Ingarden, Roman (EN)

Ingarden Roman, *5 February 1893 Kraków, †14 June 1970 Kraków, Polish philosopher, aesthetician, literature and art theoretician. He studied philosophy, mathematics and physics at Lviv University, then continued at the University of Göttingen under E. Husserl, D. Hilbert and G.F. Müller and in Vienna; in 1917, he obtained his doctorate at the University of Fribourg based on a dissertation Intuition und Intellekt bei H. Bergson [Intuition and Intellect in Henri Bergson]. Later, he worked as a secondary-school teacher of mathematics, physics and introduction to philosophy in Lublin, Warsaw, Toruń and Lviv. In 1923, he habilitated at Lviv University with a thesis Essentiale Fragen. Ein Beitrag zum Problem des Wesens, in which he introduced several ontological problems that were later fundamental issues in his work. In 1927 in Paris, he wrote Das literarische Kunstwerk. In 1933, he became a professor at Lviv University and took up a Chair of Philosophy; he also lectured literature theory at the German Studies and took part in philosophical congresses (Prague 1934, Paris 1937). In 1944, he worked in a technical school in Pieskowa Skała and participated in secret university activities. During the German occupation, from September 1941 to January 1945, he wrote Spór o istnienie świata [The Controversy over the Existence of the World]. From February 1945, he was a guest lecturer at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków and in 1946, he received the title of full professor of this university. He introduced new fields of study here, not practised before the war: ontology, aesthetics and philosophy of language; he also took part in international philosophical congresses (Rome 1946, Brussels, Paris 1947, Amsterdam 1948). In 1950, he was dismissed from the university; in 1957, he was appointed again, and in 1963, he retired. What is more, he gave many readings and taught courses, especially in Holland and Norway (Bergen, Oslo, 1966 and 1967), and lectured at universities in the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany; he was still an active participant in philosophical congresses (Venice 1956, 1958, Krefeld 1956, Royaumont 1957, Paris 1959, Athens 1960, Montpelier 1961, Oxford 1962, Fribourg 1963). From 1945, he was a member of the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences (PAU), and from 1957 of the Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN); in 1947–55, he was the president of the Polish Philosophical Society in Kraków (where he organised a Section of Aesthetics), as well as a member of many other Polish and international scientific organisations, including the American Society for Aesthetics. He was an editor of «Biblioteka Klasyków Filozofii» PAU (1946–51) and “Kwartalnik Filozoficzny” (1948–50). In 1957, he was awarded the Commander’s Cross of the Order of Polonia Restituta; laureate of many scientific prizes: American – Alfred Jurzykowski Prize (1966), Austrian – Gottfried von Herder Prize (1968).

Ingarden’s philosophical views, as one of the most renowned representatives of phenomenology, were fundamentally shaped during his studies in Göttingen; however, Ingarden criticised Husserl’s transcendental idealism and some elements of his logic (cf. E. Husserl Méditations Cartésiennes 1931). Ingarden’s philosophy opposes the attitudes popular (especially in Poland) at the turn of centuries and in the 1^st part of the 20^th c. – empirical-psychological studies, historical relativism and the neo-positivist treatment of philosophy as a synthesis of the specific sciences or an analysis of their language. Ingarden treated philosophy as a field of study covering, within its research problems, the whole of what exists and considering the so-called sheer possibilities and necessary links, regardless of the existence or nonexistence of relevant objects. According to Ingarden, philosophy should be a study free from dogmatism; the science that can analyse its basic statements and establish its general concepts. Philosophical research includes three branches: ontology, metaphysics and theory of knowledge. Chronologically, the first current of Ingarden’s reflections was the so-called absolute theory of knowledge, formulated primarily in doctoral and habilitation dissertations, later also in works collected in the volume U podstaw teorii poznania [At the Foundations of the Theory of Knowledge]. Out of three postulated branches of ontology: existential (every object exists somehow), formal (it has a specific structure) and material (it has characteristic features) – the first two research areas were realised in Ingarden’s major philosophical work Spór o istnienie świata [Controversy over the Existence of the World].

The fundamental issue in Ingarden’s ontology is the distinction between three types of being: real, ideal and intentional, and the formal analysis and characteristic of the essence of individual, general and purely intentional objects. Many scientists (e.g. W. Stróżewski, J. Makota, J. Tischner, A.T. Tymaniecka, M. Gołaszewska, and D. Gierulanka) approach Ingarden’s entire philosophical output in the perspective of the theses of the Controversy…. Other works by Ingarden, concerning, for example, causal relationship, coincidence or real opportunity, are supplementary to this main work; other treatises, especially Das literarische Kunstwerk, offer background to the subject of Controversy…. The conceptual apparatus developed in the field of ontology finds application in almost every field of Ingarden’s research. The diverse subject matter of Ingarden’s works includes, besides ontology, aesthetics, theory of knowledge, axiology, philosophy of man (e.g. Książeczka o człowieku), theory of language, methodology, philosophical foundations of logic and critical studies of some fields of modern and contemporary philosophy. Almost half of Ingarden’s philosophical works are on the philosophy of art – aesthetics. In Das literarische Kunstwerk, Ingarden conducts a thorough ontological analysis of a literary work, focusing on the work itself, contrary to biographical and psychological tendencies in literature studies of that time. This book brought him international fame, was translated into many languages, greatly influenced not only contemporary theory of literature but also the 20^th-century aesthetic views, and triggered a heated discussion in the Polish scientific community in the 1930s, and later also 1940s and 1950s (polemics with L. Chwistek, Z. Łempicki, M. Kridl, K. Irzykowski, J. Krzyżanowski, W. Borowy, J. Kleiner, J. Pelc, H. Markiewicz, M. Milbrandt and others). The impact of the book is visible in work of numerous literary researchers as well as Polish and foreign aestheticians (e.g. M. Kridl, R. Wellek, W. Kayser, F. Stentzel, J. Sławiński, N. Hartmann, M. Dufrenne M. Gołaszewski, J. Makota, W. Stróżewski, A. Szczepańska, A. Stoff, A. Tyszczyk, B. Kuczera-Chachulska, and B. Garlej). The treatise on a literary work of art resulted in Ingarden’s research on the existence and structure of works of other arts (painting, architecture, music, film) and gave rise to axiological issues, which the scholar developed in the 1960s.

