The purpose of this study was to theorise on a composer’s corporeality from the point of view of the embodied, enacted, embedded, and extended cognition paradigm, in the light of empirical data that cover the compositional process of creating one particular piece of music. The data include related manuscripts and the composer’s verbal account of those manuscripts. Composition is seen as an interactive coping behaviour and an adaptive process of knowledge acquisition and production in a sonic environment. In this epistemic process, the composer begins working with various kinds of ideas: sounds, timbres, musical structures, experiences, philosophical thoughts. They explicate these intuitive or reflective embodied representations through different kinds of externalisations, such as musical gestures, narratives, visualisation, and finally, musical notation. This study substantiates the way in which embodied, extrabodily, embedded, and enactive processes constitute the cognitive acts of a composer, usually considered as almost purely mental. It shows how musical composition may not only be grounded but also depend on embodied knowledge that the score only partly conveys. In addition to helping composers and performers communicate in real life, the findings may be useful for identifying the different cognitive premises and circumstances that can result in discrepancies between the ways in which they interpret musical notation.
AlménB. (2008). A theory of musical narrative. Indiana University Press.
2.
BailesF.BishopL. (2012). Musical imagery in the creative process. In CollinsD. (Ed.), The act of musical composition (pp. 53–77). Ashgate.
3.
BarsalouL.W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–609.
4.
BetschT.GlöcknerA. (2010). Intuition in judgment and decision making: Extensive thinking without effort. Psychological inquiry: An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 21(4), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2010.517737
5.
BiggsJ. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57–75.
6.
BowmanW. (2004). Cognition and the body: Perspectives from music education. In BreslerL. (Ed.), Knowing bodies, moving minds: Towards embodied teaching and learning (pp. 29–50). Springer.
7.
BrennerB.StrandK. (2013). A case study of teaching musical expression to young performers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(1), 80–96.
8.
BrunerJ. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard University Press.
9.
Casas-MasA.López-ÍñiguezG.PozoJ. I.MonteroI. (2019). Function of private singing in instrumental music learning: A multiple case study of self-regulation and embodiment. Musicæ Scientiæ, 23(4), 442–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864918759593
10.
Casas-MasA.PozoJ. I.ScheuerN. (2015). Musical learning and teaching. Conceptions as sociocultural productions in classical, flamenco, and jazz cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(9), 1191–1225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115603124
11.
ClandininJ.ConnellyM. F. (2000). Narrative inquiry. Jossey-Bass.
ClaxtonG. (2005). The wayward mind: An intimate history of the unconscious. Little, Brown & Co.
14.
CookN. (2013). Beyond the score: Music as performance. Oxford University Press.
15.
CopeP.SmithH. (1997). Cultural context in musical instrument learning. British Journal of Music Education, 14(3), 283–289. http://doi.org/10.1017/S026505170000125X
De SouzaJ. (2017). Music at hand: instruments, bodies, and cognition. Oxford University Press.
18.
Doğantan-DackM. (2015). Artistic research and music scholarship: Musings and models from a continental European perspective. In Doğantan–DackM. (Ed.), Artistic practice as research in music: Theory, criticism, practice (pp. 53–72). Ashgate.
19.
DorfmanJ.ShamesV. A.KihlstromJ. F. (1996). Intuition, incubation, and insight: Implicit cognition in problem solving. In UnderwoodG. D. M. (Ed.) Implicit cognition (pp. 257–296). Oxford University Press.
20.
DreyfusH.DreyfusS. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition in the era of the computer. Free Press.
21.
DreyfusH. (2002). Intelligence without representation. Merleau-Ponty’s critique of mental representation. The relevance of phenomenology to scientific explanation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1, 367–383.
22.
DuffyC.BroadB. (2015). Practising research, playing with knowledge. In Doğantan–DackM. (Ed.), Artistic practice as research in music: Theory, criticism, practice (pp. 33–52). Ashgate.
23.
EitanZ.GranotR. Y. (2006). How music moves: Musical parameters and listeners’ images of motion. Music Perception, 23(3), 221–247. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2006.23.3.221
24.
ElliottD.SilvermanM. (2015). Music matters: A philosophy of music education (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
25.
EpsteinS. (2010). Demystifying intuition: What it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychological Inquiry: An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 21(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2010.523875
26.
EpsteinS.PaciniR.Denes-RajV.HeierH. (1996). Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 390. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390
27.
EricssonK. (2003). Valid and non-reactive verbalization of thoughts during performance of tasks. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10, 1–18.
28.
GeevesA.SuttonJ. (2014). Embodied cognition, perception, and performance in music. Empirical Musicology Review, 9(3–4), 247–253. http://dx.doi.org//10.18061/emr.v9i3-4.4538
GodøyR. I. (2010). Gestural affordances of musical sound. In GodøyR. I.LemanM. (Eds.) Musical gestures. Sound, movement, and meaning (pp. 103–125). Routledge.
31.
GodøyR. I. (2019). Sound-motion bonding in body and mind. In KimY.GilmanS. L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music and the body (pp. 145–160). Oxford University Press.
