It's alright. Most people who've lived in America their entires lives don't know anything about it either.

(zing)

P.S. I get the gist of what you're saying, PurpleWolf, I'm still working on how it relates to this thread though :p:

Alright well thanks everybody.

So music has no inherent plot because black people in africa, who come to america, cannot be called "******."

Cool.

That is the same exact answer I get from my friend when I tell him things I've heard on the History Channel, like German scientist developing flying saucers during WWII etc. etc.

Well, how far apart must the cultures be, American and Russian, or maybe like Western & Asian. I'm sure if something that sounds melancholy in music to a Russian would be to an American too, no? Does the Shakuhachi create the same kind of suspense when use in a score in a movie for a Japanese person as it would for a non-Japanese person?

Janszoon said that it was partly related to their culture.
I agreed and gave an example about how two different people can have two different views on the same topic when they grow up through different cultures.

What exactly is meant when you say Universal Understanding? I mean if its that vague then yes and no. Take 10 people and listen to Cannibal Corpse and I bet you they all feel a little angry. Take those same people and play them some Jimi and they will probably all want to dance and smoke some weed. Now they are all feeling anger, pleasure, and different urges but for different reasons based on culture and upbringing. So depending on how you define understand the answer is always going to be different.

Studies have been done with people whom have never heard western music. They asked them how certain songs made them feel, and there answers were very similar to the average American citizen.

Oh, so in addition to making a bizarre and not particularly relevant comparison you also misunderstood my comment. Got it.

I somehow doubt you are capable of speaking for the general attitude of an ENTIRE CONTINENT.

Well thats to be expected. One medium is for entertainment and the other is entirely academic. I'm just saying that the premise of the thread is interesting, but has been explored in depth by others who have come to some remarkably solid conclusions, backed up by research eveidence.

Your second comment is an undefined factor, but I have a hard time comprehending how on earth we'd even begin to test that.

And what proof do you have that the History Channel is for purely entertainment purposes only? :)

I was not asking you to begin a test, I was hoping you would rely on people with far more money, time, resources, and experience than any of us have. :)

I don't totally disagree with you, that someone from an entirely different culture would not (might not) relate to a musical passage (for example) happy or sad, whimsical or serious, etc etc. Because I believe some of those things are conditional. Say that every time you watched a movie as a kid when you heard motif that used tubas and kettle drums you would see an elephant walk by, fast-forward as adult you heard the same motif and was asked what does that sound like you mostly likely respond "an elephant." But if you played the same motif to someone else in another country who didn't have the chance to watch movies you've seen, you would probably not get the same answer, maybe he had a similar experience with a different movie and employed a similar motif.