Ingarden’s studies on aesthetics focus mainly on the ontological problems of works of art. The fundamental methodological premise of Ingarden’s aesthetics is that the “method” – inextricably linked to the “object” being studied – discovers how this “object” is revealed in experience. Ingarden opposes psychological approaches and empirical research but believes that an eidetic analysis of the general idea of ​​a work of art should be carried out, enabling the detection of necessary connections and dependencies between the simplest, basic moments that can be distinguished in the content of this idea. The essence of phenomenological description is the concentration on the work – as it is revealed in our consciousness; the field of research must then be reduced to mere – in the sense of ‘pure’ – consciousness. Such a reduction requires a kind of temporary oblivion, resigning to use existing theories with the work studied. Ingarden sets a great store on the conceptual apparatus used in the description. Starting with everyday concepts, he tries to cleanse them of ambiguity, make them suggestive and precise, and bring them to the point of being obvious.

Fundamental to Ingarden’s aesthetics is the claim that works of art are purely intentional objects, i.e. they are characterised by existential non-independence. “All of their material attributes, formal, or even existential moments, which occur in their content, are somehow only attributed to the purely intentional object, but are not, in the strict sense of the word, embodied in it” (Controversy…). Therefore, one must clearly distinguish: 1. the physical, existential foundation of the work of art – the material object, 2. the actual work of art – an intentional creation, 3. concretisations of the work of art – the actual aesthetic objects obtained in aesthetic experience. The mutual relations between these three types of entities are different depending on the kind of work of art, as is their internal structure. Works of other arts, depending on the level of “an embodiment” in their existential foundation and the features of their formal construction, are, to a greater or lesser extent, schematic (literature, painting, music) or do not have this property (architecture). The work of art, as “a purely intentional product of artists’ creative acts,” is, at the same time, “a schematic creation with some expected elements” contrasted with its various “concretisations” made by recipients, which are a necessary condition for existence and manner of manifestation of the work, the so-called “life” of the work. Ingarden’s theory of aesthetic experience and “concretisation” is based on the aesthetic object of these statements. The work of art – schematic creation – contains under-specified places, which “a strictly limited multitude of its possible fulfilments belong to” (Zasady epistemologicznego rozważania doświadczenia estetycznego, in: Studia z estetyki, vol. 3) and it is through these fulfillments in concretisation that it becomes an aesthetic object.

According to Ingarden’s ontology of art, fundamental is the concept of multi-layered construction of the work of art, developed based on the analysis of literary works and later verified regarding works of other arts (painting, architecture, music, film, theatre). A work is considered multi-layered when it meets the following conditions: 1. the occurrence of various components, 2. the binding of homogeneous components into higher-order creations, and these in turn into one basic component of the entire work, 3. the basic component of the work retains its distinctiveness and demarcation, remaining a clear part of the whole, 4. the above basic components are organically combined into the whole of one work. Contrary to, for example, four-layered literary work or twelve-layered architectural work, musical work is definitely single-layered (cf. discussions on this topic by, e.g., N. Hartmann, C. Dahlhaus, W. Stróżewski, K. Kiwała, A. Gajda). Ingarden’s major work regarding music is Utwór muzyczny i sprawa jego tożsamości [The Work of Music and the Problem of Its Identity]. Ingarden had been dealing with musical issues since 1933 (cf. list of works); he presented some specific problems (sound and non-sound moments of a musical work, perception, time, performance of a musical work, score) in papers and discussions at scientific sessions, during university lectures or at the Polish Academy of Sciences (PAN) in 1947, 1954–1955, 1960, 1964, 1966, which he published later.

