Towards a Theory of Nineteenth-Century Tonality

Citation preview

pro

Towards a Theory of Nineteenth-Century Tonality

Julian Horton Trinity College, Cambridge

UNIVERSITY jJBRAR*

CAMDRIUGE j

Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

1

Towards a Theory of Nineteenth-Century Tonality Dissertation Abstract Julian Horton-Trinity College. Cambridge This thesis pursues three successive and related areas of research. First, it undertakes a critique of Schoenberg’s interpretation of nineteenth-century tonality, and explores the reception history of these ideas and their relationship with other prominent theoretical models, notably that of Heinrich Schenker. Second, it suggests an analytical theory of nineteenth-century tonality which proceeds from the conclusions of this critique. Lastly, it applies this model in the analysis of an extended work from the period; Bruckner's Eighth Symphony. The initial critique seeks to show that Schoenberg’s model of tonality in decline is predicated on a self-justifying argument; the necessity of atonality is not an immanent property of nineteenth-century tonality, but is imposed upon the music by Schoenberg’s own theoretical discourse. Schenkerian theory associates with this position in a negative sense; the aspects of this music which Schoenberg perceived to be the precursor of atonality ate taken by Schenker as evidence of the decline 'of the musical art. The error in both interpretations is the assumption that a stable system of tonality must of necessity be founded on a fundamental diatonicism. The suggestion of an alternative model starts with an exploration of the properties of a tonal system arising from a fundamental chromaticism. The taxonomies of modal and harmonic properties advanced in this regard by Gregory Proctor and Robert Bailey are extended, and distilled into four categories, being diatonicism and three identifiable modes of chromatic progression. The theoretical exposition then elaborates a quasi-reductive model, founded.upon this taxonomy, which replaces the Schenkerian system with a dualistic theory. The foreground level is characterised by the grouping of, material into localised units defined by the control of one or more of the categories of progression and possible modalities arising from the total chromatic. Such structures are defined as ‘harmonic fields’. A segmental technique is advanced which facilitates the isolation of these structures. The notion of the Ursatz is then revised to accommodate mixtures of diatonic and non-diatonic tonal relationships, and purely chromatic tonal structures, and a taxonomy of background types is provided. The two levels are shown to stand in a dichotomous relationship; the former accumulates discrete modalities, the latter isolates particular sets of relationships from the total chromatic. The concept of tonic centricity is therefore revised; it refers not only to a point

within an asymmetrical hierarchy, but to a point of departure and return defined by octave equivalence. Both levels of structure are given extensive analytical exemplification in isolation, and subsequently in combination in the analysis of Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony. The findings of the study are related to processes identified in other parameters of the music, and situated within a survey of analytical ideas and value-judgements generally associated with Bruckner’s music. Finally, a sketch of the historical character of the system is provided in the concluding remarks.

I certify that this dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration. I declare also that this work is not substantially the same as any work previously submitted as part of a degree or similar qualification at this or any other university. The thesis does not exceed the maximum word limit recommended by the degree committee.

fu

f ^ Julian Horton January 1998

Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor. Professor John Deathridge, for his continuing help aind support, and his patient and careful reading of the text of this work. Second, I would like to thank Dr Paul Wingfield for the extended loan of, and instruction in the use of, the 'Sibelius 7' programme, and for many additional helpful suggestions concerning the technical presentation of the graphic analyses. Thanks are also due to Trinity College for the provision of an Internal Graduate Studentship. Lastly a considerable debt of gratitude is owed to Janet Varley, who has provided much valuable assistance in the final stages of preparation.

Prefatory Remarks A number of notational procedures have been employed in this thesis which require initial explanation. The alphabetical representation bf keys shows major keys by capital letters and minor keys by lower-case letters, unless the description carries the suffix major or minor, in which case capital letters have been used throughout. Description of single pitches, without a necessary implication of tonedity, are shown exclusively by capital letters. When pertinent, the description of scale degrees accordmg to tessitura has not followed the standard designation of middle C as cl, subsequent upward transpositions as c2, c3, c4 and subsequent downward transpositions as c, C and CC, but has classified the octave beginning on middle C as C-B, and successive octave displacements upwards as Cl-Bl, C2-B2, C3-B3 etc. and downwards as Bl-Cl, B2-C2, B3-C3 etc. This system has been chosen because the standard notation below middle C might become confused with designations of major or minor modality. Notational conventions which arise from specific theoretical concerns and contexts, for example the notation of voice-leading procedures lying outside the accepted conventions of Schenkerian theory, will be considered at the relevant points in the text. The designation of selected text for the analysis of Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony, and the reasons for the choice of text, will be given in part two. The musical examples in this thesis have been reproduced using the ‘Sibelius 7’ music processing programme.

Contents Part One - Theory' Chapter One: Introduction .................................................................... p.l Chapter Two: Mode and Progression....................................... ........p.26 Chapter Three: Theory (1) - The Harmonic Field..................... ......p.44 Chapter Four: Theory (2) - The Chromatic Background.................p.84 ^ Part Two - Analysis; Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony Chapter One: Introduction.................................................................p.l28 Chapter Two: First Movement.............................................................p.l35■ Chapter Three (a): Scherzo................................................................ p.l67 Chapter Three (b): Trio................................................

p.l81

Chapter Four: Adagio........................................................................ p.l91 Chapter Five: Finale....................

p.222

Part Three - Conclusions................................................................p.271 Appendix I...................................................... :...................................p.280 Appendix II.......................................................................................... p.286 Appendix ITT........................................................................................p.288 Bibliography. ......................

p.299

Theory

■’i| :

1

1; Introduction I Interpretations of the development of tonality in the nineteenth century have in subsequent

years

been

dominated by

the

work

of Arnold

Schoenberg.

