How do you relate to music that is supposed to convey specific meanings, when the references may not be known to you?

In the listenings for Weeks 3 and 4 we have encountered two very different kinds of music.

One, a music that organizes itself around references to history, quotation, embedded meanings, messages and evocations (Berg Violin Concerto, Bartok Piano Concerto second movement, Webern in the Bach orchestration).

And the other, a music that seems to function strictly as a series of sound patterns, devoid of referentiality or “content” (Webern, Symphony and Concerto for Nine Instruments, and all of the Cage pieces).

Write about your experience of listening to examples of each of these two different kinds. How do you relate to music that is supposed to convey specific meanings, when the references may not be known to you? And how do you relate to music that might even be interchangeable in terms of its musical material, as (perhaps) demonstrated by Erik Carlson’s variations of Webern? Can you relate the idea of alternate versions of Webern with the openness of form utilized by Cage?