Fretted rhythm |
Musical-theoretical concept created by B. L. Yavorsky. Initially (since 1908) it was called “the structure of musical speech”, since 1918 – “the theory of auditory gravity”; L. r. – its most famous name (introduced in 1912). Fundamentals of the theory of L. river. developed in the early years of the 20th century. The term L. R.” means the unfolding of a mode in time. The main premise of the theory of L. R.: the existence of two opposite types of sound relations – unstable and stable; the attraction of instability to resolution into stability is fundamental to the muses. dynamics and in particular for building frets. According to Yavorsky, sound gravity is closely related to the orientation of a person in the surrounding space, as evidenced by the position of the organ of balance – the semicircular canals in the auditory organ that perceives music. The difference from dissonance and consonance is that unstable sounds and intervals can consonate (for example, thirds hd or fa in C-dur) and, conversely, stable consonances (tonics) of the mode can dissonate (for example, increased and decreased triads) . Yavorsky sees the source of instability in the interval of the triton (“six-luton ratio”). In this, he relies on the idea of the tritone as an important stimulus for modal development, put forward by S.I. Taneev in con. 19th century (work “Analysis of modulation plans in Beethoven’s sonatas”) and developed by him later (letters to N. N. Amani, 1903). The experience of analyzing bunks samples also led to the idea of the special significance of Yavorsky’s newt. music. Together with its resolution to a major third, the triton forms the primary unity of instability and stability – “a single symmetrical system”; two such systems at a semitone distance merge into a “double symmetrical system”, where the resolution is a minor third. The combination of these systems forms decomp. frets, and the instability of a single system introduces the function (“modal moment”) of the dominant, and the double system introduces subdominants. The position of sounds in harmony determines the degree of their intensity (“brightness”).
Harmony, thus, is conceived as a set of gravitations (“conjugations”) of unstable sounds into stable ones that resolve them. From here comes the generally accepted in owls. musicology, the concept of mode as a highly organized pattern of dynamic. character, as a struggle of opposing forces. The interpretation of the mode is much deeper in comparison with the former, scale (since the scale does not show the internal structure of the mode).
Along with major and minor, the theory of linear r. substantiates the modes, the tonics of which do not represent consonant consonances: increased, decreased, chain (linkage of two large thirds, for example, ce-es-g, i.e. the major-minor of the same name). A special group is made up of variable modes, where the same sound can have a double meaning – unstable and stable, which is the reason for the displacement of the tonic. The most complex are the “double-modes” that arise when the instability is resolved twice – “inside and out” (both resolutions are separated from each other by a tritone, so that a double-major, for example, combines the signs of C-dur and Fis-dur).
Each of the modes has its own characteristic features (for example, in an increased mode – resolutions to the corresponding triad, sequences on major thirds or minor sixths, chords with an increased sixth, dressing foundations in the interval of a diminished third, etc.). Get an interpretation. scales: pentatonic scale (major or minor with tritone sounds off), “Hungarian scale” (increased fret of two single systems), whole-tone and tone-semitone scales (increased and diminished frets, as well as double frets).
The discovery of “new modes” is one of the most important scientific. merits of Yavorsky, since most of them really exist in the music of the 19th-20th centuries, especially in the work of F. Liszt, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, A. N. Scriabin. Yavorsky also demonstrated periodically constructed scales (the so-called modes with limited transposition), which he used in his creative work many years later. practice O. Messiaen. The concept of modal variability explains many. phenomena of people music; at the same time, it helps to explain certain aspects of polytonality. The assertion of the possibility of modal formations that go beyond the major-minor is a fundamentally important antithesis to the concepts, according to which major and minor can only be replaced by the negation of modal organization in general, i.e. atonality.
The vulnerable side of Yavorsky’s modal theory is the method of constructing frets on a tritone basis. There is no reason to see in the tritone a universal source of fret formation; this is clearly evidenced by the old frets, devoid of a triton, to-rye, contrary to the course of the historical. development must be interpreted as incomplete types of more complex formations. Elements of dogmatism are also present in the explanation of internal. fret structures, which sometimes leads to contradictions with the facts. Nevertheless, the value of Yavorsky’s theory is indisputably determined both by the fundamental approach to the problem itself and by the expansion of the range of modes that have become known.