Schoenberg’s decision to abandon the structural foundations of tonality, in the George Lieder.. op. 15 and in the freely atonal works that followed, resulted from an histbrical/theoretical viewpoint which has subsequently gained widespread acceptance. Quite apart from the ramifications for the development of twentiethcentury music, the poietic strategy which produced these works has become a widely influential reading not only of nineteenth-century music but of the history of western music from the Renaissance to Schoenberg’s own time. Schoenberg’s claims rest on two principal contentions. First, that the development of western music is characterised by changes in the underlying musical system. Second, that this history, from the Carolingian church modes to Schoenberg’s own time, follows an organic process of development. Thus tonality, and ultimately atonality, arise out of an organic process of growth and decay, which first of all causes the reduction of renaissance modality to the diatonic system, and eventually leads to the dissolution of diatonic tonality at the hands of encroaching chromaticism: The decline of the church modes is that necessary process of decay from which sprouts the new life of the major and minor. And even if our tonality is dissolving, it already contains within it the germ of the next artistic phenomenon.^

In each case the change results from the exhaustion of the material and structural potentialities of the existing system. More than

this, the possibility of such

development forms an a priori characteristic of each system. In other words, the process of decay is an immanent property of the musical language, generating an historical dynamic and an inherent concept of necessity. Schoenberg conceived of this process in an almost Darwinian sense, as the progressive acquisition of higher evolutionary states: Nothing is definitive in culture; ’ everything is only preparation for a higher stage of development, for a future which at the moment can only be imagined, conjectured. Evolution has not finished, the peak has not been crossed. It is only the beginning, ^Schoenberg, A.-Harmonielehre. (Vienna 1911). All quotations from Schoenberg, A.-Theorv of Harmony, tr. Carter, R, (London 1978); hereafter Theory of Harmony. This quotation p.97.

t itNivEtiSrry •

1 inRARY

'

AMBKIOQE

2 and the peak will come only, or perhaps never, because it will always be surpassed.^

The idea of tonality as an evolving language is allied to two further concepts: the idea of musical logic, and the derivation of the modal and tonal systems from natural sources. The former is most closely associated with Schoenberg’s ideas of thematic development. In a wider context, however, the theoretical concern with coherence encompasses the development of tonality; in evolving towards atonality, the tonal system reveals a progressive process of simplification: Perhaps it is an unconscious striving for simplicity that leads musicians here; for the replacement of major and minor is no doubt the same sort of step as the replacement of the seven church modes with merely two scales, major and minor: greater uniformity

of relationship

within

an

unchanged

number

of possible

relationships.^

Just as a work might be considered ‘coherent’ if its constituent material reveals a common thematic origin, so the musical language itself finds in chromaticism a more unified conception, a reduction from a multiplicity of modal sources to a single scalar identity.-. As tonality evolves towards chromaticism it undertakes a progressive annexation of the available natural resources. This is observed first of all in the emergence of the phenomenon of tonic centricity and the I-IV-V-I hierarchy, which for Schoenberg cannot be identified as a feature of renaissance modality: ‘The effect of a fundamental tone was felt, but since no-one knew which one it was, all of them were tried’In acoustical terms, the recognition of a notion of centricity as the basis of the musical language involves the recognition of the structural potential of the fundamental frequency. The distinction between consonance and dissonance, between stable and dependent sonorities, is thus a relative concept determined by proximity to a fundamental, a designation which changes as we progressively admit the higher partials of the overtone series as comprehensible. The emancipation of the dissonance forms the ultimate goal of this process, the point at which it becomes an apparent matter Of necessity to liberate’ sonorities formed by the higher partials from their dependence upon sonorities closer to the fundamental, that is, to ^Theory of Harmony, p.97. 3lbid., p.247. ^Ibid., p.25.

3

treat them as consonances in themselves. But if the differentiation of consonance and dissonance has been' abolished, then the notion of tonic centricity must also be abahdoned. The implications of Schoenberg’s thinking for the music of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are well known. In the music of the high baroque and of Viennese classicism the tonal system reaches a stable period of common practice; thereafter it embarks on a gradual and irrevocable process of decline. The nineteenth century is defined altogether as a transition, the passage from a system based on the diatonic modes to one based on the chromatic scale, a transition which Schoenberg perceived as being ‘fuUy accomplished in the music of Wagner’.^ Yet the ‘overwhelming multitude of dissonance’ which this practice permits obscures the notion of functional centricity basic to the system; chromaticism therefore cannot sustain a notion of tonality. In Wagner’s music dramas from Tristan onwards, in Liszt’s Bine Faust-Svmphonie and late piano music, in the mature works of Brackner, Brahms, Mahler, Richard Strauss, Reger, Wolf, Debussy and Scriabin, the extensive employment of chromatic sonorities and relationships makes the parallel use of clear diatonic harmony seem anachronistic and eventually renders it obsolete. In Webern’s words, ‘music has quite simply given up the formal principle of tonality’.^ The dissemination of the evolutionary conception of the history of tonality, and of the idea of the inherent necessity of atonality, can be traced in the work of Schoenberg’s pupils, in the polemical assertions of the serialist avant-garde, and generally in the analytical and pedagogical literature of the last thirty years. The notion of musical progress was taken up by Rene Leibowitz, whose work amounts to an attempt at the pedagogical transmission of Schoenberg’s ideas. In Schoenberg et son Ecole the idea of progress is characterised as an inherent property of the phenomenon of polyphony. Progress is for Leibowitz comprised of two essential elements; on the one hand tradition, or ‘the patrimony of spiritual activity which is continually being enriched by new acquisitions’, on the other hand ‘[...]a continual synthesis[...]so that at any given moment the totality of polyphonic acquisitions is only a premise which may be followed by the acquisition of the next moment in

^Theory of Harmony, p.389. ®Webem, A.-The Path to New Music (Pennsylyania 1963), p.45.

