Introduction 
The study of the category of poetics has its own research 
tradition and is widely spread in various directions of 
humanitarian thought (literature, aesthetics, etc.). The category 
of poetics appears for the first time in the works of Aristotle [1] 
and defines the science of poetic activity, its origin, forms and 
artistic significance. In literary studies, the category of poetics 
occupies an important place and has received recognition in most 
humanities and scientific directions. As evidenced by the works 
of many researchers, the modern approach to the study of artistic 
works in general and literary works in particular presupposes the 
existence of an inextricable connection between literary studies 
and the concept of poetics. Poetics as a literary category is one of 
the sections of this direction of humanitarianism, which studies 
the structure of an artistic work, its aesthetic, stylistic and genre 
features. 
Although the first application of the category of poetics is 
observed in the works of Aristotle, at the same time, long before 
the appearance of Aristotle's works, there were repeated attempts 
to outline the artistic flavor of various cultures, including in the 
countries of the Ancient World, such as India, China, Japan, 
Persia, etc. Namely with the help of poetics as a set of ideas 
about the general construction of a work with its aesthetic and 
genre-stylistic features, national traditions were established, the 
use of which required the presence of certain laws and norms. 
The creation of a connection between poetics and religious, 
philosophical, as well as political concepts was characteristic of 
the countries of the Ancient East. Literary works were perceived 
as one whole with works that belong to other types of art, such 
as: music, theater, painting. Literature was considered as one of 
the main ways of cultural and spiritual development of the 
individual. At the same time, despite the fact that poetics was 
studied by ancient scientists long before the formation of 
Ancient Greece, Aristotle is considered the founder of this 
science. His scientific treatise “Poetics” [1] initiated the study of 
the problems of poetic art and defined the tasks of poetics, the 
principles of its construction, as well as the place it occupies in 
literature. 
In many subsequent studies, including the ones of the literary 
direction, poetics is interpreted close to the theory of literature, 
in which attention is focused on the theoretical aspects of a 
literary work, namely, the study of artistic means, its structural- 
compositional and linguistic components. At the same time, this 
interpretation is significantly reinterpreted and supplemented by 
a broader modern understanding, according to which poetics is 
considered as the science of the general structure of an artistic 
work, which includes the study of the system of aesthetic means 
[12]. The 20th century was a period when the study of the 
poetics of an artistic work and the desire to give an explanation 
of this definition became extremely relevant and in demand. 
2 Method 
The object of this study is poetics, understood as the composer's, 
creator’s poetics, where the musical and literary spheres are 
dialectically interconnected and considered in interaction. The 
understanding of composer's poetics in the form of a set of 
artistic means used by the creator led to an integrative 
perspective and access to the field of interdisciplinary 
knowledge. An integrated approach became the initial 
methodological basis of the study. The conditions for the 
relevance of literary methods in relation to the composer's 
poetics are explicated. The terminological apparatus of this work 
is complex: along with musicology itself, it includes definitions 
borrowed from related humanities. Holistic musicological 
analysis was used as approved mechanisms. 
3 Results and Discussion 
Czech linguist, literary critic and esthetician Jan Mukarzhovsky 
pointed out that poetics can be considered as the theory and 
aesthetics of poetic art, and in the process of its development, 
poetics experiences various interdisciplinary influences. The 
result of this is a rapprochement, and often a complete merger 
with “any of the related sciences, but even in those cases when it 
seems to be on foreign territory, the ultimate goal of all 
questions for it, even if they are similar to the problems of the 
history of literature, sociology etc., is always an illumination of 
the poetic structure. Hence, there is close connection of poetics 
with linguistics, a science that studies the laws of the most 
important material of poetry – language” [9]. With the help of 
language, poetics reveals the process of transformation of the 
author's idea into literary images that arise in the mind of the 
reader and change under the influence of time. 
