Imply a subject position, for it to encourage a listener to prefer one reading Itself with lyrics, and also with accompaniment. Eric Clarke’s adoption of a theory of subject position (6) does concern Result of the activity of singing-Tagg’s work concerns itself only little with Popular song, it is less the melody which is subject to accompaniment, than the Indeed, I depart also from Tagg in that for the analysis of Cone, particularly TheĬomposer’s Voice, (5) but I shall depart from him in how I observe the persona I actually derive from the writings of Edward T. So, if accompaniment equates, at first approximation, toĮnvironment, then melody, in Tagg’s understanding, equates to persona. Insisting that this textural structure is “what Haydn and AC/DC share inĬommon,” (4) and uses Jan Maróthy to argue that it is as pervasive a musicalįeature as its visual equivalent, the figure/ground dualism of post-RenaissanceĮuropean painting. Normative underpinning by a melody-accompaniment dualism of all popular song, The relationship between an individual and its environment. (between what accompanies and what is accompanied) as the embodiment in music of Philip Tagg’s semiotic method reads this implied relationship What accompanies forms a key part of the environment for what isĪccompanied. With an implied hierarchy of perceptual pertinence, although not necessarily of Want or need the security to be gained from having that singing accompanied,Įither by themselves, or by an assortment of others? What does an accompanimentĪdd? The word “accompany” indicates being in the company of something else, Little too abstract even for my taste, but the associated “why do songs haveĪccompaniments?” Why, when singing, do people (both listeners and performers)
Not actually “why do songs have music?,” for that is a “why do songs have words?” (1) (2) It seems to me that its obverse is equallyĭemanding of attention. Some years ago, Simon Frith asked the very obvious question, Copyright © 2005 Society for Music Theory
0 kommentar(er)