Ingarden undertook the subject of music primarily because he was an inquisitive lover of music and played the violin and piano; the direct musical reality with which he, as a listener, encountered (i.e. various performances of musical works, readings of musical scores) raised many questions of an ontological and epistemological nature. The advantage of Ingarden’s method of research on musical work is his reliance on data from direct musical experience; he indicates three different objects of research: the work, the score, and the performance. The method proposed by Ingarden is characterised by a rigorous separation and consistent observance of these three research areas, and in the analysis of the musical work itself, by focusing exclusively on its immanent, autonomous properties. Ingarden believes that the basis should be the direct contact with the musical work, providing the ultimate experience of the work. He considers “pre-scientific beliefs” as the sole and exclusive starting point for aesthetic analysis. The data of this experience should not be falsified by information drawn from scientific theory and philosophical views. One must get to know the musical work in its characteristics “so as not to introduce into it anything alien to it, that cannot be invented in itself;” regardless of the results of studying the work, one must collect indirect information about the era, the conditions of the work’s creation, and its creator. Ingarden assumes that a musical work created in the past is exactly the same work we are dealing with today. Regarding three objects of analysis (work, performance, score), as well as issues related to cognitive access to the work (perception of music, aesthetic experience), Ingarden clearly states that the expressed judgments concern so-called absolute, pure music, i.e. exclusively instrumental (he does not consider vocal-instrumental works) and programme music (which, according to Ingarden, is a special type of pure music); he considers existential-ontological problems and formal research to be of primary importance. Issues of the artistic value of the work remain outside the scope of consideration; the research does not reach the material endowment and historical aspects of musical works. The systematic characterisation of the work, performance, and score, carried out by Ingarden, contains a description of the essential features and concerns: 1. the way of existence, 2. temporal definition, 3. the degree of dependence on the existential foundation, 4. form, 5. the selection of possible properties for individual objects, 6. the way of perception, 7. identity in historical time.

A musical work is a purely intentional object, “which has its source in the author’s creative acts and its existential foundation directly in the score,” and defined from the position of a listener as “one of the objects that are given to the subject listening to a certain performance.” As a purely intentional object, a musical work is intersubjectively accessible, i.e. the same for many different subjects; hence the necessity of the existence of a score (different recording techniques, e.g. on magnetic tape) and performances, relatively only performances. A musical notation is not a condition for the existence of a musical work, as Z. Lissa interprets Ingarden’s views. He also does not claim that “first, there must be a musical notation, and only then the work itself,” as is often suggested by interpreters of his views (Lissa, Pociej), as evidenced by, among others, the case of improvisation discussed by Ingarden and of folk music. A musical work, viewed as a purely intentional object and schematic creation, allows for references to both folk and contemporary music, as Ingarden himself and many other researchers (including J. Makota, M. Gołaszewska, W. Stróżewski) point out.

A musical work is an object lasting in time, not located in a specific time and space, and it cannot “indicate any other real objects or processes taking place in the real world.” It is an over-individual and timeless creation, characterised by an internal, immanent quasi-temporal structure, because, despite the multi-phase structure, all of its parts “exist simultaneously, as soon as the work is ready.” The quasi-time of a musical work “is not uniform, but qualitatively and structurally organised.” This type of time organisation applies also to multi-phase works of different arts, thus Ingarden proposes (1947) – similarly to, among others, K. Huber (1923) and S. Langer (1957) – to talk about “musicality” even in the case of non-sound objects. The timelessness of a musical work is expressed in the fact that its quasi-time “does not enter the continuum of the real world;” what is called the “beginning” of a work is a certain purely formal temporal characterisation, and the content of the work does not designate any “afterwards” after the end of the work. Therefore, a musical work is “a perfectly closed whole,” the division of which does not consist in “a purely temporal division into individual ‘musical moments,’ but in the structure (‘form’) of the sound creations included in the work.” They can belong to each other in various ways. The pauses between parts do not belong to the time continuum of the work, they only seemingly separate the individual parts, and, in reality, show the connections between them.

A unit of a musical sense is at least a musical motif, which is given unity by a sound form that creates an undividable whole, which is “only spreading out in musical time.” A musical work has a single-layered structure because, according to Ingarden, the term ‘layer’ refers to a work’s immanent structure, which, in a musical work, “is not causally connected with processes or occurrences in the real world.” The existential (material) foundation of a musical work is constituted by sounds and murmurs, from which sound creations are built, differentiated among themselves by the degree of complexity (motif, phrase, sentence, part, large part) and properties: melodic, rhythmic, harmonic, agogic, dynamic, and colouristic. All these aspects of sound creation constitute one layer. Besides sound creations, Ingarden also distinguishes non-sound moments (creations) of a musical work; however, they do not form a separate layer. The degree of closeness of the connection between non-sound and sound creations determines their following hierarchy: 1. quasi-temporal structure, 2. the phenomenon of movement, but understood not as a change of place in space, but a phenomenon available “purely aurally when perceiving the melody becoming in the work.” According to Ingarden, “multitude of movement developing in musical creatures” constitutes a specific musical space (cf. S. Szuman, E. Kurth), 3. form as a factor of rational order, construction of work; after Ingarden, the essence of musical forms is repeatability, 4. emotional qualities, “specific to music (…) in a special way merged into sound creations” and therefore they cannot be considered either “beyond-musical” (Lissa) or “along-musical” (Szuman) content; emotional qualities should be distinguished from the feelings that the work evokes in the listener or the feelings expressed by the performer; “the feeling and the work heard constitute two separate values,” 5. “representative” motifs (in programme music without literary text) – “motifs which, when heard, somehow lead us away from themselves and ‘bring to mind’ some more or less specific object,” something beyond-musical “belongs to the work thanks to a given representative motif,” 6. aesthetically valuable qualities (e.g. the quality of the tone of the instrument) and qualities of aesthetic value (e.g. ‘simplicity,’ ‘pathos,’ ‘violence’) constituting the final aesthetic value of the entire work.