Ladotonal relations (the term “tonality” was introduced by Yavorsky) are considered in connection with the form and rhythmic. proportions (for example, “deviation in the third quarter of the form”). Of greatest interest is the “scale tonal comparison with the result”, in which two or more unrelated tonalities create a conflict, the conclusion from which becomes the “result” – the tonality that unites all the previous ones. Yavorsky developed here the concept of “unifying tonality of a higher order” put forward earlier by Taneyev. The principle of “comparison with the result” is also understood more broadly, as a collision of mutually contradictory moments with a generalizing result. At the same time, the causality of the subsequent conflicts in the previous one is emphasized.
A large place in the theory of L. r. occupies the problem of dismemberment of the work. Yavorsky developed the concept of caesura and its types. Based on analogies with verbal speech, the concept of caesuria enriches the theory of performance, especially the doctrine of phrasing. The opposite side – articulation – found expression in the “connecting principle” (connection at a distance), in the concept of “overlay” as a factor of adhesion, adhesion. The concept of intonation as the primary cell of muses is introduced. form and expressiveness; it is based on the interaction of sounds decomp. modal meaning. One-partness (construction on one function) and two-partness (change of two functions) are distinguished; in two-partness, a predicate is distinguished – a preparatory moment (a concept that has become widespread) and ikt – the final and defining moment.
Rhythm is understood as the entire area of temporal relationships – from the smallest to the proportions between large parts. At the same time, rhythmic phenomena are filled with modal content; the sense of rhythm is defined as “the ability to navigate in time, in a constantly acting sound gravity.” From here, a generalizing idea arises, which gave the name. the whole theory: modal rhythm as a process of unfolding the mode in time.
The form is also considered in close connection with the stability and instability relations. It has been shown for the first time that forms represent the implementation of the general principles of shaping. The concepts of a form as an individually unique warehouse and a schema as a generalized typified structure are delimited. One of the valuable aspects of the theory of L. river. – the desire to connect issues of structure with the arts. perception of music. Despite the elements of dogmatism that appeared here, too, there was a tendency to consider music as expressive human speech, to reveal the aesthetic. the meaning of forms, to bring them closer to similar. phenomena of other lawsuits. These features had a positive effect in the practice of applying the data of L. river. for music education, for courses “listening to music”.
Thus, although the holistic concept of L. R., which exactly follows the author’s presentation, has not retained its significance, many of its fruitful general ideas, etc. specific concepts are widely used. In the works of owls. musicologists L. V. Kulakovsky, M. E. Tarakanov, V. P. Dernova rethought or revived the methods of analysis of Nar. songs, concepts of L. R., double-modes.
References: Yavorsky B.L., The structure of musical speech. Materials and notes, part 1-3, M., 1908; his own, Exercises in the formation of a modal rhythm, part 1, M., 1915, M., 1928; his, Basic elements of music, M., 1923; his own, Construction of the melodic process, in the book: Belyaeva-Ekzemplyarskaya S., Yavorsky B., Melody structure, M., 1929; Bryusova N., The science of music, its historical paths and current state, M., 1910; her own, Boleslav Leopoldovich Yavorsky, in the collection: B. Yavorsky, vol. 1, M., 1964; Kulakovsky L., De-yaki zivchennya B. L. Yavorsky, “Music”, 1924, part 10-12; his own, On the theory of modal rhythm and its tasks, “Musical Education”, 1930, No 1; Belyaev V., Analysis of modulations in Beethoven’s sonatas, S. I. Taneev, in collection: Russian book about Beethoven, M,, 1927; Protopopov S., Elements of the structure of musical speech, parts 1-2, M., 1930; Ryzhkin I., Theory of modal rhythm, in the book: Mazel L., Ryzhkin I., Essays on the history of theoretical musicology, vol. 2, M.-L., 1939; Letters from S. I. Taneyev to N. N. Amani, E. F. Napravnik, I. A. Vsevolozhsky, SM, 1940, No 7; In memory of Sergei Ivanovich Taneyev, 1856-1946. Sat. articles and materials for the 90th anniversary of his birth, M.-L., 1947; Zukkerman V., Kulakovsky L., Yavorsky-theorist, “SM”, 1957, No 12; Lunacharsky AB, Speech at a conference on the theory of modal rhythm February 5, 1930 in Moscow, in Sat: B. Yavorsky, vol. 1, M., 1964; Zukkerman V.A., Yavorsky-theorist, ibid.; Kholopov Yu. N., Symmetric modes in the theoretical systems of Yavorsky and Messiaen, in: Music and Modernity, vol. 7, M., 1971.
V. A. Zuckerman
