著者
中村 滋延 矢向 正人 西田 紘子
出版者
九州大学
雑誌
基盤研究(C)
巻号頁・発行日
2012-04-01

作曲家今史朗(コン・シロウ)は1940年代から1977年に没するまで創作活動を福岡で行っていた.早くから電子音楽に取り組み,前衛的な音楽を次々と作曲・発表していた.しかし彼は福岡以外ではまったく知られていない.福岡においても,死後,彼は忘れられた作曲家になってしまった.私は偶然のキッカケで彼の作品の楽譜と録音を預かることになった.そこではじめて彼の作品に触れ,その作品のレベルの高さに驚嘆した.彼の作品の素晴らしさを多くの人に知らせたい.そのために,本発表では,彼の作曲活動の軌跡を明らかにし,代表的な作品を分析紹介した.今史朗は当時の前衛音楽の歴史を体現した作曲家である。
著者
西田 紘子
出版者
美学会
雑誌
美学 (ISSN:05200962)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.68, no.1, pp.121-132, 2017 (Released:2018-07-01)

This paper selects Neo-Riemannian theory and aims to contextualize and characterize the developmental process of the relevant academic discipline by tracing the complementary and competitive relationship of Neo-Riemannian theory with the existing Schenkerian theory. Neo-Riemannian and Schenkerian theories cannot be compared even by analytical objects. However, as observed by Julian Hook (2007, 168) who considers it a “mistake” if one regards “transformation” and “prolongation” as antithetical conceptions, even though there is a fundamental difference between the theories, the integration or differentiation of both theories has been suggested in several studies (Cohn 1999, Samarotto 2003, Hook 2007, Goldenberg 2007, Rings 2007, Baker 2008). This case study examines the effects of the methodological arguments that advocate a new theory over an existing one. The effects are divided into two categories: first, enabling heuristic interpretations through a hybrid theoretical framework by quasi-integration and, second, showing the capacity of one theory by explaining what the other theory reveals. In other words, a series of arguments arise from the methodological difference related to the priority of “interpretation” or “method,” that is, the theory that sets as an end objective renewing the interpretation of musical pieces, holding the incompatibility of methods, or evoking a new theoretical model.
著者
西田 紘子
出版者
日本音楽学会
雑誌
音楽学 (ISSN:00302597)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.65, no.1, pp.1-17, 2019 (Released:2020-10-15)

1980年代以降、米国では、D. ルーウィンの『一般化された音程と変形』(1987)で提唱された変形理論から発展して、H. クランペンハウアーやB. ハイアー、R. コーンによる一連の論考を中心にネオ・リーマン理論が形作られてきた。この理論は、ポスト調性音楽や後期ロマン主義音楽を分析対象として展開されてきたが、2000年代に入ると音楽理論史的な問い直しも現れ始めた。すなわち、ネオ・リーマン理論の論者たちが、ドイツの音楽理論家フーゴー・リーマンによる諸概念をどのように領有したか、それが主要な論点の一つである。 その代表的論考(Engebretsen 2011)によれば、和声進行に関する「進行/転換 Schritt/Wechsel」というリーマンの概念と分類学(Riemann 1880)は、ネオ・リーマン理論において「同主調」「導音転換」「平行調」(すなわちPLR)の変形群へと置き換えられたものの、両者には和音近親や調性の捉え方等の違いがあるという。その点で、ネオ・リーマン理論はリーマン理論を再発見しただけでなくその趣旨を更新したと言われる。 こうした主張は一定の妥当性を有する一方、以下の3点から、通史的に再考されなくてはならない。(1)リーマンの概念とその元となったA. エッティンゲンの概念(1866)との関係や、リーマンの理論的思考の心理学的転回を含めたリーマンの和声理論の動態、(2)ネオ・リーマン理論の各論者によるPLR以外も含む変形諸概念との関係、(3)2000年代以降のネオ・リーマン理論第2世代(Kopp 2002, Rings 2011)におけるPLR変形の変容およびそれとリーマンの諸概念との関係、である。本稿ではこれらの点から、より広範で緻密な言説分析の基に先行研究による歴史化を更新し、リーマンに由来する諸概念の変容の過程を、領有と歴史化の相互作用および方法の洗練過程として示した。
著者
森宗 里沙 西田 紘子
出版者
九州大学大学院芸術工学研究院
雑誌
芸術工学研究 : 九州大学大学院芸術工学研究院紀要 (ISSN:13490915)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.23, pp.47-57, 2015