As far as is known, the origin and formulation of the study of 
historical poetics as a separate scientific problem is connected 
with the activities of Oleksandr Mykolayovych Veselovskyi 
(1838-1906), who first defined the subject of science, developed 
the study methodology and formulated the tasks of historical 
poetics. As the scientist pointed out, thanks to the achievements 
of philosophical thought in the 18 
th 
-19 
th 
In the vast majority of cases, ancient art served as a reference 
point and main model for the study of literary heritage samples 
by aesthetic theory, and where verified historical sources were 
lacking, where gaps were observed, some assumptions arose that 
were formed on speculative conclusions. This way of knowing 
contradicted the requirement to base on the generalization of 
only reliable historical facts with the domination of inductive 
conclusions in the construction of literary theory. The works of 
O. Freudenberg, O. Potebnya, and M. Bakhtin gave a significant 
new impetus to the development of historical poetics. In his 
writings, O. Freudenberg insists on a critical attitude towards the 
understanding and interpretation of evolution as a linear process. 
According to the researcher, “each phenomenon carries out a 
cycle of two opposite phases, which give their opposition the 
commonality of a sequential course. This cycle consists in the 
transition of factors into facts and facts - back, into new factors. 
The phenomenon moves from the previous one to something, 
enters the opposite direction and in this reverse direction moves 
to the next one” [4, p. 218-219]. 
centuries, the category 
of beauty was developed, with the help of which “it was finally 
possible to separate its artistic part from literature. A special 
subject of research appeared (literature, or poetry in the broadest 
sense), and a science about it - literary studies” [15, p. 11].  Oleksandr Potebnya is another iconic figure whose achievements 
are universally recognized in the world humanitarian science. 
The development of problems of theoretical linguistics is part of 
his scientific research, and the scientist's works are still of 
fundamental importance for this scientific direction. The 
theoretical and literary ideas and main conceptual 
generalizations of O. Potebnya were the result of the study of the 
main problem for the scientist - the study of the genesis of 
language and thinking. Considering language as a form of 
human creative activity, O. Potebnya explained what is the 
specificity of poetic language and artistic expression, and 
thereby laid the foundations for studying the poetics of an artistic 
work. 
The theoretical and literary works of Potebnya, who is called the 
creator of linguistic poetics (O. Freudenberg), are of 
extraordinary importance even today, becoming not only the 
glorious history of philological science, but also its living 
present. The theory of the image substantiated by the scientist, 
the doctrine of poetic thinking and the specifics of artistic 
activity are actively mastered by modern science. Potebnya's 
linguistic and philosophical activity is in many aspects related to 
V. Humboldt's psychological theory of language. 
Developing Humboldt's idea that “language, in fact, is something 
permanent, disappearing at every moment”, that “it is not a 
matter, not a dead work, but an activity”, “an eternally repeated 
effort of the spirit to make an articulated sound an expression of 
thought”, based on the idea that language is a sign, a designation 
of a phenomenon and an act of human cognition of the 
surrounding world, Potebnya traces exactly how this cognition 
occurs and how concepts are built and formed and how the 
image of an object turns into a concept of an object [13, p. 26- 
27]. Potebnya writes: “It is not difficult to deduce from the 
analysis of words in any language that the word itself does not 
express the entire thought, taken as its content, but only one of 
its signs” [13, p. 27]. Therefore, the most important problem, 
according to the scientist, is the etymological problem, because 
it helps to formulate the main aspects of the theory related to the 
question of human mental activity. The scientist claims that the 
word has “two meanings: one, which we called objective above, 
and now we can call the closest etymological meaning of the 
word, always contains only one sign; the other is a subjective 
content, in which there can be many signs. The first is a sign, a 
symbol that replaces another one for us” [13, p. 27]. 
This research position of O. Potebnya demonstrates his view on 
the formation of concepts, which is expressed in his concepts of 
etymological meaning and proper meaning as a reflection of the 
internal and external form of the word. For him, the 
etymological meaning is “relating the content of thought to 
consciousness”, it “shows how a person imagines his own 
thought”, and, therefore, it is also the form of the word, but 
internal. However, being the internal form of the word, the 
etymological meaning helps to understand the process of human 
mental activity [13, p. 27]. 
