MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4205170835 · doi:10.1353/phx.2014.0039

Music in Roman Comedy by Timothy J. Moore

2014· article· en· W4205170835 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Timothy Power

Notice bibliographique

RevuePhoenix · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueClassical Antiquity Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComedyComicsLiteratureOperaArtMeaning (existential)Sign (mathematics)MelodyVisual artsArt historyHistoryMusicalPhilosophyEpistemology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

182 PHOENIX meticulous analysis of the contents of well J 2:4, to open lines of inquiry, raise important questions, and provoke thought and debate. She also intends to make available to other scholars a body of evidence of which many further significant questions might be asked (to which end she provides a detailed catalogue and many useful tables and charts, as well as high-quality illustrations and three appendices, one contributed by Mark Lawall and another by Lisa Little). She has succeeded admirably. McMaster University Sean Corner Music in Roman Comedy. By Timothy J. Moore. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. 2012. Pp. xvi, 452. “Like the music of opera, musicals, and film,” observes Timothy Moore in Music in Roman Comedy, “music gave Roman comedies form, played a significant role in making the plays enjoyable, and contributed to their meaning” (376). But any study of music in Roman comedy faces a glaring obstacle: the melodies of the Plautine and Terentian stage are now lost. They may not even have been notated at all, but simply worked out in rehearsal between the tibicen, who composed them and accompanied them on his double pipes, and the actors who sang them. (The view that comic music was largely improvised is one Moore convincingly refutes [6–7, 137–138].) How then can we appreciate the contributions of music to a given comedy without having the music itself? This book shows the way through two complementary approaches. First, Moore reviews the ancient evidence for the music of the palliata to present a detailed description of the sonic characteristics and performance conventions of its two interactive components , the tibiae and the actor’s voice. This is no mean feat. Evidence is problematic for even the most basic facts of musical performance in Roman comedy (such as whether it was actors themselves or, as Livy 7.2.8–11 seems to indicate, surrogate cantores who sang the cantica), but Moore’s assessments consistently find just the right note. Comparative material from the music of Sardinia, Japan, Java, and elsewhere is rewardingly applied. Secondly, Moore reads the meters of Roman comedy—Plautus’ numeri innumeri, Terence’s restrained iambo-trochaic palette—as the blueprint from which the performers built out elements of the musical design. Metrical analysis permits only the reconstruction of rhythm, but rhythm and melody were so closely connected in Roman music—the same term, modus, may describe one or the other, or their interplay—that understanding rhythms in their dramatic context allows us to imagine fairly the kind of melodic delivery that accompanied them. Moore persuasively suggests that when a rhythm recurs at key dramatic moments in a comedy, a cognate melody would have been repeated as well, the combination forming a leitmotif (172). More fundamentally, by correlating metrical/rhythmic sequences across the Plautine and Terentian corpora, Moore aims to comprehend the semiotics of music in the palliata, its patterns of syntax and signification. Metrical transitions indicate musical changes— starts, stops, intensification, and variation—which can be pegged to typical situations and tend to follow predictable cycles. Certain meters recur in association with certain character and scene types, and the musical tropes built on them presumably shared their connotations. Moore explores how poets worked within and against these generic patterns in their individual comedies, using music (as suggested by the meter) for dramatic effect in ways BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 183 that both satisfied and frustrated audience expectations. He is especially alert to the art of musical misdirection, as in his discussion of “false starts,” moments when characters begin to sing trochaic septenarii, the meter typically deployed to advance plot (172–174), but then quickly switch back to other meters—plot business teasingly deferred. The sudden disappointment of the expectations aroused by the trochaics creates a “frisson” that is both humorous and draws attention to key words and plot points (251). Music in Roman Comedy comprises an Introduction, Conclusion, ten chapters, and five appendices. The Introduction evaluates the primary ancient sources for comic music (Cicero is valuable, Donatus and Diomedes less so). Moore addresses the vexed question of instrumental interludes, overtures, and postludes (17–22). The latter two, he concludes, were rare; interludes performed...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,220
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,991

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,290
Écart entre enseignants0,267 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePhoenixMême sujetClassical Antiquity StudiesTravaux en français237 207