This is for my Architecture of Music II class. Part 2 of 3 of the midterm.

Try to imagine what the sonic experience is like without associated meaning.

  1. Do womb sounds take on any associated meaning?

    The womb is awash with sounds, particularly from the whooshing of blood and digestive system, the thumping of the heart, and voices outside of the womb that pass through the abdomen and reverberate inside–particularly the lower frequencies. These sounds are repeated day-in and day-out to the unborn child and over time, the child becomes accustomed to the acoustic characteristics of these sounds; forming an association between sound and setting. I believe this evaluated conditioning allows the child to associate emotional meaning between what they repeatedly hear and the setting in which they hear it. Also, I believe that this “orchestra of bodily sounds” institutionalizes rhythmic sounds/patterns to the child and teaches it to relate aural rhythm with a comfortable and familiar environment.

  2. Does the womb experience suggest anything about the function of music?

    The womb experience suggests that music is easily recognizable and that its rhythmic repetition allows it to function as sort of an anchor tying down a moment or setting with a particular sound. The fetus can hear and recognize specific speech patterns, intonations, heart beats, and other musical sounds while in the womb and so babies after birth will continue to recognize and be comforted by particular songs listened to regularly during pregnancy. Music can function as a means to introduce the fetus to reality before it is born. It can also function as a means to ease the fetus into reality after it is born due to its recognition of familiar rhythmic sounds i.e. music–which is typically easy to remember because of its structured, repetitive form.