Non-imitative counterpoint in the system of the course of polyphony: the actual problems of modern theory and practice.
Background. As is known, the content of the traditional systematic polyphony course, based on its dichotomous division into strict and free writing, mainly relies on the musical styles of Renaissance, Baroque and the classical-romantic era. In this regard, it is not surprising that the primary place in it is the doctrine of imitation, as well as forms of motet, ricercar, invention, fugato, fughetta, fugue, which inextricably are associated with the latter. Meanwhile, the student, starting work on two or three completely different voices, is forced to weave these continuous horizontal-vertical-diagonal connections in “real time”, facing the need to solve the problem with many unknowns at the same time. He does not have, in that matter, in its arsenal a set of specific recommendations, such as rules for constructing of the imitation. Objectives. The purpose of the article is to summarize the trends associated with the current state of affairs in the study of non-imitative (multi-subject, contrast) polyphony in the educational courses of the university as a historically developed situation. The actual tasks of the work also include determining the possibilities of filling the existing gaps in this direction and further promising development of polyphony as a discipline in its theoretical and practical aspects. Methods. The methodology of work combines comparative, structurally-analytical, deductive and systemic approaches, which allowed to cover a wide range of heterogeneous phenomena and simultaneously highlight the specificity of the chosen subject. Results. We propose to pay special attention to the voluminous note appendix to S. I. Taneyev’s “Convertible counterpoint in the strict style”, with systematically ordered examples that consistently (if not to say, pedantically) reflect the practical applications of the theoretical propositions previously expounded by the researcher [27, p. 330–375]. Our special interest in this material is because by the type of polyphonic texture it is largely the non-imitative, as the most suitable for illustrating the corresponding essence of the three main varieties of the convertible counterpoint – vertical, horizontal and double-shifting counterpoint. Active implementation in the twentieth century the “historical” vector in the traditional theoretical course of polyphony led to a revision all of its “practical” methodology: written works, the polyphonic analysis, tasks for playing the piano. As the most effective in writing practical exercises, according to Yu. Evdokimova, “a method of modeling the style of the historical epoch (or that outstanding artist) is chosen, which is mentioned in lecture classes” [5, p. 22]. Let us dwell in more detail on the methodological aspect of the Yu. Evdokimova’s manual, which is the first textbook of polyphony of a new type [6]. The manual is fully dedicated to a medieval polyphony and a strict style of Renaissance. In addition, all material is grouped according to the number of semester classes, which greatly simplifies the problem of practical integration of this radically updated course in the content of the traditional academic discipline. Attention is drawn to the fact that a large part of the material (10 lectures of 17) covers a range of issues related specifically to non‑imitative varieties of compositional techniques and genres. Yu. Evdokimova put forward the so‑called identifying (attributive) method, which assumes, based on the acquired knowledge, the ability to determine the belonging of the proposed multi‑voice musical work of the X–XV centuries to a certain historical time, genre or style of the school or author, to stable principles of writing (technique). As a final written examination paper, it is proposed to create a polyphonic play in any of the passed styles for some Gregorian monody with the text [6, p. 125]. The textbooks on polyphony of I. P. Pyaskovsky – “Polyphony” (2003) and “Polyphony in Ukrainian Music” (2012 [18, 19] – undoubtedly combine the capacious historical base of concrete theoretical knowledge with the powerful generalizing potential of the theory of systems of I. A. Kotlyarevsky. This allows the author to freely project compositional methods, techniques, genre-style patterns of a medieval polyphony on the present, thanks to which in the work of many composers of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries I. Pyaskovsky distinguishes typical neo‑Gothic features of modern polyphony, mostly non‑imitative by its very nature. Conclusions. Now the process of the formation of polyphony as a discipline continues. Therefore the actual problems remain to create modern textbooks and, especially, practical manuals on the subject that would have the goal of fully equipping our future domestic composers and musicologists with a balanced set of theoretical knowledge and practical skills, not only in sphere of an imitative, but also much wider in historical and stylistic terms, a non-imitative polyphony.