■■■

ii

t

4

history’J The action of this process forms a ‘ceaseless^ march towards the horizon of the musical future’.® At all times Leibowitz, like Schoenberg, is keen to demonstrate his detachment from the historical mechanism, which rather takes on the status of a discovered historical fact: From the first evidence of the earliest polyphonic experimentation to the most advanced realisation of the music of our time[...]a logical chain of events connects the genuine origins of polyphony with the manifestations which this polyphony has produced.^

In this way Leibowitz traces the development of the tonal system as the necessary consequence of the emergence of polyphony. Thus, in the first place polyphony tends towards harmony; ‘this is proved by the harmonic formula which it engenders almost immediately’.lo At the same time pre-tonal modality is incapable of supporting a notion of tonic centricity, since this feature is only possible when the ‘specialising’ nature of modality has been replaced by the universal nature of the diatonic system. The first significant maturity of this system Leibowitz locates compositionally in the music of J.S.Bach and theoretically in Rameau’s Traitd de THarmonie. Bach in particular was able to realise the stmctural potentialities of tonal harmony, whilst simultaneously retaining a genuine concept of polyphohy. Leibowitz’s treatment of the subsequent history of tonality presents a justification of the necessity of atonality in a similar sense. In Wagner’s mature music ‘harmony now becomes extremely comphcated[...]because chromaticism begins to eat away at the very system of thirds’.“ Roving or ‘vagrant’ chords, presented in succession, are perceived to cause ‘complete tonal chaos’. Therefore: Chromaticism, the importance of which will obviously be maintained after Wagner, introduces an entirely new perspective, by proving that every chord is justified by the chromatic scale and that it would be futile to prohibit the use of any harmony. 12

2Leibowitz.R.-Schoenberg et son Ecole (Paris 1947). All quotations from Leibowitz, R.-Schoenberg and his School, tr. Newlin, D. (New York 1949); hereafter Schoenberg and his School. This quotation p.xxi. ®Ibid., p.xxi, ®Ibid., p.xxv. lOlbid., p.l9. lllbid., p.35. 12lbid., p.38.

•

5

By the beginning of the twentieth century the process of acquisition and synthesis has progressed to the point where music has annexed the complete chromatic resource as its basip material. Thus ‘at this moment[...]we are again confronted with a privileged phase[...]in which there will occur a transition from the tonal to a new system’. 13 Again Lpibowitz stresses the logic of continuity which underlies bus development: All this[...]is nothing but the straightforward and systematic realisation of a state of affairs which - less straightforward and less systematic - already existed in the last tonal works of Schoenberg and even, up to a point, in certain works of Wagner. In this sense it is possible to say that, just as the first tonal music is very similar to the last modal music, even so the first works in which Schoenberg abandons tonality are hardly different from those in which he still maintained it.l^

With vfery little modification Leibowitz has restated the progressive, entropic interpretation of nineteenth-century tonality. Similar attitudes are to be found in the work of Josef

Ruferi^,

Rudolph

Rdtii® and Dika Newlin.ii Moreover, despite the change of orientation which locates Webern as the genuine progenitor of universal seriahsm, the mterpretation of musical history advanced by the post-war avant-garde confirmed Schoenberg’s position. In much of Pierre Boulez’s polemical writing the justification of the necessity of integral serialism is tied to a recognition of the Schoenhergian achievement. In ‘Moment de J.S.Bach’^® Boulez unquestioningly follows Schoenberg’s self-characterisation as the vehicle of a greater historical necessity; Schoenberg[...]typifies the pursuit of a new language. Appearing on the scene at the moment of disintegration, he pushes this disintegration to its logical conclusion; the suspension of tonality.

^^Schoenberg and his School, p.43. l%id., pp.74-75. l^See Rufer. J.-Die Komposition mit Zwolf Tonen (Berlin 1952); English Composition with Twelve Tones tr. Searle, H. (New York 1954), pp.14-23. ^®See R6ti, R.-Tonality - Atonality - Pantonality (London 1958), pp.33-58. ^^See Newlin, D.-Bruckner. Mahler. .Schoenberg (New York 1947). ‘Moment de J.S.Bach’ in Boulez. P.-Relev6s d’apprenti (Paris 1966L All quotations from ‘Bach’s Moment’ in Boulez, P.- Stocktakings from an Apprentice.ship tr. Walsh, S. (Oxford 1991), pp.3-14; hereafter Stocktakings from an Apprenticeship. l^Ibid,, p.7.

