However, do not fear. In creating this set of articles, I am faced with a conundrum. The best way to illustrate these ideas is to provide specific examples that demonstrate them in action and allow the reader to either experience them directly, if they are able to, or to otherwise come to the realization that they have not actually developed the mental faculties needed to actually understand them. This is something that I intend to do in the subsequent parts of this publication. However, in order to succinctly provide the examples without necessary redundancy and to show how these ideas work in the context of them, I need to first throw out these definitions, if only to at first provide labels to these concepts that can be referenced in order to show how they each relate to each other. On a first reading of this list of definitions, I do not realistically expect that most readers will understand the majority of it without going through the examples, even if they are highly perceptive.
Modal Faculty (MF):
A 'binary parameter' of a given person's mind that determines how certain aspects of their cognition are processed, which affects the ways they will perceive structural features forming from incoming sense data, and which can potentially become activated (going from off to on) within a given mind at arbitrary stages in someone's life. Encompassing Voice Perception (EVP) and Super Grammatical Perception (SPG) are the two main modal faculties which form the basis for this theoretical framework (the Theory of Modal Consciousness) at this current time. There may well be other examples of human mental processes that could also be classified as modal faculties, but I don't yet know enough to be able to confidently claim this is the case for any specific example. It is important to note that the 'parameters' of the Principles and Parameters framework in generative linguistics are not modal faculties, they arise (if they actually do) in accordance with the processing of a given language grammar and aren't things that have global effects on a person's cognition.
| Modal Faculty Table | Encompassing Voice Perception | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Available (EVPA) | Not Available (EVPN) | ||
| Super Grammatical Perception |
Available (SGPA) | EVA-SGA | EVN-SGA |
| Not Available (SGPN) | EVA-SGN | EVN-SGN | |
Canonical Sequence (CS):
A 'grammatically well formed' sequence of words (in a recognized language) or musical notes (belonging to families of themes that have been encountered) that add up to a complete sentence or self resolving theme while spanning a metric structure (of a song or poem) in such a way that develops and resolves what is perceived (by EVPAs) as tension. The core concept here is a set or verbal/musical elements that are recognized by the language faculties as fitting into a form recognizable as being something that plays out in an expected and 'correct' or satisfying way, feeling subjectively like a sentence has been completed when finished and presented in full, while at the same time not being modified by Variant Addition (defined below) or requiring any Super Grammatical faculties to comprehend. This is true of both regular (non poetic) sentences in a language and themes in a musical composition. Both of them are processed by the language centers of the mind when they are perceived. What counts as a Canonical Sequence isn't necessarily set at the outset when a given person encounters a given work though, as a person hearing a piece of music for the first time may not have heard the forms of the themes and motifs that make up the piece beforehand, or there may be words or forms of speech that they are unfamiliar with, even thought SGP seems to enhance the ability of a person to immediately learn and store these structures in an aspect of working memory.
Along this line of thought, while canonical sequences may be considered part of some kind of language, it is more fruitful here in my view to consider the mental process of assimilating linguistic constructs as a continuous, ongoing and organic process, rather than something that results in a final, well defined set of constructs that either each are or are not valid as part of a single formal system (as might be the case in a formal grammar). This is an issue that I want to discuss further in the future, but for now, we'll define a canonical sequence as something that can in principal be parsed in full and understood to feel complete by someone who hasn't developed SGP.
- Canonical Transformation (CT):
A modification of a Canonical Sequence (chiefly a musical theme constituting a phrase in this case), such that when it is presented directly after a previous CS, it is mentally interpreted by someone with EVP (whether or not they have SGP) as being a direct response to the previous CS in a way that parallels it. Particular kinds of regular transformations of musical themes count as CTs, such as transposition to a different key and augmentation and diminution. The primary theme of Beethoven's fifth as used in the first movement of the symphony shows just how much expressive power these transformations are capable of. *
It should also be noted that embellishment and the addition of notes between other notes that fit into the overall structure are also actually permitted examples of CTs and will generally be perceived by an EVA-SGN as sensible and meaningful transformations/continuations of a theme. Likewise, the implicit opposite, the deletion of notes on more minor beats in order to create a skeletal form of the melody while preserving major beats in the same shape within the metric structure, is also a valid Canonical Transformation. CTs essentially preserve the overall perceived shape and form of the theme. Conversely, things than an EVA-SGN will not feel are complete, valid thematic transformations that fit into the overall structure of a work are considered Advanced Transformations instead of canonical ones.
- Full and Partial Enjambment:
The breaking of a poetic line so that a sentence lying on it continues past the line's end before completing a grammatically whole valid phrase, creating tension across the metric lines it spans and ending the line 'weakly'. Especially impactful when the line end forms part of a rhyming scheme, to the point where the emphasis produced this rhyme might seem to go against this feeling of the line being incomplete (which is a notable phenomena by itself which I'll argue has its own significance). It's notable that I was unable to recognize or understand full enjambment until after I had developed Encompassing Voice. This, along with the fact that I was unable to properly perceive metric structure in unrhymed verse until gaining SPG, is why I believe that enjambment in unrhymed verse is only possible to understand with both EVP and SGP.