32.
GommR.HammersleyM.FosterP.2009. Case study and generalization. In GommR.HammersleyM.FosterP. (Eds.) Case study method (pp. 98–112). Sage.
33.
HanslickE. (1854/1986). On the musically beautiful: A contribution towards the revision of the aesthetics of music (G. Payzant, Ed. and Transl.). Hackett.
34.
HattenR. (2004). Interpreting musical gestures, topics and tropes. Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert. Indiana University Press.
35.
HochmanG.GlöcknerA.YechiamE. (2009). Physiological measures in identifying decision strategies. In GlöcknerA.WittmanC. (Eds.), Foundations for tracing intuition. Challenges and methods (pp. 147–167). Psychology Press.
36.
HodgkinsonG.Langan-FoxJ.Sadler-SmithE. (2008). Intuition: A fundamental bridging construct in the behavioural sciences. British Journal of Psychology, 99(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712607X216666
37.
HoggB. (2011). Enactive consciousness, intertextuality, and musical free improvisation: Deconstructing mythologies and finding connections. In ClarkeD.ClarkeE. (Eds.), Music and consciousness: Philosophical, psychological, and cultural perspectives (pp. 79–93). Oxford University Press.
38.
HollandR. W.de VriesM. (2009). Implicit evaluation as a basis for intuition. In GlöcknerA.WittemanC. (Eds.) Foundations for tracing intuition. Challenges and methods (pp. 123–138). Psychology Press.
39.
HovlandE. (2019). Who’s Afraid of Berlioz?Studia Musicologica Norvegica, 45(1), 9–30.
40.
HultbergC. (2002). Approaches to music notation: The printed score as a mediator of meaning in western tonal tradition. Music Education Research, 4(2), 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461380022000011902
41.
IyerV. (2004). Improvisation, temporality and embodied experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11(3–4), 159–173.
42.
JohnsonM.LarsonS. (2003). “Something in the way she moves” – Metaphors of musical motion. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(2), 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1802_1
43.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1992). Beyond modularity. Cambridge University Press.
KostkaS. (2016). Materials and techniques of post tonal music. Taylor & Francis.
48.
KüssnerM. B.TidharD.PriorH. MLeech-WilkinsonD. (2014). Musicians are more consistent: Gestural cross-modal mappings of pitch, loudness and tempo in real-time. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 789. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00789
49.
LahavA.SaltzmanE.SchlaugG. (2007). Action representation of sound: Audiomotor recognition network while listening to newly acquired actions. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(2), 308–314.
50.
LegaC.CattaneoZ.MerabetL. B.VecchiT.CucchiS. (2014). The effect of musical expertise on the representation of space. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 250. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00250
LemanM.MaesP. J.NijsL.Van DyckE. (2018). What is embodied music Cognition? In BaderR. (Ed.), Springer handbook of systematic musicology (pp. 747–760). Springer.
53.
LemanM.DesmetF.Styns, van NoordenL.MoelantsD. (2009). Sharing musical expression through embodied listening: A case study based on Chinese guqin music. Music Perception, 26(3), 263– 278. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2009.26.3.263
MaesP. J.Van DyckE.LesaffreM.LemanM.KroonenbergP. M. (2014). The coupling of action and perception in musical meaning formation. Music Perception, 32(1), 67–84. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2014.32.1.67
56.
MännikköM. (2018). Power of narration narrative in the interpretation of a composition [in Finnish]. Studia Musica 50 (Artistic doctoral diss.). Sibelius Academy of the University of the Arts Helsinki.
57.
MarínC.EcheverríaM. P. P.HallamS. (2012). Using the musical score to perform: A study with Spanish flute students. British Journal of Music Education, 29(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051712000046
58.
MatyjaJ. R.SchiavioA. (2013). Enactive music cognition: Background and research themes. Constructivist Foundations, 8(3), 351–357.
59.
McCutchanA. (Ed.) (1999). The muse that sings: Composers speak about creative process. Oxford University Press.
60.
MeissnerH. (2017). Instrumental teachers’ instructional strategies for facilitating children’s learning of expressive music performance: An exploratory study. International Journal of Music Education, 35(1), 118–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761416643850
61.
MenaryR. (2010). Introduction to the special issue on 4E cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 9(4), 459–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-010-9187-6
62.
Merleau-PontyM. (1945/2005). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge.
63.
MetcalfeJ.WiebeD. (1987). Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 15(3), 238–246.
64.
MezirowJ. (2018). Transformative learning theory. In IllerisK. (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning (pp. 114–128). Routledge.
65.
NewenA.De BruinL.GallagherS. (2018). Introduction: 4E cognition: Historical roots, concepts, and central issues. In NewenA.De BruinL.GallagherS. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of 4E cognition (pp. 3–18). Oxford Library of Psychology.
66.
OramoI. (2014). Afterwords. In E. Hanslick Vom Musikalisch-Schönen [in Finnish], OramoI. (Transl.), pp. 110–155. Eurooppalaisen filosofian seura ry/ niin & näin.
