“That you too were the I”: Forms of polyphonic communication in John Ashbery’s poetry

Tarkastelen tutkimuksessani amerikkalaisen John Ashberyn (1927–) runoudessa lmenevää moniäänisyyttä. Runoutta pidetään yleensä yksiäänisenä puheena, kun taas omaanin ajatellaan erityisesti Mihail Bahtinin vaikutuksesta olevan luonnostaan oniääninen kirjallisuudenlaji. Ashberyn postmoderni runous haastaa tämän äsityksen. Ashbery tunnetaan vakiintuneita runouskäsityksiä vastaan kirjoittavana avantgarde-runoilijana. Pääasiallisina tutkimuskohteinani ovat Ashberyn pitkä runoelma nimeltä ”Litany” (1979) sekä lyhyiden runojen valikoima Your Name Here (2000). Vertailukohtana tarkastelen Ashberyn yhdessä James Schuylerin kanssa kirjoittamaa romaania A Nest of Ninnies (1969). Teoreettisena pohjana on käytetty Ashberyä käsittelevän muun tutkimuksen lisäksi muun muassa jälkistrukturalistisiin teorioihin liittyviä ajatuksia pronominien vaikutuksesta siihen miten lukija muodostaa käsityksen subjektiivisesta läsnäolosta runossa. Ashbery käyttää persoonapronomineja ilman selkeitä viittaussuhteita. Viittaussuhteiden hämärtymisen ja fragmentaarisuuden vuoksi Ashberyn runoja pidetään usein vaikeina, eikä niistä ole helppo löytää yhtä selkeää aihetta. Hajanaisuus on kuitenkin motivoitua, koska juuri se mahdollistaa moniäänisyyden ja avoimen tekstin, joka voi sisältää monia merkityksiä. Kun runossa ei ole yhden puhujan hallitsevaa ääntä, lukijan rooli merkitysten muodostajana nousee keskeiseksi. ”Litany” on selkeästi metatekstuaalinen runo, jossa fiktiivinen taso sekoittuu runouden, taiteen ja kritiikin mahdollisuuksien pohdintaan. Runo hahmottelee uudenlaista, moniäänistä teorian ja runouden rajoja purkavaa kommunikaation muotoa. Toisen persoonan pronominien voidaan runossa usein ajatella puhuttelevan lukijaa. Your Name Here -kokoelmassa puolestaan toisen persoonan pronominipositiot määrittyvät usein tietyiksi henkilöhahmoiksi runojen maailmassa, ja pronominipositioiden kautta runoissa rakentuu moniäänisiä dialogeja määrittymättömien henkilöhahmojen välille. Näin lukijan huomio suunnataan ensisijaisesti kommunikaation ja arkipäivän kielenkäytön kliseiden sävyihin ja asiayhteyksiin pikemminkin kuin yksittäisten lausumien sisältöön. A Nest of Ninnies -romaani toimii näennäisestä dialogisuudestaan huolimatta ennen kaikkea yksiäänisesti, sillä romaanin yksiulotteisten henkilöhahmojen esittämiä ajatuksia hallitsee parodioimaan pyrkivä kertojanääni. Ashberyn runojen ja romaanin tarkasteleminen osoittaa, että käsitys runoudesta väistämättä yksiäänisenä ja romaanista moniäänisenä ei ole kaikilta osin ongelmaton. Moniääninen, monimerkityksinen runo voi tarjota toiselle itsenäisen aseman.

Intuitiosta esitykseen : Lear-prosessi itsereflektion ja katsojapalautteen valossa

My final project presents the directing process of my experimental production based on King Lear by William Shakespeare. I describe the process from the first visions of the beginning to the completed performance and finally the feedback from the audience. I concentrate on the special qualities of the production, such as interaction, small and moveable audience, cinematic qualities, polyphonic dramaturgy, and use of the video. The Project is divided into six parts. The first part introduces the project as a whole. The second part concentrates on the process before the beginning of the rehearsals. The third part focuses on the rehearsals and co-operation with the actors, whereas the fourth part deals with the performance and its special qualities. Following this, in the fifth part I study the interaction of the performance with the help of the audience feedback. In the final part conclusions are drawn. The focus of this work is the use of intuition even as a starting point of the theatre directing process. My conclusions drawn from the description of the process suggest that the starting point of the theatre production may be an intuitive vision as well as some conscious subject or message.