The score is linked both to the work and the creator intentionally. It is a system of imperative symbols recorded using various technical means. The system of symbols in the score determines what the work is to be like, and, at the same time, it is a set of rules specifying how the work should be performed. However, the work is not unambiguously defined in every aspect. In a schematic score notation, there are gaps and various places of indeterminacy. Also, the notation on a disc or magnetic tape is not (as Lissa suggested) an exact record of all elements but only a “reproduction of the work in performance.” In aleatoric works (cf. Z. Lissa), on the other hand, the musical notation – in the way intended by the author – is schematic to a varying degree and in various aspects, so Ingarden’s concept of the score fully encompasses it. The function of the score in understanding the work is also indirect; it only informs about what basic components may appear in the work and defines the limits of freedom of interpretation. Hence, the existence of different performances of the same piece but within a certain class of possibilities.

Every performance is an individual process, taking place explicitly in time and space. Performances are never identical. It is a consequence of both its relationship with a score and the temporal determination, but in different performances, the “structure of transformations and time perspectives” is common. A musical work is not prior to its performance (cf. A. Pytlak and Z. Lissa). A work may come into being during its first performance (e.g. independent improvisation or its occurrence within certain types of aleatoric pieces). The fact that there are many performance concretisations of the same work entails various research questions concerning the “correctness” of the performance, its fidelity to the score; the way of filling in the gaps in definition; ideal performance; compositional performance; the creative role of the performer; the function of the audience; different styles of playing, etc. These are generally formulated issues, although not analysed in detail by Ingarden, but influential in terms of further research in this field (e.g. W. Rozumny, A. Farbstein, A. Szczepańska). They inspired many musicological considerations on the historical variability of performance style (e.g. B. Pociej, L. Polony, A. Pytlak, A. Chęćka-Gotkowicz). They fall within the scope of one of the fundamental problems (original – copy) in the 20^th-century research on art in general, as well as in the reflections of composers and performers (e.g. F. Busoni, I. Stravinsky, E. Ansermet, G. Gould, W. Benjamin and others).

According to Ingarden, the issues of perception of musical work should be studied from three points of view: 1. experience psychology; 2. aesthetics – analysis of an aesthetic experience in which “the perception of a musical work as an aesthetic object takes place” (O zagadnieniu percepcji); 3. detailed theory of knowledge: cognition of a musical work as a work of art. From the psychological perspective, Ingarden defines only the general principle of perception of a specific performance. He emphasises that the perception of a sound form, extending in time, is itself characterised by temporality; he analyses this internal temporality of musical perception. To do so, he uses the description and terminology proposed by E. Husserl (in Wykłady o wewnętrznej świadomości czasu 1928), who, explaining the source of consciousness of temporal succession, used the example of the perception of sound. In the perception of a sound form, Ingarden distinguishes: 1. “pre-impression” – the actual perception of sound, capturing what is sounding “now;” 2. “retention” – awareness of the “just” heard sound, as if “keeping the past in the presence;” 3. “protention” – “anticipation of what is just about to happen.” A difference between these phases that create a continuum is a purely abstract division, a difference between the three states of consciousness. C. Dahlhaus, disputing with Ingarden’s theses, rightly says that in the perception of “musical time,” one should also take into account an important element that determines that lack of continuity in musical hearing, namely “recollection,” which “refers the currently presented motif to a motif that took place in the past, as its return or variant.” In the aesthetic perception of the performance of a musical piece, Ingarden pays special attention to the qualitative determination of the specifically experienced time, so-called time colouration. It is conditioned by the quasi-temporal structure of the work and also depends on the “total, accessible to a given subject (…) range of processes and events taking place in this phase” and on the “time colouration of the preceding moment” in a particularly synthetic way. The individual concretisation of the work by the listener (a specific musical aesthetic object) is determined by: 1. the anatomical and physiological background of the listener; 2. their psychophysiological state; 3. musical and musicological preparation; 4. artistic culture; 5. artistic sensitivity; 6. the atmosphere of the hall, etc. Perception, however, serves not only to achieve an aesthetic experience but can also be a means of getting to know the work. Thus, a difficult problem emerges of “adequate” musical perception in relation to the work: as an object of art, as an ideal aesthetic object (for a given era), or as a specific aesthetic object.

