[Smt-talk] Classical Form and Recursion
Brian Kane
brian.kane at yale.edu
Mon Mar 30 07:55:05 PDT 2009
Hi Everyone,
Four points come to mind, all related to issues of phenomenology:
1. Ildar Khannanov wrote in his last email:
> One can listen to music with eyes closed, in complete darkness. This
> will shut down the visual metaphorization process, together with
> spatial determination. It will be dark there like in the
> Mutterleib. It will be the real Lebenswelt of harmony, using the
> terms of Edmund Husserl. Tension, tone. Audible space has been
> nicely described by Husserl in his Ideen. Maurice Merleau-Ponty went
> a step further in Le visible et l'invisible. Music can present the
> world without the Other.
Typically, the "acousmatic" realm opened up by listening in darkened
settings or with eyes closed has been used to differentiate precisely
the two kinds of spaces (real physical space and, for lack of better
phrase, tonal space) that Ildar mentioned. The idea has a long
pedigree in Wagner, Zuckerkandl, Hans Jonas, Schaeffer, Lippman, and
most recently in Roger Scruton's work (I'll cite some evidence in a
moment). Thus, I don't think Ildar's claim can be supported. The
acousmatic setting may shut down (or lead us to believe that we are
shutting down) the "spatial determination," which I take to mean the
real spatial location of the sounds; but it is too strong to say that
it shuts down the "visual metaphorization process."
Here's an example from Scruton, for those who care (I've got other
examples in case you feel a strong antipathy for Scruton). You'll see
the distinction being drawn between the experienced (or phenomenal)
order of tones qua intentional objects vs. the perception of real
spatial situatedness, which gets slowly devalued as musically
irrelevant.
The person who listens to sounds, and hears them as music, is not
seeking in them for information about their cause, of for clues as to
what is happening. On the contrary, he is hearing the sounds apart
from the material world. They are detached in his perception, and
understood in terms of their experienced order: this is…the acousmatic
character of musical experience…What we understand, in understanding
music, is not the material world, but the intentional object: the
organization that can be heard in the experience (Scruton, The
Aesthetics of Music, 221)
A real locus classicus of this kind of thinking is in Wagner's
Beethoven essay, where the unsightly mechanism of the performer is
detached from the musical experience in the concert hall, and a "sound
world" (disclosed by the ear alone) is placed next to the "light
world"--which we assume to contain the sphere of physical-material
causality, or real spatiality a la Schopenhauer.
2. It's odd to invoke Husserl in this context as well. It is
especially odd to invoke the Lebenswelt next to the claim that "Music
can present the world without the Other." Husserl's concept of the
Lebenswelt, which is developed in the period around the Krisis, is a
constituted as an intersubjective structure. (A good example of how
this works is to take a look at the notion of "tradition" in Husserl's
essay on The Origin of Geometry.) The path that Husserl takes in the
later work always moves via intersubjectivity towards reduction, as
opposed to the Cartesian approach of the Ideas I, which was often
accused of being solipsistic. Iso Kern has a nice essay on this...
Now, just so you don't think I don't have a sense of humor, I assume
that Ildar is being ironic when he calls the intra-uterine experience
as the "real Lebenswelt," and thus getting Husserl where it counts--
namely, on the inadequate way in which he assumes the question of
intersubjectivity. But this irony gets undermined when Ildar invokes
Merleau-Ponty, whose entire philosophy is predicated on the notion
that our perceptual world is fundamentally an intersubjective world.
This is an aspect of what being-in-the-world means for Merleau-Ponty.
There's lots of evidence for this and I'm happy to provide it if
requested.
3. As for the question of auditory space, the only extended analysis
of Husserl's that I am aware of is §37 from Ideen II--a section
entitled "Differences between the visual and tactual realm." The
argument is that while visual and auditory sensations localize sounds
in exterior space, tactile sensations are localizable on the body
itself. This is important for Husserl, because this section of Ideen
is trying to pose questions about how we know our bodies, how do we
know that they are in space while being different from other simply
spatial objects? Touch (and the reversibility of touching and being-
touched) is valorized as the sense that allows our bodies to be not
simply Körper but Leid--or, to as it is often put, not simply bodies
but flesh.
The problem with Husserl's account of audition here is that it treats
sounds only as the sound of things situated in a spatially extended
world. There is no account, say, of the virtual spatiality of a
phenomenal world of tones. Music is not being considered here. So, in
fact, Husserl's account of auditory perception cannot be used as
evidence to support Ildar's position about the elimination of real
spatial properties and virtual spatiality in audition.
4. Finally, on the question of recursion and phenomenology, I'm
surprised that nobody has mentioned Lewin's treatment of recursion as
presented "Music Theory, Phenomenology, and Modes of Perception."
Perhaps this is due the the fact that the thread was initiated around
the question of classical form and recursion. I think that Lewin's
attempt to show the recursive nature of musical perceptions at a
moment-to moment level is pretty extraordinary. In fact, culminating
in Part IV of the essay--i.e., the whole X-is-the-dominant-of-Y, Y-is-
the-dominant-of-X business on p. 88 ff. in Studies in Music with Text--
it seems that it is the recursive aspect of musical perceptions, and
the possible logical problems that they introduce, is used as a wedge
to force the point that these percepts exist in different
phenomenological space-times. And that point is supposed to lead us to
reflect on the music theoretic systems we use to account, model,
repress or Zurückdrängen such problems.
It also strikes me that Lewin's use of recursion focuses on a level of
operation that is typically undervalued by the syntactic models that
also initiated the discussion. In other words, perhaps the question
about language c/w music which initiated the thread has led us to
overlook Lewin's approach here. However, I'm curious how others feel
about Lewin's treatment of recursion.
Best,
Brian
_________________
Brian Kane
Assistant Professor, Music Theory
Department of Music
Yale University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20090330/a2030e96/attachment-0004.htm>
More information about the Smt-talk
mailing list