卡爾•達爾豪斯「新音樂」論述的文本理解與詮釋

Abstract

卡爾•達爾豪斯（Carl Dahlhaus, 1928-1989），是上個世紀二次大戰以後，德國音樂學界最具影響力的領導人物。他優異的教學以及浩繁卷帙的著作，深深地啟發著音樂學界，並改變了這個學科的本質。 達氏著作的艱深與晦澀，眾所皆知：放棄敘事、傳記性的編纂方式，讓文風失去了親和力；摒除整體與一致性，注重每一個個案的特殊境遇，讓讀者如陷五里霧中，摸不著頭緒。而「令人難以總結」的寫作風格，其所造成的普遍現象，是人們對達爾豪斯的誤讀與誤解：有些讀者執著於某個偏狹的理念，而忽略了達爾豪斯龐大的學術能量；有些讀者則不願意認同相異觀點的「對話」與「並置」，一昧地批評、攻訐達爾豪斯的辯證寫作風格。 有鑑於達爾豪斯的著作，係「音樂學領域裡無法迴避的經典」，本論文擬以其廿世紀「新音樂」論述為範圍，對這位博大精深的音樂學家，進行個人的解讀與詮釋；除了精研幾批重要的「新音樂」文獻以外，過程中亦參酌達氏的其他重要著作，俾使整個研究結果，能建立在第一手文獻的基礎之上。 研究結果顯示，要理解達爾豪斯的著作，必須掌握幾個關鍵性的理念：（一）矛盾與辯證（二）「同一性」與「非同一性」（三）個案的取決。希冀藉由以上理念的提出，能適切、清楚地表達「理解達爾豪斯」，在什麼樣的情況底下，可能獲得比較理想的成果。Carl Dahlhaus (1928–1989) was the most influential musicologist in Germany during the postwar era. His excellent teaching and voluminous works have deeply inspired the musicology circle and changed the nature of musicology. Dahlhaus’s works are renowned to be abstract and obscure. He gives up narrative and biographical codification in his works, making his style of writing lose its affinity. He puts aside cohesion and consistency and focuses on the special circumstances of each case. Readers of his works are shrouded in mystery and feel clueless. His difficult-to-summarize writing style has resulted in the common phenomenon of people misreading and misunderstanding his works. Some readers are attached to some narrow concept while ignoring Dahlhaus’s immense academic strength, whereas some are unwilling to agree with the “dialogue” and “juxtaposition” of his disparate ideas and constantly criticize and defame his dialectical writing style. In view of Dahlhaus’s works as inevitable classics of musicology, we aimed to interpret and explain this profound musicologist, taking his discourse on the “Neue Musik” of the twentieth century as the scope of this study. In addition to a careful examination of his numerous major works on “Neue Musik,” we also considered his other major works to allow the overall results of the study to be established based on first-hand literature. The results indicate that to understand Dahlhaus’s works, one must grasp a few key concepts as follows: (a) contradiction and dialectic, (b) “identity” and “non-identity,” and (c) case selection. It is expected that by putting forward the above concepts, the idea of “understanding Dahlhaus” can be appropriately and clearly expressed. Furthermore, the study investigated the circumstances under which more ideal results could possibly be obtained.