The feeling enjambment evokes when I encounter it across rhymed lines is very much the same as that of tonal tension across measures in music; so, as far as I can tell, EVP is likely necessary to process full enjambment through rhyme. However, I admit the possibility that enjambment was simply something I was not used to beforehand, and that I simply mistakenly interpreted line endings as full completions of a thought because I didn't know how to approach them or understand the kind of mental process involved in comprehending them. As such I may have been able to process enjambment earlier had I been informed of its nature, so I can't rule out the possibility that EVP isn't strictly needed for it. Even so, I'll assume for now this it is actually the case that enjambment is something that requires Encompassing Voice and that the mental equipment that allows a person to process lines ending on incomplete phrases, while also rhyming together, and appreciating this combination of elements, is specific to EVP.
I introduce the term full enjambment, as opposed to other forms, in order to distinguish between tension resulting directly from phrases that are immediately and clearly incomplete, and phrases that could be interpreted as complete initially (save for punctuation indicating otherwise), only for it to then be revealed on the subsequent line(s) how the phrase was actually a smaller part of a larger one, potentially encouraging retroactive reinterpretation as opposed to immediately clear tension, which I'll label partial enjambment. While both are ways of carrying tension through a line end, I use Full Enjambment to point out the least ambiguous cases of this, though I'm not entirely sure if it is possible to make a hard categorical distinction between the two in poetry, or if it's a finer matter of degree that is difficult to define.
- Variant Addition:
Variant Addition is a process that arises out of SGP which acts on canonical sequences when they are presented in the context of a work of art, by allowing modifications and extensions of their structure and form. This is an 'advanced' transformation of canonical forms that isn't considered a Canonical Transformation. Variant Addition allows the extension of canonical structures by repeating subsections of them in order to elongate them, and for these elongated structures to then form parts of larger super structures (which may in turn be substructures of larger super structures). Doing so creates a Variant Structure.
One notable use of this is the ability to take a musical theme and, at the point where it would finish with a cadence (which typically, but not always, extends into the next measure), instead of actually playing the implied tonic key of the sequence, repeat the whole theme from the beginning instead. In this way the whole sequence, instead of resolving at that point (to then potentially be followed with another sequence after in response), uses an entire copy of itself which itself as a whole becomes the resolution in place of the final note that would have resolved the original. As such, this allows the structural delay of the resolution of a Canonical Sequence beyond what would otherwise be possible using only Canonical Transformations through various kinds of false cadences and methods of extending and delaying the resolution. But it isn't actually necessary to repeat the whole of a structure beyond the final part to count as a variant structure. Substructures within a sequence or theme, such as a single bar, can be made to repeat (though possibly subject to transposition and other such CTs) additional times beyond the number it appeared in a given canonical sequence. The point to understand is that subsections of a given sequence can be felt to respond to one another (as the person intuitively mentally tracks the substructure) while at the same time, how these sections fit in to the super structure they are a part of can also be acknowledged, so that the enclosing super structure can continue where it left off when the perceived repetition ends. An SGPN can still follow along with parts of this kind, but they will not feel that they meaningfully contribute to the formation of larger super structures that are meaningfully different from a given canonical sequence they are a canonical transformation of. A key difference between canonical sequences and the larger, variant structures that might be based off them is that the extended variant structures can themselves be repeated, with the response mirroring those structural extensions that might have been introduced, and this repetition can, together, potentially form part of a larger and more extended structure yet again, with the listener/reader implicitly keeping track of the general form as a whole as they get used to feeling it out, using it to mold their structural expectations of the sequence when it occurs through rest of the piece in order to generate larger, richer and more complex musical phrased from it. SGPNs without the ability to comprehend Advanced Transformations, on the other hand, will be limited to listening to the sequences 'theme-by-theme', with no expectations that themes form part of larger structures built up through them. Often, and especially for more complicated structures, the 'listener' will have to re-parse their impression of the work if they didn't comprehend it previously, and following along with a candidate parse before revising this in light of additional awareness of the work and it's contents is frequently a normal part of taking in such works.
As a general principal of interpreting musical composition, the creation of structures out of tension that feel they ought to lead to a cadence, then suspending the actual cadence proper by the insertion of other (repeating), intermediate structures in order to extent the structure (thereby creating a variant of a canonical theme), and allowing these structure to respond to each other (placing them side by side), in order to create multi-layered tonal hierarchies, is the signature process of variant addition when it operates on music.
- Variant Construction: is a generalization of this that makes use of the same mental processes of variant addition in order to extend phrases, but includes phrase extensions that add non-repetitive material (i.e. that link potentially separate themes that aren't canonical transformations of each other into larger phrases) and allows overlapping combinations of ambiguous grouping structures.
Hence, in this way SGP allows the structural extension of thematic material in ways beyond what is possible with just EVP, allowing the build up and resolution of hierarchical structures, where linear, sequential structures would only be possible with EVP alone. Because of this, themes and motifs can be embedded inside other themes (including themselves), in order to vary and be threaded through each other, even on a single instrumental line, and movement subsections and sections leading into extended cadences can be built up using these methods.