Comparison Structure Analysis

This study presents an automatic, computer-aided analytical method called Comparison Structure Analysis (CSA), which can be applied to different dimensions of music. The aim of CSA is first and foremost practical: to produce dynamic and understandable representations of musical properties by evaluating the prevalence of a chosen musical data structure through a musical piece. Such a comparison structure may refer to a mathematical vector, a set, a matrix or another type of data structure and even a combination of data structures. CSA depends on an abstract systematic segmentation that allows for a statistical or mathematical survey of the data. To choose a comparison structure is to tune the apparatus to be sensitive to an exclusive set of musical properties. CSA settles somewhere between traditional music analysis and computer aided music information retrieval (MIR). Theoretically defined musical entities, such as pitch-class sets, set-classes and particular rhythm patterns are detected in compositions using pattern extraction and pattern comparison algorithms that are typical within the field of MIR. In principle, the idea of comparison structure analysis can be applied to any time-series type data and, in the music analytical context, to polyphonic as well as homophonic music. Tonal trends, set-class similarities, invertible counterpoints, voice-leading similarities, short-term modulations, rhythmic similarities and multiparametric changes in musical texture were studied. Since CSA allows for a highly accurate classification of compositions, its methods may be applicable to symbolic music information retrieval as well. The strength of CSA relies especially on the possibility to make comparisons between the observations concerning different musical parameters and to combine it with statistical and perhaps other music analytical methods. The results of CSA are dependent on the competence of the similarity measure. New similarity measures for tonal stability, rhythmic and set-class similarity measurements were proposed. The most advanced results were attained by employing the automated function generation – comparable with the so-called genetic programming – to search for an optimal model for set-class similarity measurements. However, the results of CSA seem to agree strongly, independent of the type of similarity function employed in the analysis.

St. Petersburg Court Chant and the Tradition of Eastern Slavic Church Singing

The present study examines the repertory of liturgical chant known as St. Petersburg Court Chant which emerged within the Imperial Court of St. Petersburg, Russia, and appeared in print in a number of revisions during the course of the 19th century, eventually to spread throughout the Russian Empire and even abroad. The study seeks answers to questions on the essence and composition of Court Chant, its history and liturgical background, and most importantly, its musical relationship to other repertories of Eastern Slavic chant. The research questions emerge from previous literary accounts of Court Chant (summarized in the Introduction), which have tended to be inaccurate and generally not based on critical research. The study is divided into eight main chapters. Chapter 1 provides a survey of the history of Eastern Slavic chant and the Imperial Court Chapel of St. Petersburg until 1917, with special emphasis on the history of singing traditional chant in polyphony, the status of the Court Chapel as a government authority, and its endeavours in publishing church music. Chapter 2 deals with the liturgical background of Eastern chant, the chant genres, and main repertories of Eastern Slavic chant. Chapter 3 concentrates on chant sources: it introduces the musical notations utilised, after which a typology of chant books is presented. The discussion continues with a survey of the sources of Court Chant and their content, the specimens selected for closer analysis, the comparative materials from other repertories, and ends with a commentary on some chant sources that have been excluded. The comparative sources include a specimen from around the beginning of the 12th century, a few manuscripts from the 17th century, and printed and manuscript chant books from the early 18th to early 20th century, covering the geographical area that delimits to the western Ukraine, Astrakhan, Nizhny Novgorod, and the Solovetsky Monastery. Chapter 4 presents the approach and methods used in the subsequent analytical comparisons. After a survey of the pitch organization of Eastern Slavic chant, the customary harmonization strategy of traditional chant polyphony is examined, according to which a method for meaningful analysis of the harmony is proposed. The method is based on the observation that the harmonic framework of chant polyphony derives from the standard pitch collection of monodic chant known as the Church Gamut, specific pitches of which form eight harmonic regions that behave like the usual tonalities of major and harmonic minor. Because of the considerable quantity of comparative chant forms, computer-assisted statistical methods are applied to the analysis of chant melodies. The primary chant forms and their respective comparative forms have been pre-processed into reduced chant prototypes and divided into redactions. The analyses are carried out by measuring the formal dissimilarities of the primary chant forms of the Court Chant repertory against each comparative form, and also by measuring the reciprocal dissimilarities of all chant versions in a redaction, the results of which are subjected to agglomerative hierarchical clustering in order to find out how the chant forms relate to each other. The dissimilarities are determined by applying a metric dissimilarity function that is based on the Levenshtein Distance. Chapter 5 provides the melodic and harmonic analyses of generic chants (chants used for multiple texts of different lengths), i.e., chants for stichera samoglasny and troparia, Chapter 6 of pseudo-generic chants (chants that are used for multiple texts but with certain restrictions), i.e., chants for heirmoi, prokeimena, and three other hymns, and Chapter 7 of non-generic chants, covering nine chants that in the Court repertory are not shared by multiple texts. The results are summarized and evaluated in Chapter 8. Accordingly, it can be established that, contrary to previous conceptions, melodically, Court Chant is in effect a full part of the wider Eastern Slavic chant tradition. Even if it is somewhat detached from the chant versions of the Synodal square-note chant books and the local tradition of Moscow, it is particularly close to chant forms of East Ukraine and some vernacular repertories from Russia. Respectively, the harmonization strategies of Court Chant do not show significant individuality in comparison with those of the available polyphonic comparative sources, the main difference being the part-writing, which generally conforms to western common practice standard, whereas the deviations from this tend to be more significant in other analysed repertories of polyphonic chant. Thus, insofar as the subsequent prevalence of Court Chant is not based on its forceful dissemination by authorities (as suggested in previous literature but for which little tangible evidence could be found in Chapter 1), in the present author’s interpretation, Court Chant attained its dominance principally because musically it was considered sufficiently traditional, and as a chant body supported by the government, was conveniently available in print in serviceable harmonizations.