When studying O. Potebnay's concept, O. Freudenberg 
emphasized that poetry is created by this figurative, concrete, 
symbolic thinking; conceptual thinking gives birth to prose. 
Images always have many meanings, because they express a 
synthesis of perception; “they are ambivalent and anti- 
significant, because they consist of opposite qualities - infinity 
and definiteness of outlines” [4, p. 23]. In the concept of 
Potebnya, the word is the first symbol and the first poetic unit, 
which allows concluding that all future poetry with all its forms 
is given, as in a prototype, in a language where imagery remains 
alive until now and manifests itself in epithets. 
The previous scientific experience of literary studies connected 
the historical variability of the work with the continuous renewal 
of the social contents of the era. “Reality” is changing - and its 
artistic image is also changing. In modern humanitarianism, in 
particular thanks to the works of M. Girschman, it is proved that 
the variability of the work depends on the aesthetic laws to 
which the creative consciousness is “internally” subordinated. 
Perhaps the main one of them is the “law” of the national 
tradition, which powerfully affects the artistic word “from the 
inside”, unless it determines its potential meanings even “before” 
the artist's encounter with “social reality”, “before” the creation 
of its artistic image. 
In this regard, the comprehensive significance of a certain 
national tradition of the word for the understanding of personal 
creativity is revealed, which provokes the emergence of 
scientific discussions regarding ideas about the openness and 
accessibility of the semantic content of the work to its 
researcher. These discussions started back in the 1960s with the 
very formulation of the problem of form as “meaningful”, but 
real shifts in this regard occurred thanks to the development of 
issues of the theory and history of literary styles. Summarizing 
the achievements of scientific research in this direction, many 
researchers, including M. Girshman, come to the conclusion that 
the purpose of literary analysis is to reveal the “real meaning” 
(M. Girshman) of the work, that is, as it were, “embedded” in it 
by the author himself. Thus, this “meaning” is available, but by 
no means “directly”, because it is “mediated” by those features 
of the national tradition, the knowledge of which is obviously a 
prerequisite for the analysis of the work [6]. 
As noted in many scientific works of this direction, the 
significant successes of humanitarian science of the 20th century 
are associated with the name of M. Bakhtin, thanks to whose 
works attention to various forms of expression of the author's 
position, including non-verbal ones, was significantly deepened. 
Thus, Bakhtin claims that the writer's “word” expresses his 
artistic thinking, and this is an extremely important conclusion of 
the scientist, which is not formulated directly, but to which the 
entire analysis of styles carried out in a series of scientific works 
by Bakhtin leads. This is “artistic” thinking, and it is not in the 
words of the hero or the narrator, taken in isolation from the 
form of the work as a meaningful whole. “Artistic thinking” is 
this “form”, since namely in it the author's “evaluation” of both 
the hero and the world is carried out. As a result, the 
methodological principle of historicism under the creative 
influence of Bakhtin's thought became immeasurably freer from 
“a priori” connotations in the approach to the study of the work 
in the light of aesthetic, not “social-historical”, uniqueness of the 
writer's creative consciousness. 
At the same time, the “word” as artistic thinking, which is 
expressed at the level of the “form” of the work, is historically 
changeable, because the structure itself is historical, and 
historically unique is “relationship” of all the elements of the 
meaningful form, which is inherent in an individual work. 
However, poetics, which Bakhtin defines as classicist, undergoes 
significant changes under the influence of the author's scientific 
research in the field of studying the novel text. The word 
becomes the concept that Bakhtin uses to define the range of 
phenomena that became the subject of his research. Its first, 
direct and everyday meaning is “word” as a semantic unit of 
language, but in some cases it acquires a slight archaic or 
metaphorical connotation when used with the meaning 
“discourse”. 