I do not claim that this is in any way an exact process though, as it depends on the listener's individual interpretation and how they interpret subtitles of phrasing, along with the dramatic, empathetic and emotional drive of the music and their experience of it.
At this point I want to point out something very important, and which might otherwise confuse people. I'm using the term 'variant' to talk about something specific which is not the same as what musicologists would traditionally call a 'variation' (of a theme). A "variation of a theme" is specifically closer to and generally shares more in common with what I've chosen to term a 'canonical transformation', though there is some potential for overlap in these terms, as a given "variation of a theme" may have some elements of 'canonical' transformation and some elements of 'variant' transformation relative to another instance of a theme. The distinction, in each case, consists in the difference of mental faculties needed to comprehend the respective transformations, EVP for canonical and SGP for variant respectively.
-Decoration Bias:
Here I want to talk about something I will call decoration bias. I want to speak about the kinds of things which can fit into a canonical sequence, or even a regular sentence or passage of music that doesn't hold any tension or which fits into a metric surface without any disruption, and so can still be parsed by a SGPN, but which have a special importance when encountered with SGP. That is to say, when an SGPA encounters them in a beat based artwork, they will be felt to be especially significant in ways that an SGPN will not and can, as such, be used to redirect attention to particular features of the work in ways that will not be apparent to SGPNs. So in effect, SGP will bias the attention of the perceiver to particular features, or decorations, that otherwise would not be considered structurally meaningful. Some examples are as follows:
-Melodic Inversion: Inversion of tones in music is something that, while technically a valid aspect of the development of a musical theme or motif that forms part of a Canonical Transformation, is not something that an SGPN will feel is particularly meaningful in its own right when used sequentially (i.e.the change in pitch of a given note compared to the previous in the melody is changed from down to up or up to down). Rather, an inversion will feel like a very distant and vague transformation that simply shares the overall beat structure of the notes regardless of the melody itself, but which happens to be 'upside down'. It's only with SGP that inversion stands out as a particularly notable feature that will strongly feel like a very close, but reversed, relative of the original melody.
This piece (BWV525, mvt. 3) is a fantastic tour of large scale melodic inversion, but it might otherwise sound silly or pointless if this doesn't affect you. At about 2:05 you can hear the primary theme being played in inversion.
-Alliteration and Assonance: These are poetic features that will direct the attention of an SGPA and inform their understanding of a poem's structure by highlighting things the poet wants to emphasize/connect up. SGPAs will intuitively feel that these features are meaningful and 'brighten up' the language, as if painting words with similar features a given colour to emphasize this relationship between them. SGPNs will not feel that these features will have this effect and may notice them, but won't see them as a feature that naturally integrates into and shapes the poem in any significant way.
---
It's probably important to discuss this now, so I will mention that even without SGP, pieces are free to introduce new thematic material and melodies in addition to any previous material in any way that works out as long as it fits in to the tonal and harmonic structure of the rest of the work. I'm deliberately going to be very vague about this, as the variety of ways that this can occur is naturally immense and involves some ambiguity as whether a given part is 'really' a transfiguration of a given theme or the introduction of new material or what interpretive stance you take on that. However, as long as each part is allowed to resolve as a Canonical Sequence, instead of having deeper structures intentionally built out of it via Variant Addition it will not perpetually violate a SPGN listener's expectations of resolution.
Now, having gotten that out of the way you may very well be confused. Don't worry, as I'm throwing out these quite abstract ideas in order to reference them later as I illustrate them with actual examples. You should note though, that so far I have mostly been relating these structures to how they occur in music. There is a reason for this. It is that I conjecture that the ability to perceive metric structure at all in more advanced forms of poetry, which lack a strict beat in time or rhyming to mark out lines and which rely on syllable emphasis and line breaks to form the block structure of their metre, depend on SGP in order for that metre to be apparent at all. As such, there is no metric structure to speak of in particular forms of poetry without SGP, and as such sensible Canonical Sequences will not necessarily be perceived in such poetry the first place, just words forming what might otherwise appear to be barely grammatical or intelligible sentences. As a consequence, enjambment has little meaning outside of rhyming or particularly musical poetry, as there will be no perceived structure to break across. Because of this I feel the need to add a final, additional definition.
- High Verse:
Poetry, similar in kind to blank verse and free verse, where line endings don't necessarily have a clear structural marker (like a rhyming scheme) and which instead rely on mental processes implicit in SGP (like Variant Addition, among others) in order to allow a person to intuitively mark out their intended structure.
---
In subsequent articles I will give firm examples showing what I mean by all this, so don't worry if you are having trouble understanding anything, especially if you suspect you lack any of the perceptual abilities I've outlined.
* The actual nature of the main, four note theme/motif as used in the first movement of the fifth symphony is interesting given how short and abrupt it is. But because of this, it seems to be the case that it can be used in a variety of ways in the context of the movement, allowing a, listener to follow a great deal of its development without demanding they are necessarily be capable of perceiving Variant structures. It's arguable that it should be called a motif instead of a theme, but I'm going to call it a theme here because its structure seems to be sufficient enough that anyone with EVP should be capable of perceiving it drive the movement to its resolution, even without SGP.
No comments:
Post a Comment