Typical Norwegian

In Norwegian I don't state my name. I reveal my name. In English, I will say my name is Anders. In Norwegian, differently, I say “I denote Anders”.

In English, one takes a leap. In Norwegian, we do a leap. And in Norway, we will not get to the point. We come to the point. The fact it is so, tells us the typical Norwegian orientation differs from the typical English orientation, speaking of living. The typical English orientation is idealistic. The typical Norwegian orientation is materialistic.

The difference becomes obvious when we see how days are referred to differently in the two languages. In English, one speaks of today and of tomorrow and of, or in, a number of days from now. In Norwegian, differently, we speak of inday, inmorrow and about a number of days. You see, we do not give to day, but we reach the day.

Norwegians learn English at school, and all are enrolled. So the idealistic way of thinking is taught in Norway. But we naturally think differently than Englishmen do, and our political system shows this to be the case.

Also Swedes and Danes are coming to the point, not getting to it. And also Swedes and Danes say inday, inmorrow and about a number of days. The cultures of Norway, Sweden and Denmark are very much alike, and we do understand each other. But both in Sweden and in Denmark, the feminine grammatical gender is absent. They only have the masculine and the neutral gender. In Norway we have the feminine gender, and so the female gender is equivalent with the masculine.

Women will typically be materialistically oriented, while men will typically be idealistically. Men give seed and the women conceive to bear offspring. In Norway, being materialistically oriented and also making a grammatical gender of her being, we are special.

When I compose music, I compose in the Norwegian, and not in the English way. That means I am materialistically, not idealistically oriented. I have no idea what I am doing. There is no frame clear to me in which I will put content, and I have no notion of the whole. What I have, is a certain feeling of direction inherent in the composing act. In Norwegian we have a word for this. We call it “peiling”, meaning clue or bearing. The word, I believe, is taken from the sea, from the act of taking direction on a ship in the old days. It is not an idea. It is a feeling of worth.

Since I have no idea, it is obvious also to the listener of the music that the idea of the work cannot be grasped. The work can only be enjoyed by the harmony and the outcome. The outcome saves it from being an affectionate work. By the outcome there is as if there was an intent.

But I believe there is a development in the history of man, where he goes from being materialistically to idealistically oriented. With practise, I will get an idea of what I am doing. I will go from faith to hope. I will be a master.

The question is if it is possible, then, to go the other way around, that is to start with the idea, learn it, and become an expert without having been through the educational process. The question is if it is possible to start with the idea and let it be current or valid in a work, that is to make it applicable, without being artificial doing so.