In ‘EventueUement..,’20 the process of disintegration is described in conjunction with his own compositional, standpoint: Let me hasten to explain in more detail, for the benefit of those dullards who continue to proclaim the series as the purely arbitrary and artificial creation of a schoolmaster in search of a rule-book. It seems obvious that, since Wagner, chromaticism has become an epidemic; Debussy would certainly not disagree. Hence serial technique is merely the boiling over of musical problems which have been simmering since 1910. It is not a decree, but a statement.^ ^

Boulez is unequivocal in his condemnation of those who might draw the opposite conclusion: [...]let me state, in my turn, that any musician who has not experienced -1 do not say understood, but truly experienced - the necessity of dodecaphonic language is USELESS. For his entire work brings him up short of the needs of his time.^^

The influence of the Schoenbergian model remains in more recent analytical, historical and pedagogical literature. In 1972 Philip Friedheim advanced the following description^of the development of tonality in the nineteenth century: One can say thatl...]music moves from the height of Viennese classicism and its perfected tonal structures to atonality and the elimination of a functioning tonic. It is possible to view the harmonic style of the nineteenth century as part of an historical tradition that explores the areas leading to the dissolution of tonality.^^

Similarly Donald Jay Grout, in the widely read History of Western Music, adheres to Schoenberg’s historical thinking: Much nineteenth-century music, especially in Germany, had been unconsciously tending towards atonality. Chromatic melody lines and chord progressions, even in Wagner, had resulted in passages in which no tonal centre could be

perceived.^^

^^Originally published as ‘Eventuellement...’ in Relevds d’Apprenti. Translated as ‘Possibly...’ in Stocktakings from an Apprenticeship, pp.l 11-140. ^^Ibid., p.ll3. 22lbid., p.ll3. 23Friedheim,P-’A Problem in Nineteenth-Century Musical Structure; the Approach to the Tonic’ in Music Review vol.33 (1972), pp.81-92. This quotation p.81. ^'‘^Grout, D. J.-A History of Western Music (1968, reprinted 1988), p.850.

Stefan Kostke and Dorothy Payne, in the context of a general theory of tonality, have stated that: Tbe forces that led ultimately to the breakdown of the tonal system may be viewed as the logical extension of the direction in which music had been developing since the beginning of the nineteenth century.25

As recently as 1989 Joel Lester has advanced' the Schoenbergian model as the starting point for a consideration of the analysis of twentieth-dentury music: What happened increasingly during the nineteenth century is that many composers sought new harmonic effects for individuality’s sake. The long-term result of these new harmonic effects was a gradual loosening of the bonds of functional tonality.25

Having cited the encroaching employment of chromaticism, both as an harmonic and as a tonal phenomenon, as the substance of these ‘new effects’, Lester proceeds to the following conclusion: The first stages of this trend are perceptible in some music firom the early nineteenth century. In works from the 1850s and later, most of these features are increasingly prevalent. By the beginning of the twentieth century, functional tonality ceased to be a controlling influence over harmony and voice leading in the music of some composers. 22

As an hermeneutic, analytical and pedagogical model for the understanding of the history of tonality in general and of nineteenth-century tonality in particular, the concept of the necessity of atonality has in many ways taken on the status of an historical truth. Opposition to this viewpoint, particularly in the face of Boulez’s acerbic protestations, appears considerably less vocal. Adele Katz’s characterisation of the Schoenbergian revolution as a misunderstanding of Wagner’s work is more melancholic than zealous: This is the tragedy of Wagner - that in spite of his amazing extension of the older techniques, he invalidated their function; in spite of his adherence to tonality, his lesser deviations have led to its breakdown; and in spite of the use of chromaticism

^Kostke, S. and Payne, p.-Tonal Harmony (New York 1984), p.421. 25Lester,J.-AnaIytical Approaches to Twentieth-Centiirv Mirsic (New York 1989) on 6-7

22lbid., p.7.

•

■

8 within thfe realm of diatonicism, he gave rise to a form of chromatic supremacy that resulted in atonality.^®

Katz is, however, emphatic in her rejection of the idea that atonality forms a logical extension of tonality: Finally let us

explode the

theory

that these systems

are an

outgrowth

or

development of tonality, for we must realise that the concepts underlying present-day techniques are totally divorced from the type of coherence demonstrated by tonality.

Atonality must be accepted not because it constitutes a necessity but because it is a result of the aesthetic and expressive concerns of contemporary composers. More recently Schoenberg’s position has undergone some considerable revision, both implicitly in the theoretical and analytical work of Robert Bailey^o and Gregory Proctor^

and explicitly in the work of Lawrence Kramer^^ and William

Thomson.33 in Kramer’s case, Schoenberg’s position is admonished without serious consideration of its ideological shortcomings. In ‘The Mirror of Tonality’

the

critique of the necessity of atonality is confined to the following remarks: Yet the rhetoric of discovery is deceptive; the truth is that Schoenberg was interpreting, not ’discovering, atonahty as chromatic saturation[...]Persistent ideas endure for a reason, and this one is no exception. Though most varieties of nineteenthcentury chromaticism can be heard as harmonically directed, and though a good many tonally

unstable pieces

are not excessively chromatic,

the myth of creeping

chromaticism is clear as an explanatory principle and dramatically appealing as a vision of musical entropy.^^

Whilst the theoretical notion which Kramer suggests as an alternative model of nineteenth-century tonality may be pertinent, it is scarcely based on a comprehensive analysis of the. issues. Thomson’s study is more exhaustive, encompassing not only ^^Katz, A.-Chal1enge to Mu.sical Tradition: a New Concept of Tonality (New York 1945j, p.247. 29lbid„ p.397. 3°Bailey, R.-'The Structure of The Ring and its .Evolution' in Nineteenth-Century Music vol.l (1977), pp.48-61. See also Tristan nnd Isolde: Prelude and Transfiguration (New York 1985), pp.108113. 3tProctor, G.-The Technical Basis of Nineteenth-Centurv Chromatic Tonality (Ph.D, Princeton 1978). 32Kramer, L.-The Mirror of Tonality: Transitional Features of Nineteenth-Century Harmony' in Nineteenth-Centurv Music vol.4 (1981), pp.191-208. 33Thomson, W.-Schoenberg's Error (Pennsylvania 1991). 34'The Mirror of Tonality', pp.191-192.

