• Author / Uploaded
• Filipe Carlos Vieira

Citation preview

Contemporary Music Review Vol. 23, No. 3/4, September/December 2004, pp. 91 – 95

The Theory of Perception in the Aesthetic Conception of Helmut Lachenmann: A ‘Redefinition’ Trial of the ‘Functional’ Aspect of Music Iyad Mohammad

In this article, I discuss my opinions of Helmut Lachenmann’s own theories on perception and the functionality of music. I also allude to the numerous ways in which his music could be approached by new or experienced listeners and how Helmut’s musical thought has evolved during the past few decades. Keywords: Functionality; Listening; Perception

One of the main keys to understanding the works of the contemporary German composer Helmut Lachenmann is his concept of musical perception, in which he develops a new type of music listening, a new approach to the essence of this art and its functions in modern society. Working out a new attitude of man toward music is an issue that is central to some of Lachenmann’s most celebrated essays. Wholly dedicated to this subject are such articles as ‘Vier Grundbestimmungen des Musikho¨rens’ (‘Four fundamental provisions for listening’, 1979), ‘Ho¨ren ist ¨ ber Mo¨glichkeiten und Schwierigkeiten’ (‘Listening is wehrlos—ohne Ho¨ren. U defenceless without listening. On possibilities and difficulties’, 1985) and ‘Herausforderungen an das Ho¨ren (Gespra¨ch mit Reinhold Urmetzer)’ (‘The challenges of listening [conversation with Reinhold Urmetzer]’, 1991), all of which appear in the 1996 collection of Lachenmann’s writings, Musik als existentielle Erfahrung. In his articles the composer strives for an innovative conception of listening that embodies the existential idea of acting out of knowledge and, as such, differs from the traditional understanding of listening as a passive act of perception. According to Lachenmann, listening is a process of perception, in which the composer, as well as the performer and listener, touches his way through the musical material together with the factors predetermining its tonal, corporal, structural and associative ISSN 0749-4467 (print)/ISSN 1477-2256 (online) ª 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd DOI: 10.1080/0749446042000285708

92

I. Mohammad

contexts, at the same time opposing himself to the latter. While in this process of recognising the factors that predetermine the character of the musical material, the listener becomes aware of his own predetermination, of the inner factors that predetermine his act of perception itself and thus limit the range (scope) of his apprehension and experiencing of earlier unknown musical events. To listen, writes Lachenmann (1996, pp. 117 – 118), means to discover one’s own ability to change and to oppose it against the just recognised non-freedom as a resistance; to listen means to rediscover oneself, means to change oneself. . .. It is a question of a new, a changed perception.

The musical work is understood as a landscape, through which we are to touch our way in the process of listening. In it we recognise our own predetermined structure of perception as sublimed, as broken-up and as possible too; maybe only in this regained freedom can we be reconciled with it (our predetermined structure) without yielding to it anew. (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 135)

What has been called here the process of ‘touching one’s way through’ the musical material is what Lachenmann names in German abtasten, one of the main compositional categories of the composer’s aesthetics. It indicates both the cognitive and physical aspects of the process. The word awakens the image of a blind man trying to construct in his mind a view—a picture of the world around him without being able to really see it—only by using the sense of touch. One might even be reminded of Maurice Maeterlinck’s Les Aveugles. Hearing, performing and composing become processes of ‘touching the way through’ the offered and given musical material, through the composition and through the structures and relations existing in it. Thus they are described as acts of searching and exploration, as cognition. The material side of this ‘touching’ is on one hand closely related to the purely physical and acoustic features of the musical material, named by the composer in ‘Vier Grundbestimmungen des Musikho¨rens’ as corporeality (Ko¨rperlichkeit) (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 58). This term, defined in his later article ‘Zum Problem des Strukturalismus’ (‘On the problem of structuralism’, 1990) as the ‘acousticphysical experience’ (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 88), generalises in its turn the acoustic experience of Lachenmann’s classification of sound-types made in his early article ‘Klangtypen der Neuen Musik’ (‘Sound types of New Music’, 1966). On the other hand, it is not less related to the extremely material, physical attitude of Lachenmann toward musical instruments that materialises in his unique world of sound referred to by him as musique concre`te instrumentale. No less determined by Lachenmann’s material approach to musical categories is the cognitive aspect of touching. The choice of the word abtasten itself is very significant. The direct material impression it gives and the sensuality it attributes to

