Imitation |

from lat. imitatio – imitation

The exact or inaccurate repetition in one voice of a melody immediately before that sounded in another voice. The voice that first expresses the melody is called the initial, or proposta (Italian proposta – sentence), repeating it – imitating, or risposta (Italian risposta – answer, objection).

If, after the entry of the risposta, a melodically developed movement continues in the proposta, forming a counterpoint to the risposta – the so-called. opposition, then polyphonic arises. the cloth. If the proposta falls silent at the moment the risposta enters or becomes melodically undeveloped, then the fabric turns out to be homophonic. A melody stated in proposta can be imitated successively in several voices (I, II, III, etc. in risposts):

W. A. ​​Mozart. “Healthy Canon”.

Double and triple I. are also used, that is, simultaneous imitation. statement (repetition) of two or three props:

D. D. Shostakovich. 24 preludes and fugues for piano, op. 87, No 4 (fugue).

If the risposta imitates only that section of the proposta, where the presentation was monophonic, then the I. is called simple. If the risposta consistently imitates all sections of the proposta (or at least 4), then the I. is called canonical (canon, see the first example on p. 505). Risposta can enter at any sound-hundredth level. Therefore, I. differ not only in the time of entry of the imitating voice (risposts) – after one, two, three measures, etc. or through parts of the measure after the beginning of the proposta, but also in direction and interval (in unison, in the upper or lower second, third, fourth, etc.). Already since the 15th century. the predominance of I. in the quarter-fifth, i.e., tonic-dominant relation, which then became dominant, especially in the fugue, is noticeable.

With the centralization of the ladotonal system in I. of the tonic-dominant relationship, the so-called. a tone response technique that promotes smooth modulation. This technique continues to be used in jointed products.

Along with the tonal response, the so-called. free I., in which the imitating voice retains only the general outlines of melodic. drawing or the characteristic rhythm of the theme (rhythm. I.).

D. S. Bortnyansky. 32nd spiritual concert.

I. is of great importance as a method of development, development of thematic. material. Leading to the growth of form, I. at the same time guarantees thematic. (figurative) unity of the whole. Already in the 13th century. I. becomes one of the most common in prof. music of presentation techniques. In Nar. polyphony I., apparently, arose much earlier, as evidenced by some surviving records. In the music forms of the 13th century, one way or another connected with the cantus firmus (rondo, company, and then motet and mass), contrapuntal was constantly used. and, in particular, imitation. technique. At the Netherlands masters of the 15th-16th centuries. (J. Okegem, J. Obrecht, Josquin Despres, etc.) imitation. technology, especially canonical, has reached a high development. Already at that time, along with I. in direct movement, I. were widely used in circulation:

S. Scheidt. Variations on the chorale “Vater unser im Himmelreich”.

They also met in the return (crashy) movement, in rhythmic. increase (for example, with a doubling of the duration of all sounds) and decrease.

From the 16th century dominance the position was occupied by simple I. She also prevailed in imitation. forms of the 17th and 18th centuries. (canzones, motets, ricercars, masses, fugues, fantasies). The nomination of a simple I. was, to a certain extent, a reaction to the excessive enthusiasm for the canonical. technique. It is essential that I. in the return (crashy) movement, etc. were not perceived by ear or were perceived only with difficulty.

Reaching in the days of J. S. Bach dominance. positions, imitation forms (primarily fugue) in subsequent eras as forms are independent. prod. are used less frequently, but penetrate into large homophonic forms, being modified depending on the nature of the thematic, its genre features, and the specific concept of the work.

V. Ya. Shebalin. String Quartet No 4, final.

References: Sokolov HA, Imitations on cantus firmus, L., 1928; Skrebkov S., Textbook of polyphony, M.-L., 1951, M., 1965; Grigoriev S. and Mueller T., Textbook of polyphony, M., 1961, 1969; Protopopov V., The history of polyphony in its most important phenomena. (Issue 2), Western European classics of the XVIII-XIX centuries, M., 1965; Mazel L., On the ways of developing the language of modern music, “SM”, 1965, Nos. 6,7,8.

T. F. Müller