the emancipation of

the dissonance and the necessity of atonality, but the

foundations of Schoenberg’s theory of harmony, the validity of the concept of musical logic and the perceptual basis of Schoenberg’s claims for the audible coherence of dodecaphonic music. With regard to the history of tonality, the essence of Thomson’s objection lies in a notion of perceptual necessity and of historical relativism. In opposition to the ‘progressive’ view of tonality as an evolving language, Thomson claims that the concept of tonic centricity underlies renaissance and medieval modality as much as it forms the basis of tonality in the modern sense. The idea that post-renaissance tonality is defined by the recognition of a fundamental tone or chord is borne out neither by the phenomenon of modal polyphony itself, nor by renaissance and medieval theoretical discourse. Thomson bases this judgement not only on historical/analytical evidence but on the apparent existence of a necessary psychological condition for musical comprehensibility: The chromatic scale is the correlate in pitch space of a time period filled by undifferentiated pulses; it is an example of a flat or single-level structure, a nonhierarchy. We can paraphrase Paracelsus’ indelicate condemnation of four-sided triangles by observing that God can make an ass with three tails, but not a perceptual unit from the chromadc scale.^^

Citing the evidence of experimental psychology (in particular Frances and Deutsch) he contends that coherence in music is specifically a property of centricity, and that no system which professes a basis in the chromatic scale, or indeed in any intervaUicaUy egalitarian pitch structure, can project such a property. It is therefore a unifying feature of the history of western music that each successive period relies on some concept of a tonic, be it a major triad or the finalis of a Gregorian chant. Schoenberg’s position becomes untenable because it attributes a condition of comprehensibility to a phenomenon which abandons the concept of centricity. Thus if the chromatic scale is ‘the evolutionary product of music’s progress, as a cognitive archetype it was a regressive mutation’.^® Whatever the merits of Thomson’s perceptual arguments, his reappraisal of the • sharp end of Schoenberg’s historical model, that is the interpretation of the chromatic tonality of the late nineteenth century, falls somewhat short of the mark. His first contention is that chromaticism, rather than forming an immanent property ^^Schoenberg’.s Error, p.87. 36lbid., p.88.

10

of the musical system, performs an expressive or illustrative function in nineteenthcentury music. It is closely associated with the concept of programme music and in effect forms a topos of textual or emotional allusion and illustration. In this sense passages of extended chromaticism and tonal ambiguity at no point obscure the functional basis of tonality because thdy point beyond the structural premises of a work to an extra-musical substance: Such passages of extraordinary tonal indecisiveness[...]usually share one of two common features: they are all inextricably bound up with some kind of dramatic gesture (even within the framework of “absolute” music), of pointing beyond the sonic moment itself. Otherwise they are intend to refer wholly to extramusical matters. They signal relationships with other contexts, whether morphological or ideational.^^

The necessity which Schoenberg perceived is therefore groundless because it resides in a phenomenon which was designed to be cosmetic. With this in mind Thomson proceeds through analyses of Tristan und Isolde. Also Sprach Zarathustra and Bine Faust -Svmphonie. Yet the demonstration of tonal security is far from successful. Certainly in each of these works clear diatonicism is as apparent as extended chromaticism; howeyfer a simple reversal of Schoenberg’s contention, the argument that such works support a stable notion of tonality because they contain passages of stable tonality, is no argument at all. To suggest that chromaticism has no effect on the underlying structure of the system because it might perform an extra-musical function is to make the dubious assertion • that some elements of the system can be divorced from others on the basis of a posteriori extra-musical interpretation. Furthermore, the very notion of the connection between programmatic and chromatic elements demands extensive qualification. Whilst it is entirely plausible that the ‘progressive’ aspects of nineteenth-century tonality might in many instances support the depiction of programmatic or emotional ideas or states, it is equally easy to discover music which is extensively chromatic and both entirely without programmatic content and also divorced from a dramatic, gestural function. One thinks, for example, of much of Brahms’ work, which, as Schoenberg realised, engenders a highly developed ide^ of .chromaticism within the confines of absolute musical forms which is not tied purely to the articulation of, dramatic events. Conversely, when chromaticism 37-

11

does serve an explicitly programmatic function it can do so beyond the level of foreground elaboration. As Thomson fails to point out, in Liszt’s Bine FaustSvmphonie the initial augmented triad becomes projected at the background as an arbiter of tonal strategy. The work as a whole derives a central tonal conflict from the opposition of C, E and A-flat. In this way the background does not reflect locally supportive diatonic harmony in the Schenkerian sense of Auskomponierung, but rather is derived from the very elements which Schoenberg perceived to be tonally disruptive. This is not to take issue’ with Thomson's contention that:

‘It was

Schoenberg’s most damaging error[...]to conclude that the tonally perfidious music of the nineteenth century must of necessity give way to the uncharted seas of a non-hierarchical pitch world’Indeed, the central problem for Schoenberg’s position is that it contains a self-justif3dng argument. The dissolution of tonality is brought about not by the operation of an historical dynamic but by the force of Schoenberg’s own theoretical discourse. Thomson’s principal failing is that at no point is this problem clearly established as the centre of his argument. Instead Schoenberg’s Error simply attempts to replace the idea of the necessity of atonality with the idea of the perceptual necessity of tonality. However, the problem raised by the break with tonality is surely not simply that Schoenberg mistook as transient a phenomenon that was in truth an absolute precondition for musical coherence, but rather that he brought to bear on the history of music a self-justifying concept of historical necessity. II Despite substantially different objectives, Schoenberg’s theoretical and historical position in its broader aspect holds much in common with that of Heinrich Schenker. Bpth sought to ground their viewpoints in a derivation of the phenomenon of-tonality from nature. Whilst Schenker was rather more circumspect in his adoption of the properties of the overtone series as a natural foundation, and whilst neither took their physicalism to the levels of abstraction displayed in Hugo Riemann’s system, nevertheless both -held to the basic conviction that the triad and the hierarchical structure of diatonic tonality are naturally preformed. Moreover the evolutionary character of Schoenberg’s thinking finds a parallel in the biological

^^Schoenberg’s Error. p.l79.