That is why the approach of M. Bakhtin becomes extremely 
important for musicology and significantly influences the 
formation of the principles of understanding poetics as a 
musicological category. As O. Samoilenko pointed out, openness 
and completeness in their interdependence are characteristic 
properties of the poetics of M. Bakhtin himself, in connection 
with which Bakhtin's method is extremely important for 
musicological understanding. Samoilenko points out that “on the 
one hand, Bakhtin is very systematic, although it is not so easy 
to notice: he does not declare his systematic approach, and the 
latter covers all of Bakhtin's works without exception - from the 
earliest to the last summary notes. On the other hand, Bakhtin's 
scientific poetics is distinguished by the mobility of structural 
connections between the main system elements (supporting 
concepts). However, this mobility is not accidental: it is part of 
the method, which we have already defined as dialogical” [14, p. 
64-65]. Thus, this mobility is the result of M. Bakhtin's idea and 
has its own internal patterns and aspirations, which are generally dictated by the idea of the “Super-addressee” and the 
permanence of oppositional (literally dialogized) relations 
between concepts [14, p. 65]. 
O. Samoilenko points out that the set of concepts that Bakhtin 
chooses for himself and develops in his researches create the 
originality of his discourse and demonstrate their focus on the 
complex semantic phenomena of human culture. Namely this 
becomes a factor in the convergence of the approaches proposed 
by Bakhtin and musicological thought, because the phenomena 
considered by the scientist assume the “openness” of human 
experience, which is paradoxically stimulated by attempts to 
present it as complete one, in the “last” instance, to imagine 
possible methods of its completion. As Samoilenko points out, 
Bakhtin tries to preserve, reproduce, and comment on the nature 
of such phenomena. “Openness” – “completion” become in his 
concept system-forming categories of a wide range of action, 
concepts always aimed at the study of human activity in culture 
[14]. 
The antinomic pair “openness” – “completeness” leads to the 
discovery of the antinomic nature of aesthetic - ethical relations, 
and therefore Bakhtin allows us to assert that the antinomic 
character of the dependence of ethical and aesthetic principles in 
the effective experience of a person is a necessary aspect of all 
cultural phenomena, and, therefore, they must to a certain extent 
to reflect, taking on their duality, contradiction and “difficulties 
of breadth”, all art history categories. Thus, art history concepts 
in general and musicology in particular are characterized by 
openness and completeness. 
Samoilenko points out that the paired categories of musicology 
assume the same “game” of concepts, which comes from the 
opposition musical - beyond-musical, that are continued by 
“dialogical partners” - genre-style, tradition-author, text-work, 
and some others. According to the researcher, the genre-style 
dialogue acquires special importance, since it directly reveals 
those two, already specific to musical art, immanent factors of its 
poetics, which become expressions of two levels of dialogue 
between music itself and culture as a whole [14]. When 
discussing this range of problematic issues, the researcher in her 
musicological research turns to the conceptual apparatus of M. 
Bakhtin, and applies the categories of “authoritarianism” and 
“persuasiveness” proposed by him. According to Bakhtin, an 
authoritarian word does not imply the possibility of arbitrary 
“mastery and assimilation with one's own word”, but requires its 
absolute and unconditional recognition. This becomes the reason 
that the authoritarian does not give the opportunity to form the 
play context and the play itself. Bakhtin points out that when 
studying the “internally convincing word” it becomes obvious 
that its semantic structure is not complete, but rather, on the 
contrary, it is open. This leads to the fact that in each new 
context, which arises as a result of dialogical relations, the 
context of “internally convincing word” every time demonstrates 
and reveals new semantic possibilities [3, p. 158]. 
Samoilenko, developing the thoughts of Bakhtin, points out that 
style in music shows a direct connection with “persuasiveness”, 
since style is formed and determined by “the creative 
relationship of the word to its subject, to the speaker himself and 
to someone else's word; it strives to organically incorporate the 
material of the language and the language of the material” [3, p. 