Ingarden introduced the distinction of a musical work as 1. schematic creation; 2. “ideal” aesthetic object created both by the creator and performer; 3. specific aesthetic object (multiple concretisations); this allows for undertaking research questions posed but not resolved by traditional aesthetics, e.g. concerning the differences in perceptive experiences, historical variability of the work’s function in culture, and divergences in aesthetic evaluations. Thanks to that, Ingarden’s theses can be developed in areas of considerations that were not covered by his research, e.g. the sociology of music (e.g. S. Jarociński, T. Misiak, A. Szczepańska), or the reception of music and the theory of aesthetic values ​​(e.g. A. Pytlak, B. Pociej, W. Stróżewski, A. Szczepańska, M. Gołaszewska). Ingarden’s theory of concretisation reveals the indispensable necessity of the recipient’s creative activity because it is somehow “forced” by the structural properties of the work – its schematicity and potentiality. The views on concretisation are, on the one hand, consistent with the tendencies observed in the avant-garde art and music theory of the 20^th century, and on the other hand, with contemporary directions in semiotic research, especially in the field of artistic communication and the theory of music meaning (e.g. U. Eco, S. Langer, L.B. Meyer). This fact can also be seen as the inspirational power of Ingarden’s aesthetics for theories talking about the “heteronomy” of art reception, even in the field of research with a different philosophical and methodological orientation (e.g. Z. Lissa, S. Szuman, S. Ossowski), as well as in fields that go beyond direct reflection on art, e.g. in copyright law (e.g. A. Kopff, G. Mania, E. Lajowska-Litak). Traditional connections between composer, performer and listener were also emphasised in other aesthetic doctrines, but the work itself remained in the background, while in Ingarden’s phenomenology, it becomes the most important, independent subject of research. This methodological concept was the source of the extensive and most multifaceted influence of Ingarden’s aesthetics, especially since, in some aspects, it is convergent with structuralism. Putting the musical text in the centre of analytical attention made it possible to use phenomenological inspiration not only in research on instrumental music (e.g. M. Tomaszewski, K. Kiwała), as Ingarden assumes, but also vocal (M. Bristiger, M. Tomaszewski, B. Pociej and others) and programme music (L. Polony). In the phenomenological, holistic change in the way of perceiving music, it is also necessary to emphasise the introduction of a very clear distinction between the physical foundation of music and its “image” in consciousness. This creates the possibility of undertaking a non-physical and non-psychological – but conducted from the point of view of compositional technique, as well as from an auditive perspective – analysis of the sound factor, which is the most difficult to grasp theoretically. The need for such research tools was expressed by musical creativity itself, especially in the 1^st half of the 20^th century. These inspired, among other things, the original concept of “sonorism” by J. Chomiński (cf. E. Dziębowska), which, according to M. Bristiger, is “an attempt to create an immanent theory of music – a doctrine of musical sonority of a mainly phenomenological character (with some operationalist moments)” (Muzykologia a lingwistyka). Ingarden’s detailed, ontological statements also proved useful for capturing some stylistic features of contemporary music, despite the fact that Ingarden drew exemplifications mainly from classical-romantic music or from the turn of the century (Chopin, Beethoven, Bach, Paganini, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Moniuszko, Szymanowski, Debussy, Stravinsky). The most significant changes in contemporary music have been made in the group of “non-sound moments” distinguished by Ingarden, especially the radical disintegration of the quasi-temporal structure, the autonomisation of movement phenomena, and different concepts of form and the breakdown of the uniformity of structure. Ingarden’s interpretational suggestion concerning the relationship between form and the emotional qualities of music is very accurate from the perspective of music history (especially the 20^th century) and contemporary compositional reflection (cf., e.g., I. Stravinsky, A. Schönberg, Th. Adorno, S. Langer, E. Ansermet, C. Dahlhaus, P.E. Carapezza, M. Tomaszewski and others). There are also similarities between the phenomenology of Ingarden (as well as his predecessors and successors, including F. Busoni, H. Mersmann, E. Ansermet and J.C. Piguet, M. Dufrenne) and the “ontological aspect” in some tendencies of contemporary art itself (S. Jarociński, J. Makota, B. Pociej, A. Czarniawski, P.M. Simons and others), both in the field of poetry (e.g. symbolism, surrealism) and music (e.g. aleatoricism, happening, collage, computer music and others). The theses of Ingarden’s musical aesthetics are also criticised in relation to the category of a musical work (e.g. P. Kivy, L. Goehr) and from the perspective of new compositional practices in the 20^th–21^st centuries (e.g. Z. Lissa, P. Simons, B. E. Lipták, M. Rychter), and the relevance of the phenomenological analysis of works of art is discussed (e.g. E. Buch, M. Tomaszewski, K. Kiwała, A. Krawiec, M. A. Szyszkowska, M. Kokowska).

Ingarden’s phenomenology reconciles autonomous and heteronomous interpretational concepts of music. In some 19^th-century aesthetics, as well as in positivist-empirical trends, autonomous values ​​of music were attributed mainly to purely instrumental music, and everything that was not sound was considered “beyond-musical.” In this aesthetic-historiosophical context, the “non-sound moments,” distinguished by Ingarden, take on a dual meaning, which is essential for the structure of a musical work, contained in it itself and mainly responsible for musical “beauty.” The research of many contemporary aestheticians, dealing especially with so-called intra-musical meaning and non-verbal musical meaning (including S. Langer, U. Eco, L.B. Meyer, D. Stockmann, J.-J. Natiez and others), has gone in a similar direction. Ingarden himself did not exhaust the research possibilities he suggested in his book Utwór muzyczny i sprawa jego tożsamości. Ingarden’s aesthetics is an open system by its very nature. As he writes: “I am as far as possible from wanting to state that only the phenomenological method is effective in aesthetic investigations and that any other method is doomed to failure. I am also far from wanting to impose the use of this method on others” (O estetyce fenomenologicznej). In the 21^st century, creative criticism of Ingarden’s multi-element innovative musical aesthetics, especially the reflection on the performance concretisation of music, perception, experience and aesthetic object, as well as aesthetic values, inspired Polish researchers (including A. Chęćka-Gotkowicz, M. A. Szyszkowska) to create their original proposals in these areas.

