Kata is a formalized interpretation of precedent, by the bearer of the tradition, i.e., a result of the transmitter’s own Esthesic Processes, which result in Poietic Processes during an Act of Transmission. Any variation that occurs with respect to the actual sonorous reality within a given cultural context is therefore part of an intentional and deliberate change, which is prescribed by the transmitter: it becomes part of the kata. My hypothesis was that kata is a fluid concept that does not correspond to a definable, structural unit of the music, and that it is only definable in terms of individual variations. My analysis indicates that this way of perceiving kata at work in the process of learning results in a possible way of finding smaller units in the music.
Deconstructing Tradition in Japanese Music A Study of Shakuhachi, Historical Authenticity and Transmission of Tradition
by Gunnar Jinmei Linder
http://su.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:488776/FULLTEXT01.pdf
The shakuhachi (尺八, Plate 1) is a vertical end-blown bamboo flute, possibly with roots in the ney, an ancient flute made of reed. The ney is a commonly used instrument in Central Asia, and it has a history that goes back to the third millennium BCE. The ney is probably related to the Chinese xiao. In the Tang dynasty China (618–907) the most commonly used flute was chiba, the Chinese reading of the characters 尺八, and the supposed ancestor of the Japanese shakuhachi. The name of the instrument refers to its standard length: shaku (chi in Chinese) is a unit of length measurement, and hachi (ba in Chinese) means ‘eight,’ referring to 8 of the length unit sun, which is a tenth of a shaku; the standard length is thus one shaku and eight (hachi) sun, which in today’s measures is approximately 54.5 centimetres. It should also be noted here that in the course of history, the unit shaku has differed in actual length.
The shakuhachi has a long history in Japan; it is historically proven that
it came to Japan in the eighth century by way of the Korean kingdom Paekche. Some later sources indicate that it may have entered the country already in the sixth century (cf. Section 7.2.2), but the chiba seems to have been revived from an older instrument in the early Tang dynasty China, probably around the 630s (cf. Chapter 3). In Japan the shakuhachi was used at the court, as an instrument in the court music ensemble for around 150 years, but even after that it seems to having been played – typically – by male members of the court. In medieval times it may also have been used by mendicant monks, but this can not be substantiated until the early sixteenth century. It was employed in music forms preceding the Nō theatre, but it was not included in the ensemble of this stage art. In 1512 the shakuhachi is mentioned in a treatise on court music, some 700 years after it was abolished from the court music ensemble. In this treatise, the author claims that the shakuhachi should not be regarded as a popular music instrument, but rather as a court music instrument. The shakuhachi is, however, most widely known as an instrument used by a certain group of Zen monks (discussed at depth in Chapters 4–7), who were officially acknowledged as such in the late seventeenth century. The present study examines the tradition surrounding these monks – the so-called komusō – how they created a (fictive) origin in order to invent a tradition (cf. Chapter 4), and also how the tradition of the shakuhachi has been re-created in twentieth-century writings on the shakuhachi. I believe that the twentieth-century writings have established a ‘tradition’ that runs parallel to the tradition created by the komusō (cf. Chapters 5–7), in which a connection is forged between the shakuhachi and older kinds of monks. I regard this as a possible attempt to invent an indigenous tradition (cf. Chapter 7).
The repertoire we know today was created by the komusō, and it is through their activities that the repertoire has survived. This music, which developed during the Edo period (1603–1867), is in several ways the raison d’être for the present research, as was also the case in my previous research.
…
Most of the monks who had been centred around the main temples in Edo, however, belonged to the oldest of the still existing lineages, the Kinko-ryū, which was established in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth century. In Edo, as in Kyoto, many monks of the Fuke sect had been involved in both playing profane music, and teaching shakuhachi to ordinary people, activities that were prohibited for the monks by law. However, because of these unlawful activities, the players who belonged to Kinko-ryū could more easily adapt themselves to the new society, with the support they had from their organisation, which was already established in that society.
In the Meiji period, new styles of playing were also established, mainly concerned with ensemble playing, but also creating new music for the shakuhachi, for example the Tozan-ryū, Ueda-ryū, and Chikuhō-ryū. The Myōan players, the Kinko players, and the newly born styles all claim some connection to older ways of playing. What, then, makes one lineage closer to the origin, what is the ‘real thing’ in shakuhachi playing, and are all the different styles really of the same origin?
These two themes became the starting point for my present research: the historical authenticity of a tradition, and the elements of its transmission.
日本音楽における「伝統」の脱構築 尺八の研究 ―歴史的真正性と伝統の伝承
by グンナル リンデル
http://su.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:488776/FULLTEXT01.pdf
本研究は、日本における尺八の歴史とその音楽の伝承についての研究である。本論文のも っとも中心となる課題は、「伝統」という概念について考察し、「伝統」が必ずしも真正 の起源を基礎とするものとは限らないということを、尺八を例として明らかにすることで ある。
尺八には日本固有の起源があり、それにともなった伝統があるという説は、現在広く 受け入れられているが、これはおそらく社会政治的な (socio-political) 理由のもとに、 1900 年代に行われた尺八の歴史に関する研究の中で作り出されたものであると筆者は論じる。
尺八に関連した研究はそのほとんどが歴史的な考察であり、そこでは尺八の起源、楽器としての尺八、そして尺八音楽について議論がなされてきた。江戸時代において尺八は、普化宗の僧すなわち虚無僧によって宗教的な道具(法器)として使用されており、彼らは尺八の起源を 9 世紀の中国の禅僧 Puhua(普化)にさかのぼるものと主張していた。それに対し、1900 年代の初頭に行われた尺八に関する初期の研究では、そのような尺八の伝説的な起源について反証が行われている。それらの研究の中で日本の研究者たちは、江戸時代以前にさかのぼる尺八の日本固有の起源論を提示し、また、それが暮露および薦僧という別の仏教僧集団につながるものであると述べている。
筆者は、まず、そのような尺八の伝説的な起源について紹介し、また、暮露、薦僧、虚無僧が江戸時代の早い時期には同様のものとして見なされるようになった経緯について考察する。さらに、日本人研究者の研究が提示し、現在広く受け入れられている尺八の日本固有の起源論とその発展の過程を分析し、それに対して反論を試みる。そこでは、日本人研究者のほとんどの研究が参照している、暮露と薦僧に直接につながる資料の詳細な分析を行う。
本論文中では、「伝統」の概念に関してもう一つの観点を取り上げる。それは、伝統芸 能において伝承されるものは何かという観点である。日本における研究では「型」 、つ まり、その芸能特有の特質が含まれる固定化されたフォームが、日本の伝統芸能の特筆す べきものとして論じられており、それが伝承されると述べられている。筆者はその「型」 の伝承が、尺八を例としたときにどのように行われているかを調べて考察し、教える者か ら学ぶ者へ伝承される要素の中には必ず「伝統」の本質が含まれる、という考えに対して 反論を行う。そして、この本質主義的な観点とは対照的に筆者が主張するのは、伝統芸能 の一例としての尺八において伝承されるのはそのような意味での「型」ではなく、それは むしろ個々の伝承者のレベルでの、より緩やかな「音楽の持ち味」あるいは「表現方法」 であり、「型」はそういう意味にとらえ直されるべきだということである。本論文では、アスペクト 尺八の伝承における諸要素について論じ、また、この伝承における「伝統的」な 様 相 を構成しているものが 、もしあるとすれば 何であるかを追究する。