12 inclination of much of Schenker’s writing, that is, in the characterisation of tonality as a quasi-procreative phenomenon: Since it is a melodic succession of definite steps of a second, the fundamental line signifies motion, striving towards a goal, and ultimately the completion of this course. In this sense we perceive our own life-impulse in the motion of the fundamental line.^^

Schenker’s predilection for biological metaphors does not arise with Per freie Satz. but can be traced back to the Harmonielehre: I have repeatedly had occasion to show the truly biological characteristics displayed by tones in various respects. Thus the phenomenon of the partials could be derived from a kind of procreative urge of the tones; and the tonal system, particularly the natural one, could be seen as a sort of higher collective order, similar to a state, based on its own social contracts by which the individuals are bound to abide.'^®

The notion of coherence manifests itself equally in the work of both, Schoenberg through the widespread application of the concept of musical logic, Schenker through his belief in the organic unity bestowed upon a work by the existence of the Ursatz. Furthermore, as Matthew Brown'll has pointed out, Schenker’s conception of chromaticism was rather more liberal than has been generally recognised. The idea of ‘mixture’ as it is applied in Per freie Satz was not conceived purely as an elaborative property of the middleground, but has its roots in a theory of chromaticism first expounded in the Harmonielehre. The fully developed tonal system is not completed with the natural derivation of the major system and the artificial derivation of the minor system (unlike Riemann, Schenker makes no attempt to establish a natural basis for minor tonality), but rather with the exploration of how the two systems might be combined. Ultimately, chromaticism is

^^Schenker, H.-Der Freie Satz (Vienna 1935). All quotations from Schenker, H.-Free Composition, tr. Oster, E. (New York 1979); hereafter Free Composition. This quotation p.4. '^^Schenker, H.- Harmonielehre (Vienna l906). All quotations from Schenker, H.- Harmony tr. Jonas, O. (Chicago 1954); hereafter Harmony. This quotation p.84. '^^Brown, M.-'The Diatonic and the Chromatic in Schenker’s Theory of Harmonic Relations' in Journal of Music Theory vol.30 (1986), pp.1-34. Brown has elaborated the ideas expressed in this article in ah analysis of Isolde’s narrative from Act I of Tristan und Isolde: see 'Isolde’s Narrative; from Hauptmotiv to Tonal Model' in Analyzing Opera: Verdi and Wagner ed. Abbate, C. and Parker, R. (Berkeley 1989), pp.180-201.

13 accounted for as the product of a mixed major/minor system which Schenker recognises to be the genuine foundations of much tonal music: The combinations are actuated between the major and minor modes and, obviously,only between homonymous keys[...]The combination may proceed from major to minor or from minor to major; in both .cases, the same result is reached. Properly spe^ng, I think that any composition moves in a major/minor system[...]a pure C major, without any C minor ingredients, or, vice versa, a pure C minor without any C major ingredient, hardly ever occurs in reality

The complete set of possible combinations is given by Schenker in the following example;

mA

The second chapter of the Harmonielehre is given over altogether to an exploration of the harmonic and tonal possibilities arising from this system.

'’^^Hannony, p.86.

14 In Schenker’s mature system the concept of combination becomes the concept of mixture as it occurs in the middleground: In the fundamental stracture, the fundamental line remains strictly diatonic. At the first level, however, it can contain a mixture of the major and minor third. In this regard, it makes no difference whether the line begins on 3,§ or

Thus chromatic relationships are conceived of as deep structural phenomena as far back as the first level above the Ursatz. Nevertheless, mixture is never allowed to permeate the background, and is specifically denied the status of a fundamental stractural process:

/

The mixed third does not represent a linear progression or a neighbouring note. It provides no occasion for a cadence, but can only give form the opportunity to set off two or three sections against one another. Certainly, this also means a delay, but, in a strict organic sense, mixture is less form-indicating, less form-generating than division or interruption.^

The problems arising from the application of Schenker’s. mature system to works of nineteenth-century tonality are generally apparent in his attempts to account for unorthodox structures in Per freie Sat/ through recourse to the concepts of mixture and incompletion. This may be specifically observed in his analysis of Chopin’s Prelude, op. 28, no.2:''^5 Ex.2

S

■/!

•V' ’

■ V

“

S i Hzl 11

§ [j^EI! (Ulilllil [m [is] [i^ Ii8-I9||20ll2i]

in

mi

Many of the analytical decisions taken in the course of this graph appear as questionable. To begin with, Schenker characterises the whole as an ‘incomplete '^^Free Composition, vol.l, p.40. '^^Ibid., p.41. '^^Ibid., vol.2, figure 110, a) 3.