Literature: S. Ossowski U podstaw estetyki, Warsaw 1933, 3^rd ed. 1966; S. Ossowski and Roman Ingarden Dyskusja w sprawie ekspresji estetycznej, “Przegląd Filozoficzny” 37, 1934 book 1; M. Dufrenne Phénoménologie de l’expérience esthétique, 2 volumes, Paris 1953; N. Hartmann Ästhetik, Berlin 1953, chapter Schichten des Musikwerkes, Polish ed. Warstwy w dziele muzycznym, transl. M. Turowicz, “Res Facta” 8, 1977; Z. Lissa Rola kojarzeń w percepcji dzieł muzycznych, “Materiały do studiów i dyskusji z zakresu teorii i historii sztuki, krytyki artystycznej oraz badań nad sztuką” 1954 no. 1; W. Stróżewski Gli studi di estetica di Roman Ingarden, “Rivista di Estetica,” Turin 1963 book 1; D. Gierulanka and A. Półtawski Kierunki badań filozoficznych Romana Ingardena, A. Kopff Znaczenie koncepcji utworu w prawie autorskim and A. Półtawski O istnieniu intencjonalnym, in: Szkice filozoficzne Romana Ingardena w darze, ed. Z. Żarnecka, Warsaw 1964; J. Makota O klasyfikacji sztuk pięknych, R. Ingarden’s preface, Kraków 1964; Z. Lissa Teoriopoznawcza analiza struktury czasowej gatunków muzycznych (1964), O procesualnym charakterze dzieła muzycznego (1965), Uwagi o Ingardenowskiej teorii dzieła muzycznego (1966) and O istocie dzieła, muzycznego (1968) in: Wybór pism estetycznych, introduction, selection and ed. Z. Skowron, Kraków 2008; A. Pytlak Kilka uwag na temat Ingardenowskiej koncepcji dzieła muzycznego, “Studia Estetyczne” 3, 1966, new ed. On Ingarden’s Conception of the Musical Composition, in: On the Aesthetics of Roman Ingarden: Interpretation and Assessments, ed. B. Dziemidok, P. McCormik, Dordrecht 1989; M. Rieser Untersuchungen zur Ontologie der Kunst-Musikwerk-Bild-Architektur-Film, “Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism” 24, 1966; M. Rieser Roman Ingarden and His Time, “Journal of Aesthetics and Art. Criticism” 29, 1971 no. 4; E. Husserl Idee czystej fenomenologii i fenomenologicznej filozofii, book 1, transl. and annotations D. Gierulanka, introduction Roman Ingarden, Warsaw 1967, 2^nd ed. 1975, book 2, transl. annotations and introduction D. Gierulanka, Warsaw 1974; C. Dahlhaus Musikästhetik, Cologna 1967, Polish ed. Estetyka muzyki, transl. Z. Skowron, Warsaw 2007; E. Husserl Briefe an Roman Ingarden, published by Roman Ingarden with comments and a memorial on Husserl, the Hague 1968; A. Pytlak Zagadnienie ekspresji w muzyce, “Studia Estetyczne” 6, 1969; M. Bristiger Sonorismo e strutturalismo, “Collage” no. 9, Palermo 1970; Z. Lissa Zur Ingardenschen Theorie des musikalischen Werkes, “Studia Filozoficzne in Übersetzungen” 1970 no. 4, as Einige kritische Bemerkungen zur Ingardenschen Theorie des musikalischen Werkes, “International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music” 3, 1972; D. Gierulanka Filozofia Romana Ingardena. Próba wniknięcia w strukturę całości dzieła, M. Rieser Romana Ingardena filozofia sztuki and A. Szczepańska Niejasność jako estetycznie doniosła jakość, in: Fenomenologia Romana Ingardena, “Studia Filozoficzne” special ed., 1972; B. Pociej Myśl i czas (1965), Problem muzyki dawnej (1966), Dekompozycja – próba ujęcia teoretycznego (1969), in: Idea, dźwięk, forma, Kraków 1972; W. Stróżewski Program estetyki Romana Ingardena, “Ruch Filozoficzny” 30, 1972; M. Bristiger Krytyka muzyczna a poetyka muzyki, in: Współczesne problemy krytyki artystycznej, ed. A. Helman, Wrocław 1973; M. Gołaszewska Romana Ingardena filozofia wartości estetycznych, «Zeszyty Naukowe UJ. Prace Filozoficzne» 3, 1973; M. Gołaszewska Zarys estetyki. Problematyka, metody, teorie, Kraków 1973, 3^rd ed. Warsaw 1986; J. Rybicki Romana Ingardena i W. Tatarkiewicza teoria przeżyć estetycznych (analiza porównawcza) and A. Szczepańska Perspektywy aksjologicznych badań struktury dzieła sztuki i koncepcja Romana Ingardena, “Studia Estetyczne” 10, 1973; P. Beylin Roman Ingarden (1970), in: O muzyce i wokół muzyki, Kraków 1974; M.K. Černý Problèm hudebniho dila, jeho podstaty, identity a forma existence, “Estetika”, 1974 no. 4; J. Makota Stosowalność kategorii estetycznych Ingardena do sztuki współczesnej, “Studia Estetyczne” 11, 1974; H. Markiewicz Twórczość Romana Ingardena a rozwój badań literackich, in: Nowe przekroje i zbliżenia, Warsaw 1974; Z. Zwolińska Byt i wartość u N. Hartmanna, Warsaw 1974; J.J. Jadacki O poglądach Romana Ingardena