the night, another in the day. If a child sings it, it has a different taste; if a woman sings it... If a youth sings it, it becomes one way, if an elder sings it... If it is sung on the mountain, it is one way; on the plain, in the forest, on the sea, it is another. They are all in distinct tastes. It is one way in the morning, another at noon, in the afternoon, and at evening."

We cannot separate music from language. Without knowing the language, knowing and understanding music becomes difficult, and performing it is an entirely separate matter in itself. Sometimes we may listen to music in languages we do not know; we might even enjoy it, or it might even convey its emotion; yet, in the end, we return to the songs in our mother tongue, we take refuge in them. This holds a massive share, particularly in vocal music; instrumental music is freer in this regard.

Many analyses have been conducted regarding music, and various subjects have been addressed in thick-bound books—it would be misplaced to enter into those details here—but if we set out from these analyses, it is impossible to keep music separate from technology under current conditions. Because in our rapidly changing age, music, too, changes swiftly alongside technology. Alongside these advancements, certain tasks previously done by human hand began to be done with technological tools; musicians lost their jobs, those tasks vanished, and manual labour transformed into technological "labour". In this context, there is one more vital point: the concepts of artist and celebrity have become conflated due to the development of technology; whether a singer possesses a voice or not is neither cared about nor known, for devices have been produced that even correct the vocals, and once you become a celebrity, it has become easy to be a singer. Moreover, men and women have been homogenised, presented to the market through physical shows rather than voice. The vast majority took part in this trend. They knew the package prepared for them and, regrettably, ignored the danger of consumption for the sake of their individual comfort, supporting this degradation.

Let us arrive at another subject, the debate of whether music belongs most to "the people" or should be made for the people. What do you think the answer to this question is? Why is music for the people? Perhaps it is not; can we say it is for the listener? This might create an aesthetic or beauty in the name of sharing, but this is the individual's preference; in other words, the composer's purpose, stance, and the music they offer determine the answer to this question; no definitive judgement is correct. This debate stretches from individuality to communalism; yet there is only one truth, and that is preference. Music is for individuals and for societies. People and societies have expectations of musicians and the musical performers they listen to and love. They criticise easily, love quickly, even—though it is a very dangerous state of emotion—worship them, yet the moment they experience a disagreement of opinion, they drop them from favour and end it in their heart. There is such a thin line between the listener and the artist. Is this not the handicap of the consumer age? To love easily, to consume easily.

Undoubtedly, music is not the monopoly of anyone. Even if it is not so in the popular world, productions that are permanent have made themselves known throughout the generations. The fact that we are living in a consumer age does not mean that production will vanish due to populism; every era carries what is essential within itself into the future, and again, the works that will remain are those poured out with knowledge, labour, and emotion. Because nature has a cycle; not even humanity has the power to destroy it. Over centuries, by carrying the songs of their regions, countries, and villages from tongue to tongue, and by living and enriching their cultures despite all conditions, people have demonstrated the indispensable place of art within cultures.

What else is music? Music is being collective. It is sharing, it is dividing. It has the power to bring thousands, millions together, from national politics to public concerts, to make them sing songs in one voice, and to experience a shared exuberance. It is not mere talent; it is the work of labour and intellect. There are those who give a lifetime to be able to play an instrument with justice; the people I mention are certainly not those who know three chords and think they play an instrument.

Music is class; styles and consciousness change according to class. It is an individual act, repeated every day. In capitalist societies, music has fallen into the hands of large corporations and has been commodified. We know and love "artists" only as much as they are presented to us, and we know they represent a culture or a language only to the extent that it is presented to us. In other words, what is seen is not always sincere, because it is a market directed by great powers. So much so that systems divided the people, and marketeers divided music; they separated artists into languages, and music into styles. People's consciousness has been so restricted that they cannot go beyond sentences like "That one sings in Turkish, this one in Kurdish," "I sing in Armenian," "That one sings pop, pfft." Artists have also started to live in groups. However, music is, of course, language and geography. For this reason, it is often performed in the mother tongue; very few people sing in a language that is not their own, and this is often a marketing technique at the behest of the industry. Adorno clearly expresses this situation with these words: "The role music assumes in the social process is entirely a commodity role; its value is its value in the market... When the capitalist process completely draws music production and consumption into itself, the alienation between music and people also reaches completion." (Adorno, Music Writings, p. 48).

Let us come to other fields of music... music is performance, and performance is sharing. In this context, music brings the listener and the musician together; this is what the musician also needs—they are nourished by this and can continue to produce. Performance also has its difficulties. Especially if one is to re-adapt a work that has been performed before, one must be careful; if it is not presented to the listener in the right way, it can lead to a reaction and, as I mentioned above, can end the relationship between the listener and the artist, which hangs by a thread.

In conclusion, music is everywhere and in everything. Its colour changes according to the place where music exists, and if there is music within a place, that place also changes according to the music. Music also changes the human being. The musical style and artists you listen to are important. Because not every music presented to people is developmental. In short, do not let music be missing from your lives; do not give up on listening to a bit of music every day, singing songs, or dancing. Music is a cure; do not remain without a cure.