Muzikos genotipo teorinis modelis

LTMonografijoje gvildenama menotyros fundamentalios kategorijos „muzikos žanras“ kilmė, ontinis statusas, funkcijos ir raiška XX a. antros pusės-XXI a. pradžios Vakarų tradicijos profesionaliojoje muzikoje. Autorinis teorinis modelis remiasi bendrosios sistemų teorijos (BST) metodologine prieiga ir iškelia tradicinį terminą pakeičiantį sinonimą - „muzikos genotipas". Šis apmąstomas kaip optimaliai atspindintis muzikos morfologijos sistemos genotipo lygmens esmę. Muzikos genotipo samprata grindžiama žanrologijai priskiriamais mokslotyros darbais ir nauju požiūriu į garsų meno tipologizavimo principus. Šie monografijoje išskirti ištyrus istorines garsų meno tipologizavimo sistemas. Tipologizuojančios muzikos genotipo funkcijos samprata aptariama kaip fenomeno subordinuotų subfunkcijų (kompozicinės ir komunikacinės) sinergijos raiška. Dinamiško, saviorganizuojančio muzikos genotipo koncepcija monografijoje grindžiama pastarųjų dešimtmečių muzikos tipologinių procesų analitinio diskurso pagrindu. Kaip tyrimo rezultatą autorė iškelia muzikos genotipo kaičių statusų sistemos (senosios tradicijos monožanras, poližanras, „laisvasis žanras" ir naujosios tradicijos monožanras) idėją. Istorinių muzikos genotipų makrosistemų kaitos požymių autorė įžvelgia XX a. paskutiniais dešimtmečiais ir XXI a. pradžioje garsų mene vykstančiuose procesuose.

ENThe monograph focuses on the issue of changes in the postmodern art music typology and the genetic identity of musical compositions. The symbolic beginning of challenging times and revolutions in the art of music that made them meaningful (the 1950s through 1960s) was marked by the Dada and Fluxus movements. For musicology, they posed a number of fundamental questions at the epistemological level. One of them was whether, from the point of view of modern science, the typological essence of the art of sounds of the late twentieth through the early twenty-first century allows us to talk about the still functioning phenomenon of the music genre (defined by the author of the monograph as “music genotype”). The evaluation of crisis situations in the development of music and the critical analysis of its typological aspect seek to both provide answers to the questions that have arisen and simultaneously expand and deepen the concept of typologizing musical phenomena and initiate the renewal of genrology. The revision of concepts and theoretical approaches at present is similarly dictated by the state of theories in quite a few traditional categories of musicology. The sixteen-chapter scholarly study of A Theoretical Model of Music Genotype attempts to overcome the fear of researching into the phenomena of music typology, including music genre (music genotype) as “outdated” and removed to the archives of science, and to transcend the limits of the current issues of musicology. In the chapter The Concept of Music Genotype, the researcher concentrates on the theoretical discourse of “music genotype” as the key concept of the research. The term was proposed in the monograph author’s doctoral dissertation (1990) as a synonym for the traditional term “music genre,” with the aim of emphasizing the genetic nature and functions of the music genre (genotype) in the sound art system through the semantics and etymological meaning of the concept.The concept of the music genotype enables us to take a fresh look at the value and function of the genre paradigm and at its ontic status. From the author’s point of view, this universal phenomenon of art has been implanted in the overall process of artistic creation and communication and represents a picture of the ongoing creation of music. The term “music genotype” emphasizes the integration of types of musical works into the global process of creation as a bioartistic process. The word “genotype” (gene + 0 + type), derived from genetics, deconstructs the essential meaning of the concept of music genre - the genetic constitution of an object or phenomenon, the totality of hereditary factors, which reflects the fundamental characteristics of the phenomenon. From the viewpoint of art studies, the music genotype is an inherited typological commonality of works, one of the instruments of identity, pervading the development of the composition of music without excluding the contemporary artifacts created by artistic intellect. A music genre (genotype) is the ontic condition for the inherent existence of sound art. The genres of music are conditioning (naturans) in relation to musical works, and simultaneously conditioned (naturata) in relation to the types of music. In this respect, the category and the term “music genotype” signify the totality of hereditary extramusical and intramusical factors implanted in musical compositions, transmitted in a manner similar to the DNA code inherited by living organisms. This analogy raises the issue of the validity of the bioartistic approach relevant to the studies of music morphology, dealt with by philosophers Raymond Ruyer (1952,1958), Gilles Deleuze and Pierre-Felix Guattari (2004), and Audronė Žukauskaitė (2019) and discussed in the monograph.As emphasized by the author when proposing to integrate the concept and term “music genotype” into musicology, the word “genotype” was later used by Francois-Bernard Mache (1997, 2001) in the context of the semiotics of zoomusicology and by Dora A. Hanninen (2001) in her research into segmentation and associative organization of musical compositions. Since “music genre” and “music type” are structural units of typologies, classifications (systematizations), and taxonomies, it is important to discuss the procedural differences between typology and taxonomy. In the chapter Typology versus Taxonomy, the author of the monograph sought to clarify the difference between them as the operations of systematization used in genrology, which she discerned both in the etymology of the two words as well as in the directionality of systematization operations. Typology (grouping of objects by type, the science of types) is an umbrella category, more general than taxonomy, which means a certain specification of typology. Both taxonomies and typologies are classification structures; as the research revealed, the difference between them lies in the concept and development of each: in the monograph, taxonomy, the systematics of empirical origin, is opposed to typology of conceptual origin and its systematization principles. Typology differentiates objects (phenomena) based on the studies of logical solutions and the principles of deduction, while taxonomies are based on the principle of induction and the process of association. The first historical systematization of music in Boethius’s De institutio- ne musica (c. 491-492) was a speculative, hierarchically organized three-level typology of the types of music (musicae genera} that eventually legitimized a deductive logic-based typological approach in music systematics. [...].