we can all make music

made to sing

the biological imperative

We begin with the larynx, also called the voice box. We all have one - it's as integral to our anatomies as our fingers, eyes and feet. It's the gateway to our lungs - we use it to hold our breaths and to stop eating getting mixed up with breathing. And we use it to make speech; at least, we use about ten per cent of it. That's right, a tenth of the complex web of muscles that suspend the larynx in position are activated in conversation.

So when is the larynx used to its full capacity? You guessed it: when, and only when, we sing.

We have been, quite literally, made to sing. Our body is a musical instrument. How did this come to pass?

For believers in intelligent design, the answer is simple. The designer made us musical so that we could sing her praises. For adherents of Charles Darwin, the answer is a little more complex and will probably always be speculative.

In fact, the evolutionists are split: some believe that our musicality is just a decorative by-product of the development of our language capacities. Others, possibly most, agree that this singing thing must have developed because, in some ways, it enhanced our capacity to survive.

This is where the complexities begin. At least half a dozen probabilities, not necessarily mutually exclusive, are being tossed around by evolutionary biologists, neuro-scientists, paleo-archaeologists and the like. These include:

The standard Darwinian line about sexual selection: from the serenade outside the loved one's bedroom window to musicians becoming objects of sexual desire.
Food procurement: mimic the sound of your prey and it'll be easier to catch.
Predator scaring: sound like an elephant and the tiger will move on (and a whole group sounding like a herd of elephants is seriously scary - see below).
Infant rearing: mothers sing to their babies even before they are born (the ear is the first sense organ to become active) - virtually all early mother child vocal interaction can be described as musical.
Territory (and identity) defining: singing the national song is mandatory in many education systems - the human version of bird song.
Communication of emotion: some feelings can only (or at least best) be expressed musically.

And then there are the speculations arising out of the idea that 'group' selection is as important a part of our evolutionary history as 'individual' selection:

The 'military' model: a group display of impeccably co-ordinated aggression will strike such fear into the enemy that they'll run a mile (the haka perfectly embodies this idea).
The 'social' scenario: the fact that music-making involves groups doing something simultaneously and together (unlike speech which is a back and forth thing) leads many to think that, along with dance, singing developed as the means by which our ancestors learnt to co-operate - and, as important, to enjoy co-operating.

This last idea takes us far deeper than just time and motion co-ordination (itself a critical issue in the survival of a small group of hominids). The key elements of music - rhythm and pitch - are the fundamental tools that allow us to recognise, implement and celebrate commonality - without a word being spoken.

Those exploring this idea believe that before humans developed language, in order to survive, they needed a way to bind the group, to be together comfortably and productively, to know each other. Hence song and dance, or what's becoming known as 'musicking'.

The conclusion: making music together is not just a useful community development tool. It is the unique evolutionary characteristic of humans that allowed us to become effective social beings.

we can all make music

made to sing

the biological imperative

making a sound world together