na dzieło muzyczne, «Zeszyty Naukowe PWSM w Gdańsku» 14, 1975; J. Rybicki Teorie przeżyć estetycznych. Struktura i funkcje głównych koncepcji and A. Szczepańska Polemiki wokół Ingardena, in: Studia z dziejów estetyki polskiej 1918–1939, ed. S. Krzemień-Ojak, W. Kalinowski, vol. 2, Warsaw 1975; W. Harmick Ingarden i twórczość artystyczna, transl. K. Rosner, “Studia Estetyczne” 13, 1976; B. Pociej Istnienie, in: Lutosławski a wartość muzyki, Kraków 1976; W. Stróżewski N. Hartmann. Prezentacja, “Res Facta” 8, 1977; M. Bristiger Muzykologia a lingwistyka (Zagadnienia z pogranicza dyscypliny) and L. Polony Fenomenologiczna koncepcja muzyki E. Ansermeta i J.C. Pigueta, in: Muzyka w kontekście kultury, ed. L. Polony, Kraków 1978; W. Stróżewski O prawdziwości dzieła sztuki. Prawdziwościowa interpretacja dzieła sztuki, “Studia Estetyczne” 15, 1978, English transl. A. Szylewicz entitled On the Truthfulness of the Work of Art, “Review of Metaphysics” 35, 1981; C. Dahlhaus Musik als Text, in: Dichtung und Musik. Kaleidoskop ihrer Beziehungen, ed. G. Schnitzler, Stuttgart 1979, Polish ed. C. Dahlhaus Idea muzyki absolutnej i inne studia, transl. A. Buchner, Kraków 1988; E. Dziębowska Koncepcja realnego kształtu dzieła muzycznego, “Muzyka” 1979 no. 4; A. Farbsztejn Einige Tendenzen der heutigen Musikphilosophie, “Kunst und Literatur” 27, 1979, also “Sowietskaja Muzyka” 1979 no. 1; S. Jarociński Estetyka a socjologia muzyki, in: Studia musicologica, aesthetica, theoretica, historica, ed. E. Dziębowska, Z. Helman et al., Kraków 1979; A. Pytlak Wartość i kryteria oceny dzieła muzycznego, Kraków 1979; B. Dziemidok Teoria przeżycia i wartości estetycznych w polskiej estetyce dwudziestolecia międzywojennego, Warsaw 1980; L. Polony Kontrowersje wokół stylu chopinowskiego, in: W kręgu muzycznej wyobraźni, Kraków 1980; E.H. Falk The Poetics of Roman Ingarden, Chapel Hill 1981; G. Küng Roman Ingarden (1893–1970). Ontological Phenomenology, in: H. Spiegelberg The Phenomenological Movement. A Historical Introduction, the Hague 3^rd ed. 1982; A. Szczepańska Myśl fenomenologiczna w polskiej estetyce współczesnej, “Studia Estetyczne” 19, 1982; M. Tomaszewski Nad analizą i interpretacją dzieła muzycznego. Myśli i doświadczenia, “Res Facta” 9, 1982; W. Stróżewski Dialektyka twórczości, Kraków 1983, 2^nd ed.  2007; T. Misiak Socjologia muzyki i jej ontologiczne przesłanki, “Kultura i Społeczeństwo” 1985 no. 1; A. Szczepańska Problematyka konkretyzacji, “Studia Estetyczne” 22, 1985; B. Pociej Ingarden, “Ruch Muzyczny” 1985 no. 25, 1986 no. 1; M. Bristiger Związki muzyki ze słowem, Kraków 1986; T. Misiak Ingarden a socjologia muzyki, “Ruch Muzyczny” 1986 no. 5; L. Polony Poetyka muzyczna M. Karłowicza, Kraków 1986; P. Kivy Review of “The Work of Music and the Problem of Its Identity” by Roman Ingarden, “Journal of Aesthetics and Art. Criticism” 45, 1987 no. 4; A. Shields, Review of “The Work of Music and the Problem of Its Identity” by Roman Ingarden, “Leonardo” 20, 1987 no. 3; P. Simons Computer Composition and Works of Music. Variation on a Theme of Ingarden, “Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology” 19, 1988; A. Szczepańska Estetyka Romana Ingardena, Warsaw 1989; G. Scaramuzza Oggetto e conoscenza. Contributi allo studio dell’estetica fenomenologica, Padua 1989; B. Pociej Ostatnia fuga Bacha. Próba interpretacji fenomenologicznej w duchu Romana Ingardena, in: Analiza i interpretacja dzieła muzycznego. Wybór metod, ed. T. Malecka, Kraków–Gdańsk 1990; L. Polony Polski kształt sporu o istotę muzyki. Główne tendencje w polskiej myśli muzyczno-estetycznej od Oświecenia po współczesność, Kraków 1991; B.E. Benson Ingarden and the Problem of Jazz, “Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie” 55, 1993; J. Dankowska Czy o Ingardenie można mówić jako o filozofie muzyki? in: Estetyka Romana Ingardena – problemy i perspektywy. W stulecie urodzin, ed. L. Sosnowski, Kraków 1993; W. Biemel Ingarden als Phaenomenologe der Kunst. Bemerkungen zu sejner Deutung de Musikwerks, A. Haardt Das Problem der musikalischen Zeit in Roman Ingardens Musikästhetik und in Aleksej Loseve Phänomenologie der reinen Musik and B. Pociej Tezy do metafizyki muzyki, in: Roman Ingarden a filozofia naszego czasu, ed. A. Węgrzycki, Kraków 1995; B. Pociej Ingarden a polska myśl muzykologiczna, in: