So, there are actually two lines of independent harmonies at the same level of quality working with each other to create the third one with more values. This type of combination can seemingly be addressed to other forms of art. For example a ballet of two dancers, or a harmonious montage of a film shots according to its music score, or a composition of line and shape in a painting, or text and image in a poster.
Counterpoints, again, prove that how the matter of two-ness is not only a fundamental method of thinking in art practice, but is also a constitutional philosophical way of our cognitive ideology.
Just think of yin and yang or anima and animus or even day and night!
Now the question is whether the simultaneity of the two poles is crucial? Or better say, does the counterpoint and its components need to be recognized simultaneously in time based works of art?
From the text read for the class:
ReplyDeleteCounterpoint cuts into total movement to create an actualizable field -- “an ordered interplay.” In doing so, counterpoint touches on both registers of movement, virtual and actual, tapping into the field of total movement to create an opening for this or that movement-quality in the realm of the actual. This allows the milieu of movement to resonate with the more-than. This more-than is the counterpoint-event’s motif. This motif is a like-ness. It gives the milieu a singular tonality. This tone in turn tunes the milieu to certain tendencies. A milieu with a springing motif tunes to air-likeness, […]. - Manning
In response to your question, I am on the same train of thought as lp. The interplay of elements rather than their simultaneity is crucial. Even if elements are encountered separately from another they can resonate a likeness that composes a counterpoint.
ReplyDelete