Companion and Urban Animals >
Wild Animals >
Wild Bird Index
| Links | Starlings | Message Board |
Mozart's Starling Page 4 Tyson's analysis of the original score of K. 522
indicates that it was not written during June 1787, but
composed in fragments between 1784 and 1787, including
an excerpt from K. 453. This period coincides with
Mozart's relationship with the starling. A common
interpretation is that A Musical Joke was meant
to caricature the kinds of music popular in Mozart's
day. Writing such music, a course of action urged on
him by his father, might have earned Mozart more money.
And thus, the composition has also been interpreted in
regard to the father/son relationship (25). Tyson
disputes this view on the basis of the physical nature
of the autograph score, as much of it was written before
Leopold's death, and the lack of solid evidence that
Mozart's relationship with his father was bitter enough
to cause him to commemorate his first and foremost
teacher with a parody. Although we do not presume to explain all the
layers of compositional complexity contained in K. 522,
we propose that some of its starling-like qualities are
pertinent to understanding Mozart's intentions in
writing it. Given the propensities of the starlings we
studied and the character and habits of Mozart, it is
hard to avoid the conclusion that some of the fragments
of K. 522 originated in Mozart's interactions with the
starling during its three-year tenure. The completion of
the work eight days after the bird's death might then
have been motivated by Mozart's desire to fashion an
appropriate musical farewell, a requiem of sorts for his
avian friend. Last words We have offered these observations on starlings
and on Mozart for two reasons. First, to give music
scholars new insights with which to evaluate one of the
world's most studied composers. The analyses of the
autograph scores and recent reinterpretations of
Mozart's illnesses and death demonstrate the power of
present-day knowledge to inform our understanding of the
past. We have provided the profile of captive starlings
as another way to gain perspective on Mozart's genius.
Second, we hope to spark further interest in the
analysis of the social stimulation of vocal learning.
Although the role of social companions in motivating
avian vocal learning is now well established, the
mechanisms by which social influence exerts its effects
have only begun to be articulated (26). Part of
the problem is defining the nature of social contexts.
To say birds interact is to say something quite vague.
Interact how? By fighting? By feeding? By flocking? By
sitting next to one another? Measuring sound waves is
easy compared to calibrating degrees of social
influence. Moreover, social signals are multi-modal. The
species described here make much use of visual, as well
as vocal, stimulation. By what means do they link sights
and sounds? Why are only certain linkages made?
Answering these questions is the next challenge for
students of communication. One of the founders of the study of bird song, W.
H. Thorpe, speculated that birds' imitation of sounds
represents a quite simple cognitive process: "The
essence of the point may be summed up by saying that
while it is very difficult for a human being (and
perhaps impossible for an animal) to see himself as
others see him, it is much less difficult for him to
hear himself as others hear him" (27). Although we recognize the law of
parsimony in Thorpe's remark, we are led by the evidence
to seek a phylogenetic middle ground between
self-awareness and vocal matching. We propose that some
birds use acoustic probes to test the contingent
properties of their environment, an interpretation
largely in keeping with concepts of communication as
processes of social negotiation and manipulation
(28). An analogy with the capacities of
echo-locating animals may be appropriate. Like bats or
dolphins emitting sounds to estimate distance, some
birds may bounce sounds off the animate environment,
using behavioral reverberations to gauge the effects of
their vocal efforts. They are not using Thorpe's
behavioral mirror, necessary for self-reflection, but
instead a social sounding board with which to shape
functional repertoires. In the case of our starlings, we also conclude
that social sonar works two ways: human caregivers cast
many sounds in the direction of their starlings and were
often educated by the messages returned. The mimicry of
vocal acts such as lip noises, sniffs, and throat
clearing brought to the attention of caregivers routine
dimensions of their own behavior that they rarely took
notice of. The birds' echoing of greetings, farewells,
and words of affection conveyed a sense of shared
environment with another species, a sensation hard to
forget. The caregivers' sadness in response to the
illnesses, absence, or death of their avian companions
also suggests that they had been beguiled by the chance
to glimpse a bird's-eye view of the world. Most found
themselves at a loss for words. And thus we turn to
Mozart for fitting emotional expressions, his poem, his
Musical Joke, and his appropriately grand burial
for a "starling bird." Meredith J. West and Andrew P. King received
their PhD.s from the Department of Psychology at Cornell
University. Meredith West is a professor of psychology
at Indiana University, and Andrew King is a research
associate professor at Duke University. Their research
interests include learning, development, and
communication. Published in "American Scientist" --March-April 1990
References: 1. G. Nottebohm. 1880. Mozart tana. Breitkopf and
Hartel. 2. O. Jahn. 1970. Life of Mozart, trans. P. D.
Townsend. Cooper Square. 3. F. M. Chapman. 1934. Handbook of Birds of
Eastern North America. Appleton. 4. E. A. Armstrong. 1963. A Study of Bird Song.
Oxford Univ. Press. 5. R. Dyer-Bennet, trans. 1967. Impatience. In
The Lovely Milleress (Die scheme 6. J. R. Baylis. 1982. Avian vocal mimicry: Its
function and evolution. In 7. D. Todt. 1975. Social learning of vocal
patterns and models of their 8. M. J. West, A. N. Stroud, and A. P. King.
1983. Mimicry of the human voice by 9. H. B. Suthers. 1982. Starling mimics human
speech. Birdwatcher's Digest
10. I. M. Pepperberg. 1986. Acquisition of
anomalous communicatory systems: 11. M. Adret-Hausberger. 1982. Temporal dynamics
of dialects in the whistled 12. M. Chaiken. 1986. Vocal communication among
starlings at the nest: Function, 13. I. M. Pepperberg. 1988. An interactive
modeling technique for acquisition of 14. Pepperberg. Ref. 7. 15. K. Lorenz. 1957. Companionship in bird life.
In Instinctive Behavior: The 16. L. F. Baptists and L. Petrinovich. 1984.
Social interaction, sensitive 17. A. P. King and M. J. West. 1988. Searching
for the functional origins of 18. P. Marler, A. Dufty, and R. Pickert. 1986.
Vocal communication in the 19. E. Anderson, ed. 1989. The Letters of Mozart
and His Family, p. 907. Norton. 20. Jahn. Ref. 2. 21. Anderson. Ref. 19, p. 877. 22. F. Niemtschek. 1956. Life of Mozart, trans.
H. Mautner. Leonard Hyman. 23. A. Tyson. 1987. Mozart: Studies of the
Autograph Scores. Harvard Univ. 24. W. A. Mozart. A Musical Joke. Liner notes by
P. Cohen. Deutsche Grammophon. 25. Ref. 2. 26. Ref. 16. 27. W. H. Thorpe. 1961. Bird-Song, p. 79.
Cambridge Univ. Press. 28. D. W. Owings and D. F. Hennessy. 1984. The
importance of variation in Some additional reading: |