W kręgu filozofii Romana Ingardena. Materiały z konferencji naukowej, Kraków 1985, ed. W. Stróżewski, A. Węgrzecki, Warsaw–Kraków 1995; B. Pociej Czysta struktura a mowa dźwięków – uwagi na temat pewnej rewolucji w estetyce muzycznej dzisiaj, in: Muzykolog wobec dzieła muzycznego. Zbiór prac dedykowanych doktor Elżbiecie Dziębowskiej w siedemdziesiątą rocznice urodzin, ed. M. Woźna-Stankiewicz, Z. Dobrzańska-Fabiańska, Kraków 1999; K. Guczalski Phenomenological and Analytic Aesthetics of Music. On the Views of Susanne Langer and Roman Ingarden, “Nordic Journal of Aesthetics” 13, 2001; Słownik pojęć filozoficznych Romana Ingardena, ed. A. J. Nowak, L. Sosnowski, Kraków 2001; W. Stróżewski Wokół piękna. Szkice z estetyki, Kraków 2002; W. Stróżewski Romana Ingardena filozofia czasu, in: Nauka, religia, dzieje. Czas, wieczność, nieskończoność. XII Seminarium w Castel Gandolfo, 5–7 sierpnia 2003, ed. J.A. Janik, Kraków 2004; M. Tomaszewski Utwór muzyczny w kontekście swego czasu i miejsca, in: Dzieło muzyczne, jego estetyka, struktura i recepcja (1), ed. A. Nowak, Bydgoszcz 2005; L. Goehr The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works. An Essay in the Philosophy of Musica, Oxford, 2^nd ed. 2007, Polish ed. Dzieła muzyczne w muzeum wyobraźni. Esej z filozofii muzyki, transl. Z. Białas, Kraków 2022; M. Trzęsiok Muzyka doświadczenia, “Res Facta Nova” 9, 2007; A. Chęćka-Gotkowicz Dysonanse krytyki. O ocenie wykonania dzieła muzycznego, Gdańsk 2008; M. Poprawski Miejsca niedookreślenia dzieła muzycznego, Poznań 2008; M.A. Szyszkowska Aspekty słyszenia dźwięku w doświadczeniu estetycznym dzieła muzycznego, in: Materia sztuki, ed. M. Ostrowicki, Kraków 2010; M.A. Szyszkowska Pojęcie idealnej granicy w estetyce dzieła muzycznego Romana Ingardena, “Aspekty Muzyki” 1, 2011; E. Buch Relire Ingarden: l’ontologie des oeuvres musicales, entre fictions et montagnes, “Intersections” 32, 2012 no. 1–2; J. Mitscherlin Roman Ingarden’s Aesthetics, “Philosophy Compass” 7, 2012; A. Chęćka-Gotkowicz Ucho i umysł. Szkice o doświadczeniu muzyki, Gdańsk 2012; A. Góral-Marks Czasowość dzieła muzycznego w oparciu o koncepcję czasu Romana Ingardena, “Idea. Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych” 14, 2012; K. Kiwała Dzieło symfoniczne w perspektywie polskich koncepcji fenomenologicznych. Lutosławski, Górecki, Penderecki, Kraków 2013; K. Kiwała Ontologia dzieła muzycznego według Romana Ingardena – perspektywy badawcze dla muzykologii i teorii muzyki, in: Świadomość, świat, wartości. Prace ofiarowane profesorowi Andrzejowi Półtawskiemu w 90. rocznicę urodzin, ed. D. Leszczyński, M. Rosiak, Wrocław 2013; M. Krasińska Problem dzieła muzycznego w myśli estetycznej Romana Ingardena, “Filo-Sofija” 20, 2013; M. Lipták Roman Ingarden’s Problems with Avant-garde Music, “Estetika: The European Journal of Aesthetics” 50, 2013; M. Szyszkowska Muzyka i moralność. O wartościach moralnych, dziełach muzycznych i możliwościach ich korelacji w nawiązaniu do filozofii Romana Ingardena, “Miscellanea Anthropologica et Scociologica” 16, 2015; M. A. Szyszkowska Wsłuchując się w muzykę: studium z fenomenologii słuchania, Warsaw 2017; B. Garlej O (podstawowym) znaczeniu Ingardenowskiej kategorii konkretyzacji estetycznej, Kraków 2018; A. Krawiec Pytanie o aktualność rozważań Romana Ingardena dotyczących dzieła muzycznego w świetle współczesnej fenomenologii, “Muzyka” 65, 2020 no. 3; H. Leblanc The Semiotic Foundation of Ingarden’s Analysis of Music, O. Malherbe Artistic Creation in Ingarden’s Thought, M.A. Szyszkowska Roman Ingarden’s Theory of Aesthetic Experience. From Idea to Experience and Back and E.M. Świderski Ingarden and Quandary of Musical Ontology, in: Roman Ingarden and His Time, ed. D. Czakon, N. A. Michna, L. Sosnowski, Kraków 2020; G. Mania Muzyka w prawie autorskim, Kraków 2020; M. Rychter Filozofia muzyki Romana Ingardena (z widokiem na nowość), in: Doświadczenie świata. Eseje o myśli Romana Ingardena, ed. T. Maślanka, Warsaw 2020; E. Laskowska-Litak Pojęcie utworu w prawie autorskim, Warsaw 2022; M. Kokowska O fenomenologicznym doświadczeniu muzyki and M.A. Szyszkowska Muzyka jako droga i doświadczenie. Fenomenologiczne ścieżki badań nad doświadczeniem muzycznym, in: Filozofia muzyki. Doświadczenie, poznanie, znaczenie, ed. M. Gamrat, M.A. Szyszkowska, Kraków 2022.