Tonal Atonality, Section 1, Monograph

Greetings!
` We are pleased to present an information resource that provides a comprehensive overview of the work of the outstanding Russian composer Vyacheslav Kazarin within the context of the finest achievements of World Culture.

Sincerely, art historian Arina Ryazantseva.

Blog, there will be a lot of interesting things:
https://composervaycheslavkazarin.tilda.ws
https://tonal-atonality-kazarin.tilda.ws
Wixsite:
https://savasavichev.wixsite.com/composer-kazarin




УКА | UCA:
 xVK-1xxxx`26`x-RAxN-xxf



Form `10
Preparatory publication of terminology and scholarly apparatus for the concept of ‘Tonal Atonality’


The theoretical framework of ‘Tonal Atonality’ [its original version] is due to be published shortly by the author, Vyacheslav Kazarin, as a separate monograph.
The first section is reproduced below.




Vyacheslav Gennadievich Kazarin



SECTION I

Tonal Atonality in the Context of the History of Musical Thought



Chapter 1
The Crisis of Tonality and the Search for a New Universal System


1.1. The Historical Problem of Universality in Music

The history of European music demonstrates a rare phenomenon: for two millennia, musical thought was based on just two universal systems:
1. The modal-scale system of antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
2. Functional tonality of the 17th–19th centuries.

A universal system is neither a style nor a school. It is a structure which:
• shapes composers’ thinking,
• shapes the acoustic nature of listeners’ perception [a new way of hearing],
• sets the model for form,
• organises time,
• becomes a cultural norm,
• ensures the predictability and stability of perception.

Such systems arise extremely rarely. They are not created artificially — they grow out of the ontology of culture.

By the beginning of the 20th century, functional tonality had exhausted its potential for universality. Its collapse led to the emergence of a multitude of specific systems, none of which was able to take its place.



1.2. The failure of 20th-century systems to live up to their universal claims

Following the collapse of tonality, musical culture underwent a period of intense experimentation. However, none of the new systems became universal.


1.2.1. Dodecaphony and serialism

Dodecaphony proposed a strict order, but:
• lacked a centre,
• had no cultural roots,
• did not cultivate a new musical ear,
• could not be accepted by the masses.

It was a technique, not an ontology.



1.2.2. Spectralism

Spectralism proposed a new acoustic model, but:
• was limited by the physics of sound,
• lacked a universal structural form,
• had no categories of centre or memory.

It was an acoustic system, not a universal one.



1.2.3. Minimalism

Minimalism proposed a new concept of time, but:
• lacked depth of parameters,
• had no ontology,
• could not explain complex structures.

It was an aesthetic rather than a system.



1.2.4. Post-tonality

Post-tonality proposed an analytical language, but:
• it lacked its own ontology,
• it did not shape a new musical ear,
• it did not offer universal categories.

It was a description, not a system.



1.3. The problem of the absence of a centre as a key factor in the crisis

All 20th-century systems share one thing in common: they failed to propose a new type of centre.

The centre is neither a note nor a function. The centre is:
• stability,
• a point of orientation,
• minimal entropy,
• the basis of perception.

The destruction of the centre led to:
• the disintegration of form,
• the loss of predictability,
• the disappearance of cultural norms,
• the fragmentation of musical thinking.

Twentieth-century music became a multitude of distinct languages, but not a unified system.



1.4. The need for a new ontology, not a new technique

By the beginning of the 21st century, it had become clear that:
• a new universal system cannot be a technique,
• it cannot be a style,
• it cannot be an aesthetic,
• it cannot be a set of rules.

It must be an ontology, that is, a system describing:
• the centre,
• the field,
• memory,
• gravity,
• entropy,
• time,
• space.

Such a system must describe the structure of musical being, rather than the structure of musical language.



1.5. The Emergence of ‘Tonal Atonality’ as a Response to a Historical Imperative

Vyacheslav Kazarin’s ‘Tonal Atonality’ emerges not as a specific technique, but as an ontological system capable of:
• restore the centre, but in a new form,
• create fields as acoustic environments,
• introduce memory as a structural category,
• describe form as an entropic process,
• define time as kinetics,
• describe space as topology,
• incorporate the listener into the structure of the work.

TA [tonal atonality] is the first system since tonality which:
• has its own ontology,
• possesses internal completeness,
• forms a new type of listening,
• is capable of describing any music,
• is rooted in culture,
• possesses the potential for universality.



1.6. Tonal Atonality as the third universal system in the history of music

If the modal-scale system was a vertical system, and functional tonality a horizontal system, then Tonal Atonality is a system of parameters.

It:
• does not destroy tonality,
• does not replicate it,
• does not oppose it.
It follows on from it as a new paradigm.

TA [being, by definition, an integral part of the consonant-tonal construct] creates ideal conditions for the generation of:
• a system of centre without tonality,
• a system of form without functions,
• a system of time without metre,
• a system of space without harmony,
• a system of memory without a theme.

This makes it the first genuine contender for the role of a new universal system following the tonal one.



1.7. Structure of the Further Study

The following sections of this monograph will examine:
• ontological categories of TA (Section II),
• interval fields as an acoustic medium (Section III),
• parametric architectonics (Section IV),
• the morphology of texture (Section V),
• time and kinetics (Section VI),
• the topology of space (Section VII),
• form as entropic dynamics (Section VIII),
• perception and a new type of hearing (Section IX),
• folklore and tradition as ontological layers (Section X),
• Kazarin’s literary ontology (Section XI),
• the philosophical foundations of the system (Section XII),
• the universality of TA (Section XIII),
• the future of the system (Section XIV).



SUMMARY OF SECTION I

Section I demonstrates:
• why tonality has ceased to be universal,
• why the 20th century did not create a new system,
• why the centre is a key category,
• why the new system must be an ontology,
• why Tonal Atonality meets these requirements.



Rus' ` Moscow
7534 _ 2026

` A-CVK