Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T15:27:10.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An Exploratory Inquiry into the Relationship between Temporality and Composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2020

Eric Maestri*
Affiliation:
Conservatorio ‘Niccolò Paganini’, Genova, Italy

Abstract

In this article, I explore the relationship between the temporality of the composer and that of the music composed. This investigation starts with a fundamental presumption: composers, generally speaking, think in the future – their compositions will be performed and perceived at a different and later time than that of the compositional act, and will be listened by other persons. The hypothesis I develop in this article is that the musical work determines a deferred relationship between the listener and the composer, and that the compositional act is basically a dialogical act. Paul Ricœur’s theory of mimesis is helpful in analysing this dialogical mechanism through the notion of ‘temporal configuration’. By drawing on this theoretical framework, I interviewed five composers in order to make explicit the imbrication of the composer’s and listener’s temporalities in the musical work. This exploratory inquiry allowed for a concrete analysis, articulated in the words of the composers, of how they conceive the relationship between their compositional temporality and that expressed by their work.

Type
Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bachelard, G. 1950. La Dialectique de la durée. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Carter, E. 1965. The Time Dimension in Music. Music Journal 23(8): 2930.Google Scholar
Carter, E. 1976. Music and Time Screen. In Gubbs, J. W. (ed.) Current Thought in Musicology. Austin: University of Texas Press, 6388.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. [1927] 1996. Being and Time, trans. Stambaugh, Joan. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Koechlin, C. 1926. Le Temps et La Musique. La Revue Musicale, 4562.Google Scholar
Rheinberger, H.-J. 2018. ‘From Traces through Data to Models and Simulations’. In Schwab, M. (ed.) Transpositions: Aesthetico-Epistemic Operators in Artistic Research. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 215–25.Google Scholar
Ricœur, P. 1983. Temps et Récit 1. L’intrigue et Le Récit Historique. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Roads, C. 2015. Composing Electronic Music. A New Aesthetic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195373233.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Small, C. 1998. Musicking: The Meaning of Performing and Listening. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Zuckerkandl, V. 1956. Sound and Symbol. Music and the External World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691218366CrossRefGoogle Scholar