15 structure’ in which the initial 5 of the fundamental line is not supported by the •tonic but is presented immediately against a counterpointing V. Yet we see that, in the immediate context of the first phrase, the harmony thus described has no evident dominant function; in the absence of any preceding referential tonic, one hears the E of bars 1-3 apparently as a tonic in itself. This sensation is heightened by the fact that the harmony prolonged here is not E major but E minor. Since Schenker’s contention implicitly rests on the possibility of interpreting the third of this chord as .a potential leading-note, we are led to assume that the initial harmony retains its dominant function despite existing in a modal rather than tonally diatonic relationship with the final chord. The succeeding motion to G major does nothing to support 'Schenker’s reading. The progress of the first phrase continues to outline the .’diatonic major scale of G, indeed the local harmonisation of G as a tonic at bar 6 further undermines any sense that this pitch may function overall as a leading-tone. As the graph progresses, further anomalies emerge. It becomes apparent that Schenker’s placing of the third and fourth degrees of (Ee Urlinie

are far from

unproblematic. In both cases Schenker’s desire to imagine a smooth progression from J to i tends to override the actual nature of the voice-leading. In the former instance the appearance of the D in the soprano at bar 4 is apparently sufficient evidence to A

assume that the sense of this pitch carries over to become a structural 4 when the harmony reaches the'root position G major chord of bars 6-7. Despite Schenker’s placement of this pitch in parentheses, would it not be more appropriate simply to assume a registral transfer, and place the stmctural 4 in the tenor at bar 6, where it is actually present ? Even more dubious is the assigfament of the status of ^ to the soprano, C of bar 17. Even at the foreground this pitch is at best part of the existing prolonged 6-4 chord reached at bar 16, at worst simply a melodic passingtone elaborating a motion from F toD. Schenker’s attempt to justify this divergence through the intimation of the provision of consonant support by the bass A of bar 11 turns the idea itself on its head, for how are we supposed to infer the identity of the tonic from the remote dissonance which this A supports? Once again it is surely the case that the structural 3 is present in the tenor, and is reached at bar 15. Furthermore degree % which Schenker could easily assign to a B in the soprano of the final cadence, is here placed on the suspension at the beginning of bar 21. These difficulties go beyond a simple question of interpretation; the Prelude as ’*a whole displays a marked dislocation of melody and harmonic function which .Schenker, out of a desire to fit Chopin’s practice into the confines of his theory, seems eager to smooth over. Degree § is particularly telling in this respect. The

\ ■€

harmony which unfolds in the right hand is scarcely consonant with the underlying 1(6-4) harmony, and instead treats the pitches of the A minor triad as passing-note embellishments around a ii7 chord, thus: Ex.3

In practice the whole of this work up to the clear triadic cadence of bar 22 seems deliberately to subvert the progress of a fundamental line, either by pushing the

UrUni e

into subordinate regions of the texture, or else by rmdermining the

relationship between harmonic function and melodic context. These problems are compounded by a niunber of specifically harmonic considerations. If one isolates the harmonies which Schenker considers to be fundamentally prolonged a highly irregular progression emerges: Ex.4

It is hard to .see how Schenker intends the harmonisation of degrees 5 and 4 to be functionally related to the subsequent harmonies. Whilst one finds the local progression Eminor-G major convincing, and whilst it is even conceivable that the opening tonality may be modally related to the tonality of bar 15, the progression from VII- to 1(6-4), and the idea that 4 might be harmonised as the root of a flattened leading-note chord, is surely untenable. There is a fracturing of clear functional relations at this point which Schenker’s analysis, emphasises without explicating, ironically as the result of a desire to reveal large-scale functional connections. Simultaneously, the sequence of dissonances through which these two

17 chords become connected is considerably sanitised. In particular the ii7 sonority of bar 11 is reduced to,the status of a diminished seventh over an A bass note, I

anticipating the harmony of bar 15. Yet in reality it is precisely in the foreground that the sense of this passage resides, that is to say it is in the means of connection rather than the wider functional relationship. In this way, the largest connection

^ '

made by Schenker, the characterisation of the entire piece up to the final chord as a prolongation of V, is supported neither by the relationship of the first and last chords nor by the intermediate foreground progression. One of Schenker’s most significant insights, the recognition that in diatonic tonality form is an expansion of the principles governing local chordal relationships, has in this example been made to work against itself.

*

The problem for Schenkerian analysis in this instance lies in its insistence on a universally diatonic fundamental structure. In much nineteenth-cetttury music the role of V is deliberately undermined, reinterpreted, or even replaced. Hence it is often the case that the V-I relationship may occur as a local progression supporting the tonic, or as a final cadential device, but fundamentally it exists less and less as a background phenomenon. In the work under consideration, the harmony surrounding V at the beginning is completely separated fi-om any dominant function. It exists initially, one might say, in a dysfunctional relationship with the final tonic; it is only as a result of progressive chromatic alteration, through a process of reinterpretation, that it is brought within the ambit of the final I. In general, the Schenkerian approach often forces one to treat foreground events in nineteenthcentury music as if they were still apparent in the background, whilst simultaneously relegating more significantly prolonged tonal events middleground, claiming

to

a position in the

that they are basically interruptive. Alternatively, the

application of Schenkerian theory often fails for precisely the opposite reason. One may detect a clear I-V-I as background, yet in context any sense of prolongation is undermined by the character of the middleground and foreground, which do not carry the sense of the structural V into the harmonic detail. The root of the problem remains the same in both cases: the relationship between tonal macrocosm and harmonic microcosm as formulated by Schenker is in varying degrees broken by nineteenth-century music. Hence, Schenkerian analysis increasingly takes on a negative aspect; it is more adept at revealing what is not in the music than what

is.