67.
Peréz-EchevarríaM.-P. (2017). The music scores as external representational systems: Teaching and learning. Finnish Journal of Music Education, 20(1), 114–116.
68.
PohjannoroU. (2012a). From imagination to experience, from rules to constraints: A case study of the dynamics of intuitive and reflective thinking of a composer [In Finnish]. Finnish Journal of Music Education, 15(2), 7–37.
69.
PohjannoroU. (2012b). I’ll know when I get there: A case study of a composer’s intuitive and reflective thought [In Finnish]. Journal of the Finnish Musicological Society [Musiikki], 42(2), 7–39
70.
PohjannoroU. (2014). Inspiration and decision-making: A case study of a composer’s intuitive and reflective thought. Musicæ Scientiæ, 18(2), 166–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864914520848
71.
PohjannoroU. (2016). Capitalising on intuition and reflection: Making sense of a composer’s creative process. Musicæ Scientiæ, 20(2), 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864915625727
72.
PohjannoroU.RousiA. (2018). The modes of music information in a compositional process: A case study. Journal of Documentation, 74, 987–1007. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2017-0141
73.
PozoJ. I. (2017). Learning beyond the body: From embodied representations to explicitation mediated by external representations. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 40(2), 219–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2017.1306942
74.
PrintzJ.BarsalouL. W. (2000). Steering a course for embodied representation. cognitive dynamics: Conceptual and representational change in humans and machines. In DeitrichE.MarkmanA. (Eds.), Cognitive dynamics: Conceptual and representational changes in humans and machines (pp. 51–78). Erlbaum.
75.
ReberA. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Oxford University Press.
76.
ReybrouckM. (2005). A biosemiotic and ecological approach to music cognition: Event perception between auditory listening and cognitive economy. Axiomathes, 15(2), 229–266.
77.
ReybrouckM. (2006a). Music cognition and the bodily approach: Musical instruments as tools for musical semantics. Contemporary Music Review, 25(1/2), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/07494460600647451
78.
ReybrouckM. (2006b). Musical creativity between symbolic modelling and perceptual constraints: The role of adaptive behaviour and epistemic autonomy. In DeliègeI.WigginsG. (Eds.), Musical creativity: Multidisciplinary research in theory and practice (pp. 42–59). Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis.
79.
ReybrouckM. (2012). Musical sense-making and the concept of affordance: An ecosemiotic and biosemiotic approach. Biosemiotics5, (391–409). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-012-9144-6
SchiavioA.MeninD.MatyjaJ. (2014). Music in the flesh: Embodied simulation in musical understanding. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind, and Brain, 24(4), 340–343. https://doi.org/10.1037/pmu0000052
83.
SchiavioA.van der SchyffD. (2018). 4E music pedagogy and the principles of self-organization. Behavioral Sciences, 8(8), 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8080072
84.
SchönD. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
85.
Sheets-JohnstoneM. (2015). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Imprint Academic.
86.
ShustermanR., (2008). Body consciousness: A philosophy of mindfulness and somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press.
87.
SmallC. (1998). Musicking. Wesleyan University Press.
88.
StewartL.VerdonschotR. G.NasrallaP.LanipekunJ. (2013). Action–perception coupling in pianists: Learned mappings or spatial musical association of response codes (SMARC) effect?The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.687385
TaylorJ. E. T.WittJ. K. (2015). Listening to music primes space: Pianists, but not novices, simulate heard actions. Psychological Research, 79(2), 175–182.
VadénT.TorvinenJ. (2019). Musical meaning in between: Ineffability, atmosphere and asubjectivity in musical experience. In RiedelF.TorvinenJ. (Eds.), Music as atmosphere. Collective feelings and affective sounds (pp. 43–59).
93.
van der SchyffD.SchiavioA.ElliottD. J. (2016). Critical ontology for an enactive music pedagogy. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 15(5), 81–121. http://dx.https://doi.org//10.22176/act15.5.81
94.
van der SchyffD.SchiavioA.WaltonA.VelardoV.ChemeroA. (2018). Musical creativity and the embodied mind: Exploring the possibilities of 4E cognition and dynamical systems theory. Music & Science, 1, 1–18.
95.
WengerE. (2002). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
96.
WilsonR. A.FogliaL. (2015). Embodied cognition. In ZeltaN. (Ed.) Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford University (Spring 2017 edition). http://www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/embodied-cognition
97.
WittemanC.van den BerckenJ.ClaesL.GodøyA. (2009). Assessing rational and intuitive thinking styles. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.25.1.39
98.
WolfeJ. (2018). An investigation into the nature and function of metaphor in advanced music instruction. Research Studies in Music Education, 41(3), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X18773113
99.
VosniadouS. (Ed.) (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change. Routledge.
100.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind and society. The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
101.
ZembylasT.NiederauerM. (2018). Composing processes and artistic agency: Tacit knowledge in composing (GenrichT., Transl.). Routledge.