189] Genre-style dialogue, which is the result of the relationship 
of “the word to its subject” according to Bakhtin, is decisive for 
understanding the history of musical creativity, the aesthetic 
content of music. Samoilenko claims that this genre-style 
dialogue helps to reveal the fact that meanings are not divided 
into musical and non-musical, they are related to the “life world 
of culture” and, entering the content of music, are appropriated 
by it, are determined by the broad context of cultural semantics. 
On the other hand, music “returns” the borrowed experience of 
meaning-making, significantly changing and updating it [14, p. 
79]. 
Musicology has established its own tradition of using the 
definition of poetics in opposition to the existing traditions of 
using this category in literature. In addition to the literary 
approaches to the category discussed above in this paper, a 
significant number of scientific works were also important for 
modern art studies in general, and for music studies in particular. 
Among the most important for musicological understanding of 
the works in which the problem of poetics is posed, one should 
note the works of D. Likhachev, who characterized poetics from 
the standpoint of its linguistic means [7]. In Likhachev’ works of 
different years, the issue of studying the poetics of Old Russian 
literature is revealed with the help of the author's proposed 
conceptual approach to the content and form of this cultural 
heritage. Also, the works of V. Zhirmunsky, O. Mykhaylov can 
serve as examples of the study of the content side of individual 
structural and artistic components of poetics. 
According to V. Zhirmunskyi and O. Mykhaylov, since the 
beginning of the 20th century, theoretical poetics sees its task in 
the systematization, description, and classification of historical 
and literary material. O. Mykhaylov continues to develop the 
ideas of V. Zhirmunskyi in his works and points out that “the 
traditional understanding of poetics continues to exert pressure 
on the consciousness of researchers” even today [8, p. 56]. 
According to O. Mykhaylov, the established ideas that “poetics 
should become normative” and realize its purpose thanks to a 
number of tasks, among which one of the most important is the 
ability to express “the recommendation of such scientifically 
based, verified generalizing provisions, based on which the 
literary criticism could more effectively, without current 
subjectivism, with great knowledge of the matter and the best 
prediction of development prospects, influence the practical 
activity of writers” [8, p. 23-24]. 
No less important is the approach to the study of poetics 
proposed in the work of V. Zhirmunskyi from the standpoint of 
the artistic skill of the artist, as well as the unique view of 
poetics as a system of working principles or working attitudes of 
any participant (school, era) presented in the works of S. 
Averintsev, which reveals the convergence of the concept of 
poetics with the psychology of creativity [2]. Along with the 
psychological aspect, poetics in the understanding of Averintsev 
is based on the unity of the theory and practice of verbal art, 
where the theoretical aspect is understood as a scientific theory 
of artistic creativity or a system of methodically developed 
recommendations for it – “spoken” poetics, and the practical 
aspect as a system of working principles or working attitudes – 
“immanent”, “unspoken” poetics. 
Averintsev points to two existing interpretations of the category 
of “poetics” - first, as a scientific theory of “verbal artistic 
creativity or at least a system of methodically developed 
recommendations for it: this is what Horace and Pseudo-Longin, 
Buillot and Lessing were engaged in. Such “poetics” goes back 
to the time of Aristotle. Secondly, it is a system of working 
principles of any author, or literary school, or an entire literary 
era: what any writer creates consciously or unconsciously for 
himself” [2, p. 7]. The author emphasizes that in his work the 
category of poetics is used precisely in the second meaning and 
is immanent in literary creativity itself. 
The existing traditions of consideration of the category of 
poetics and its interpretation in many literary studies have 
created a solid foundation for the application of this concept in 
musicology, which in many respects follows literary studies. At 
the same time, in comparison with other scientific branches of 
art studies, precisely in musicology a wide range of its 
application and more in-depth development is presented. 