This study examines the theatre placement of the band or musicians during early opera performances. This research is considered from the interdisciplinary points of view, for example, acoustic knowledge, and cultural customs of the time. Three countries, England, Italy, and France, where early operas were successful, are focused on. The arrangement of the bands or musicians is inferred based on various historical records such as plan views, libretti, scores, and spectator's diaries. As the results show, some similarities and differences exist between the three regions. For example, it was not the custom in early operas in the three regions to place the band or musicians in front of the stage. One can observe differences in the placement of the bands if they were not arranged in front of the stage. However, if they were positioned there, the pit was not set lower than the ground floor. From this research, the relation between acoustic knowledge and those of theatre construction and band placement could not be proved clearly. It is necessary to get more first historical sources to raise the estimated reliability in the future.
著者
西田 紘子
出版者
九州大学大学院芸術工学研究院
雑誌
芸術工学研究 : 九州大学大学院芸術工学研究院紀要 (ISSN:13490915)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.15, pp.1-14, 2011

This paper discusses the interpretations of Beetoven's "Ninth Symophony" by Richard Wargner, Hermann Kretzschmar, and Heinrich Schenker, eithin the framework of a musical narrative. First, foundamental problems in musical narratology are discussed in order to bridge between recent studies and the narrative acts in Schenker's time. Second, Schenker's work "Beethoven's NInth Symphony" (1912) can be regarded as the starting point of this examination, because it includes a detailed criticism of the interpretations by Wagner and Kretzschmer. Wagner modified Beetoven's own text in oeder to make the main melody clear and provided legitimacy to the voice and language in the finale through his meta-narrative of music history. Moreover, Kretzschmer applied Goethe's "Fausr" to the narrative of the finale. Both attempts were quite unacceptable to Schenker, who did not deviate from the authority of Beethoven's own text and the superiority of absolute music. Schenker's meta-narrative was so powerful thet he characterized the finales as a narrative of the victory pg absolute music and possibly of Beethoven's failure. Such persistance of music's autonomy and the identity of musacal interpretations can also be observed in recent musical narratology.
著者
西田 紘子
出版者
美学会
雑誌
美学 (ISSN:05200962)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.60, no.2, pp.30-43, 2009-12-31 (Released:2017-05-22)

This paper aims to re-examine Heinrich Schenker's (1868-1935) thoughts of music under the frame of musical hermeneutics, by comparing the hermeneutics of Schenker and Hermann Kretzschmar (1848-1924) as representatives of music analysis and musical hermeneutics through Dilthey's hermeneutics. While Kretzschmar proposed inner understanding by listening into "affects" as spiritual content from tones (1902; 1905), the object of Schenker's "true hermeneutics" (1913) was "tonal life," in which movements of tones and human life were identical. Although both correlated tones with "spiritual life," the difference exists in what they regarded as internal: for Schenker, the criterion was to be inside music, but Kretzschmar contrasted internal mentality with external tones. The discrepancy about inner/outer difference corresponds to the discrepancy between Dilthey's general and musical hermeneutics. Dilthey's distinction in 1900 coincided with Kretzschmar's in that the "inner" and "spiritual" expressed in external signs should be understood. However, in Dilthey's "The Musical Understanding" (c.1905), experience was internalized in music and "the life itself" was to be expressed. Interestingly, such a view resonates with Schenker's intramusical hermeneutics.