{"title":"Beethoven jako aktor historyczny. Perspektywa mikrohistoryczna w muzykologii","authors":"Bogumiła Mika","doi":"10.14746/rfn.2020.21.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on issues of microhistory and the usefulness of this historiographical practice in musicological research. The author begins by presenting the key issues relating to microhistory, referring extensively to the book What Is Microhistory? by István M. Szijártó and Sigurður Gylfi Magnússon. She then quotes and briefly discusses the most significant musicological works which employed microhistorical strategy. These are Mark Everist’s book Music Drama at the Paris Odéon, 1824–1828, Tamara Levitz’s Modernist Mysteries: Perséphone and Peter J. Schmelz’s article “Shostakovich” Fights the Cold War: Reflections from Great to Small. The main part of the text is devoted to Mark Ferraguto’s monograph Beethoven 1806. That publication is wholly based on the microhistorical approach, thus open- ing a new perspective in reflection on the instrumental works by the Master from Bonn. Ferraguto analyses Beethoven’s works from 1806 and early 1807 in the context of the people and the instruments for which they were composed; he also explores the nature of and reasons for the composer’s retreat from the „heroic phase”, analysing various aspects of contemporary musical, social and political life in Vienna. He does so while concentrating on selected, characteristic moments which define the given opus. Unlike the earlier musicological works based on the microhistorical strategy, Ferraguto’s monograph is not overburdened with detail, but makes an excellent job of linking contextual issues with analysis of musical composition. In this way it enriches musicological research by providing it with a new, interesting dimension.","PeriodicalId":335976,"journal":{"name":"Res Facta Nova. Teksty o muzyce współczesnej","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Res Facta Nova. Teksty o muzyce współczesnej","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/rfn.2020.21.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The article focuses on issues of microhistory and the usefulness of this historiographical practice in musicological research. The author begins by presenting the key issues relating to microhistory, referring extensively to the book What Is Microhistory? by István M. Szijártó and Sigurður Gylfi Magnússon. She then quotes and briefly discusses the most significant musicological works which employed microhistorical strategy. These are Mark Everist’s book Music Drama at the Paris Odéon, 1824–1828, Tamara Levitz’s Modernist Mysteries: Perséphone and Peter J. Schmelz’s article “Shostakovich” Fights the Cold War: Reflections from Great to Small. The main part of the text is devoted to Mark Ferraguto’s monograph Beethoven 1806. That publication is wholly based on the microhistorical approach, thus open- ing a new perspective in reflection on the instrumental works by the Master from Bonn. Ferraguto analyses Beethoven’s works from 1806 and early 1807 in the context of the people and the instruments for which they were composed; he also explores the nature of and reasons for the composer’s retreat from the „heroic phase”, analysing various aspects of contemporary musical, social and political life in Vienna. He does so while concentrating on selected, characteristic moments which define the given opus. Unlike the earlier musicological works based on the microhistorical strategy, Ferraguto’s monograph is not overburdened with detail, but makes an excellent job of linking contextual issues with analysis of musical composition. In this way it enriches musicological research by providing it with a new, interesting dimension.
本文着重讨论微观历史的问题,以及这种史学实践在音乐学研究中的作用。作者首先介绍了与微历史相关的关键问题,广泛参考了《什么是微历史?》作者:István M. Szijártó和Sigurður Gylfi Magnússon。然后,她引用并简要讨论了运用微观历史策略的最重要的音乐学作品。这些是马克·埃弗里斯特的书《巴黎奥德赛,1824-1828》、塔玛拉·莱维茨的《现代主义的奥秘:奥德赛》和彼得·j·施梅尔茨的文章《肖斯塔科维奇与冷战作斗争:从大到小的反思》。正文的主要部分是马克·费拉古托的专著《贝多芬1806》。该出版物完全以微观历史方法为基础,从而为反思波恩大师的器乐作品开辟了新的视角。费拉古托分析了贝多芬1806年至1807年初的作品,从人物和乐器的角度来分析这些作品;他还探讨了作曲家从“英雄阶段”撤退的本质和原因,分析了维也纳当代音乐、社会和政治生活的各个方面。他这样做的同时,专注于选定的、有特色的时刻,这些时刻定义了给定的作品。与早期基于微观历史策略的音乐学作品不同,费拉古托的专著没有过多的细节,而是出色地将背景问题与音乐创作分析联系起来。通过这种方式,它丰富了音乐学研究,为它提供了一个新的、有趣的维度。