In the studies of many musicologists, including N. Gulyanytska, 
the appeal to the concept of poetics reveals its close connection 
with the works of Averintsev and the understanding of this 
category as a system of “working principles” aimed at revealing 
the peculiarities of the dynamics of the development of epochal, 
national, and individual style systems. Among the musicological 
works, in which there is an appeal to the theoretical foundations 
of musical poetics, a group of methodologically oriented works 
dedicated to the study of various aspects of musical form, the 
technique of modern composition, counterpoint, instrumentation, 
etc. should be singled out. These works represent “orders for action” - a complex of clearly verified rules and 
recommendations, designed to form the technological 
foundations of composer thinking. On the other hand, there are 
actual scientific studies where the method of poetics is used, 
which, according to N. Gulyanytska, is closely related to the 
theory of music in the study of musical language and is based on 
the synthesis of theoretical and historical musicology. 
Important ones in the development of approaches to musical 
poetics are the scientific works of E. Nazaikinskyi, in which 
poetics appears as a special “style” of research about music, 
determined by the specific features of music itself, its internal 
artistic and aesthetic qualities. In this aspect, poetics is 
understood as an approach that allows focusing on revealing the 
deep meaning of music, immerse in its semantic, content- 
meaningful space, reveal the richness of associations with extra- 
musical spheres, and come to generalizing characteristics of the 
specifics of its various stylistic parameters [10]. 
The focus of Nazaikinskyi's research is on the problems of music 
perception - from the facts of the psychology of hearing, the 
theory of musical language and form, to the history of musical 
styles. Musical meaning appears here as a process of forming 
objective ideas about sound based on its acoustic properties and 
through the mediation of reserves of musical impressions in 
connection with language experience, familiarity with folklore, 
literature. The process of forming spatial, temporal, kinetic 
(plastic) musical meanings is also traced in detail. The role of the 
phonemic layer of national languages in their semantic 
interpretation for the creation of the intonation-semantic relief of 
the melody, the role of the accent structure of the language in the 
creation of typical metrorhythmic formulas is revealed. The 
dynamic, moving nature of musical cues, their unfixed to certain 
concepts, “ability to change forms of objectification” are 
actualized [11, p. 211]. 
4 Conclusion 
Thus, while theoretical poetics develops a system of literary 
categories and provides their conceptual and logical analysis, 
historical poetics studies the origin and development of this 
system. Given this, it should be said that historical poetics 
studies the genesis and development of an aesthetic object and 
its architecture, its manifestation in the evolution of meaningful 
artistic forms. In this regard, the musicology' application of the 
achievements made in literary scientific thought actualize, in 
addition to structural and compositional elements, problems of 
genre and style, form and even musical language, actualize a 
range of issues related to the problems of the dialogic nature of 
musical poetics and semantics. 
Based on the works of M. Bakhtin, it can be concluded that the 
principles and characteristic mechanisms of the aesthetic attitude 
bring culture and music closer together, including through the 
“act of humanity”. As O. Samoilenko testifies, the circle of art 
critic categories is formed in a dialogue with their aesthetic 
equivalents, as if they are built on the latter and “embedded” in 
them thanks to, on the one hand, the discussion of their general 
broad historical role, on the other hand, thanks to specific 
analyzes of artistic texts. Thus, the dialogue is the realization of 
the constant opposition of life principles, thanks to which it 
becomes possible to identify their axiological-semantic 
orientation, which is connected with the phenomenon of 
understanding. In the dialogue, a person perceives and realizes 
himself not only as a part of the world, but also “the world as a 
part of himself”, communicates with the world as a subject, 
builds up own and its semantic structures, the volume of 
perception of life and resonance with it as “whole with whole”. 
Musical semantics becomes a boundary branch between all 
participants in the musical creative process, and, therefore, it 
borders between the understanding and interpretation of music - 
it “brings” understanding to the possible limits of interpretation. 


РОЗКАЖИ ПРО ЩО ТУТ ЙДЕ МОВА