In retrospect, DeNora describes how music could be utilized as a “technology of self” (aiding to the benefits of our daily functions) or morph into becoming instrumental to our identities. We allow music to change our beings as we become invigorated in the entire “action of music” or “musicking” as Small would believe. Integrating their two concepts: music is less of an object and more of a wholesome experience for the listener and performer; afterall, how could a musician hold any power if no one hears their music? Because of this interaction with music we find ourselves incessantly creating new ways music can do more for us. This driving force may cause true “music lovers” to begin some sort of obsession. And so I propose that when taking into account that music is a “competing stimulus,” there exist …show more content…
Essentially, all music is composed of a few non-neglectable components that separate music from noise or sound. One of these components is melody. While I will not provoke the music debate of what qualifies as melodic, harmonic, both, or neither - I will investigate how the component of melody affects the neurological interactions and provocation of the brain. Tan, Pfordresher, and Harre argue that melody is a mixture between pitch, interval, melodic contour, harmonies (as a inextricable layer to melody), key, and the perceptual organization of melodies (76). From a medclinal perspective, as we listen to these different subsections of melody we process them each individually and begin to amalgamate into a cohesive whole. They compare the process to obtaining “loose beads, which listeners thread together in strands” in order to form the most wholesome experience (77). When adding an abundance of“complicated networking” the listener does not always gain a well-rounded listen. In order to process all neurological effects of a particular melody we must learn how to hear and listen to all the foundations of the musical