Contemporary Music Review 93 the cognitive process characterise the latter as an empirical existential act. It excludes any abstract, speculative or metaphysical interpretations. This act of exploration concerns not only the musical material of a work. Instead, it is a much more general attitude that manifests itself with regard to what Lachenmann calls the ‘aesthetic apparatus’: musical instruments (in relation to their absolute physical-acoustic possibilities) and the history of music as a whole, through which the composer ‘touches his way’ as part of his present existence, as far as it is a searching one. According to Lachenmann (1996, p. 63), the transformation of the act of perception occurs due to the fact that ‘the confrontation with the musical material turns by necessity into a confrontation with oneself’, also with one’s own perception and its cognitive structure. This opposition of perception with the ego itself is unavoidable if listening is to become an existential experience, in which the aim of cognition is self-knowledge and self-consciousness. When listening is understood as an existential act, it becomes aware of its own structure, it focuses on itself as a process. Thus, the final aim of such an approach becomes the experiencing of the conditions and circumstances of perception in the course of perception itself. The result of such a reflective listening would be the self-experiencing of man in the course of the cognitive act. ‘Practically,’ as Lachenmann (1996, p. 118) puts it, ‘such listening means concentration of the spirit, work. But work, which as the experiencing of penetration into reality, as progressing self-experiencing, is a happy experience.’ This reasoning brings Lachenmann to a rather paradoxical assertion concerning the essence of music as an art. The object of music, as he sees it, is the act of ‘listening itself, the self-perceiving perception’ (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 117). Music thus loses its traditional meaning as the most consequent example of art for the sake of art. Its function is to activate a conscious reflective process. It is a means, the final aim of which is for man to experience himself, his own cognitive act and structure. Listening, traditionally traced as a passive act, here becomes an active selfexperiencing of man, an exploration of his existential situation. Thus, what really matters in a composition is not what happens, but rather how it happens, not what we hear, but how we hear it and how we experience what we hear. A certain musical acoustic event works as a catalyst, a generator within the frame of a new form of listening, in which feeling and thinking while listening to music is recognised as a necessary means for a conscious self-observation. The differentiation in Lachenmann’s terminology between feeling and experiencing is based on the understanding of the first as an elementary and rather passive act of self-identification, while the second is defined as an existential process of man experiencing himself in action, a self-experiencing apprehension. In this correlation between the what and the how in the act of perception we observe a resemblance with the relation of the same two aspects of a musical composition. The concept of musical form as a ‘description of the flowing of time’, popular in the second half of the 20th century, is strongly interrelated with the processes found in Lachenmann’s works. This concept is based on a more descriptive

94

I. Mohammad

function of musical form, rather than the traditional constructive one. The music of Lachenmann is one of gradually unfolding structural and acoustic processes. Each of the innovative acoustic and technical elements for which Lachenmann’s music has come to be famous is not as important in itself as its context within a compositional process, whether acoustic or technical. The what of the musical event is subordinated to its how, to the issue of organisation of the material in time. The qualitative aspect of the musical material is what is organised and developed in the musical process; it is the manifestation of the latter. This analogy between the relation of the qualitative aspect and the overall process of the act of perception on the one hand and the musical material and compositional technique on the other is related to the basic structural orientation of Lachenmann’s thinking. As structural experience hearing is orientated not only positively toward the qualitative aspects of the acoustic object, but explores the position of this object in its surrounding. The perception of music becomes narrower or wider simultaneously with these interrelations, unfolding themselves in time and space between it and the nearer and farther surrounding. (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 118)

To say it in another way: ‘hearing apprehends consciously and unconsciously, together with the acoustic events, also relations’ (Lachenmann, 1996, p. 118). Lachenmann interprets structures as a ‘polyphony of allocations’ that must be explored in the process of listening and experienced as an expressive and structuralacoustic idea. Such a type of listening the composer calls ‘structurally orientated listening’. The terminology is clearly close to the conception of the Russian musicologist Boris Asafiev of a ‘musical form directed toward perception’. However, Asafiev’s ideas are quite the opposite of Lachenmann’s: they interpret perception as the passive side of the act of listening and see musical form as its active one. Structure and process, or said better as the structure of the musical process, is one of the most important categories of the compositional thinking of Lachenmann and as such is common to both acts of composition and perception. In experiencing a composition, in experiencing the act of perception itself as a structured process, man becomes aware of his own alienation. As Lachenmann (1996, p. 66) puts it: ‘The expressive ego is struck by its own socialisation; the subject discovers himself as an object, a given entity, a structure.’ In the subject experiencing himself as a structure, he achieves the ultimate unity of the musical structural process of a composition and the perceiving subject for which Lachenmann strives. Thus, in Lachenmann’s musical aesthetics and his theory of perception, the acts of listening, composing and performing are brought closer together on the basis of the similarity of their essence and role in human existence. The perception of music becomes in his writings an existential act of self-knowledge, the object of which is man himself, his structure and relationship with his surrounding. As in the composer’s music, in his theoretical writings human action and its reflection are

Contemporary Music Review 95 traced as self-sufficient aspects of human existence—a fact that reflects the existential orientation of Lachenmann’s views and thinking. Reference Lachenmann, H. (1996). Musik als existentielle Erfahrung. Schriften 1966 – 1995 (J. Ha¨usler, Ed.). Wiesbaden: Breitkopf & Ha¨rtel.