The Origins of Music: Preface - Preface

distinct,more or less discretely different songs.It is true that the indi-

vidual distinctiveness of each animal’s pant-hoots and songs may be

taken as a hint that a degree of inventiveness,or at least of indetermi-

nacy,enters into the development of these calls,but their innateness and

rather strict species-specificity suggest a limited degree of developmen-

tal plasticity (Geissmann 1993).In other words,the indications of cre-

ativity in their development are minimal.

For comparison,I return to the learned song of the winter wren (figure

3.7).This is a much more complex pattern,more elaborate than anything

that an ape ever produced.As we have seen,each male winter wren has

a repertoire of distinct song types.These are assembled during develop-

ment as a collage of learned phrases and notes,in a number of different,

set sequences,to create the repertoire of multiple song types (Kroodsma

1980;Kroodsma and Momose 1991).

How does this compare with the songs of gibbons and the pant-

hooting of chimpanzees? From a functional viewpoint they have certain

aspects in common.They are all affective,nonreferential displays,given

in a state of high arousal,and used especially for achieving and modu-

lating social contact and spacing.They are all highly individualistic,

within limitations imposed by phonocoding rules that prevail in each

species.But how do birds and apes rank with regard to creativity? In this

respect,the two are as different as chalk and cheese.Ape song reper-

toires are limited to one pattern per animal,supplemented by a range of

44 Peter Marler

Figure 3.7

Songs of two neighboring winter wrens,marked with an alphabetical code to illustrate

sharing of sound components between individuals.The song of male one is about seven

seconds in duration.This is another clear case of phonocoding.(From Kroodsma 1980.)

Fig.3.7

MUS3 9/14/99 11:58 AM Page 44