tJAMORIOGE

18

ni

One way of attempting to avoid these difficulties is to take the aspects of nineteenth-century music which undermine the Scheiikeiian perspective as constituting principles in themselves. In other words, post-classical tonality is defined by an increasingly sharp dislocation of foreground and background. The structural premise at the he^ of classical tonality, the idea that local harmony and tonal structure should obey the same logic of connection, is dissolved by romantic composers, who on the face of it value foreground harmonic colour over an audible sense of prolongation. Such a position has been adopted by Rose Subotnik.'^^ It is impossible to consider Subotnik’s view of nineteenth-century tonality without acknowledging the contextual framework which her analysis is designed to exemplify. Her concern is not specifically to erect a theory of nineteenth-century tonality, but to locate the differences between eighteenth- and nineteenth-century tonal and stylistic practice within the context of the history of ideas. To this end the reciprocal relationship of form and content, of tonal structure and harmonic detail, which is apparent in the classical style is posited by Subotnik as an outcome or manifestation of the enlightenment thought More specifically she draws a direct parallel between the contentions of Kant’s critical philosophy and the logic of coimection inherent in the operations of classical tonality. Hence, just as Kant’s conception of the categorical imperative sets up a quasi-objective idea of subjective imderstanding, so too the high classical style, by embod3dng its largest structural relations in its most localised chordal connections, projects the impression that the formal/structural and particular/stylistic parameters of a work are one and the same thing. As Subotnik has it; With Mozart and especially with Haydn, however, it is often possible to entertain the illusion that the empirical particularity and arbitrariness of style have been integrated’ seamlessly with the universal necessity of an abstract musical structure, so that one could momentarily believe that the style is the structure, and that for this music stylistic understanding[...Jand structural understanding!...]are identical. ‘^^Subotnik, R-R.-Developine Variations (Minnesota 1991), pp.l 12-140. Subotnik also pursues these ideas in ‘Thd Message of Musical Semiology’ in Critical Inquiry, vol. 4 (1978), pp.741-768. See also Lawrence Kramer’s reply in the same journal; ■ ‘The Shape of Post-Classical Music’ in Critical Inquiry, vol.6 (1979), pp.144-153. The idea that romantic harmony, at- least in the Wagneriad sense, is characterised by progression rather than by prolongation has been taken up in a different form by Carl Dahlhaus. See Zwischen Romantik und Modeme: 'Vier Studien zur Musikgeschichte des spateren 19.Jahrhunderts (Munich 1974); English Between Romanticism and Modernism, tr. Whittall, M. (Berkeley 1980), pp.64-75. ‘^'^Ibid., p.ll8.

19

Classical harmonic procedure, by establishing

the existence of a clear central

tonality which immediately implies a system of attendant hierarchical relationships, proposes a particular idea of logical necessity described by Subotnik as a ‘premiseconclusion structure’. Thus any event within a classical work which does not explicitly prolong the tonic will nevertheless reinforce that tonic’s ultimate centricity. The status of I is in this way implied even when it is physically absent; regardless Of one’s temporal positioning, the same system of relationships wiU. apply. The classical work thus implies all subsequent harmonic events within its initial material. More than this, it posits aU following events as the logically necessary outcome of the beginning; we wait to hear not what wiU happen, but how it will happen. In erecting this system musical classicism associates directly with enlightenment rationalism, be it in the form of Rameau’s harmonic theory or Hume’s empiricism. After Beethoven, in whose work ‘the binding force of tonality is first explicitly exposed to question’, this condition begins to break down. Romanticism in music can be seen to embark on a negative critique of the classical premiseconclusion paradigm, revealing its quasi-objective subjective structure as an illusion. Again Subotnik proposes parallels in the history of ideas: The more the nineteenth-century work tries to encompass - and there may he some parallel here with the dialectical system through which Hegel overcomes Kant’s disjunctions - the more evident it becomes that its boundaries are limited by a determining subjectivity.'^®

Increasingly the romantics undermine the quasi-Objective wholeness of the classical style, fracturing it into a ‘new cultural paradigm of many semiotic universes’. Romantic works suggest at every level a universal conception of style and structure only in as much as. they emphasise stylistic and structural particularity. The logical necessity generated by classical tonality disintegrates, to be replaced by an harmonic practice which may emphasise a logic of connection within local harmonic units but does not carry this sense into the large-scale tonal structure. Concomitantly, the classical sense of a structural norm .derived from the smallest operations disappears. Nineteenth-century composers come instead to rely on rhetorical effects as a means of providing coherence, on dramatic gestures, thematic derivation and crossreference, and a logic of implication derived from processes of patterning and '^®Developing Variation.s. p.l26. 4^rbid., p.120.

20 repetition. Harmony, on the whole, now performs a colouristic function and is used in a cosmetic sense, to provide foreground emphasis to gesturally determined events. Subotnik characterises this change as the difference between a temporal and a spatial notion of form: Unable any longer Jo simulate the temporal generation of a logically unified meaning out of a single tonal premise, the romantic piece seems to go about defining a universe of meaning in a spatial manner.^*^

It is in precisely this way that she interprets Chopin’s Second Prelude. Altogether she views the work not as a single continuous tonal statement but as a series of ‘analogous or partly analogous harmonic patterns’.The harmonic anomalies which undermine Schenker’s conception of this piece as the prolongation of

a V-I cadence are for Subotnik evidence of the basic absence of any one

overarching tonal identity. Instead Chopin presents us with a series of discrete harmonic events, each logically consistent within itself and each plausibly connected to the following unit, yet taken altogether revealing no one single controlling tonic. Hence the initial phrase is in no sense a statement of V; rather it is an enclosed fragment in which E minor is first of all sensed as a tonic, and then by the close of the phrase as vi p G major. Even within the first phrase a problem of harmonic identity has arisen. If our point of orientation is bar 3, then we are in E minor, if it is bar 6, then we are in G major. Despite the fact that both these interpretations make reference to the same mode, nevertheless the decision as to which we prejudice as the true tonic becomes a question of listener viewpoint rather than inherent necessity. This condition of tonal relativity extends to the connection between this phrase and its successor. The move from G to B minor in bar 8, whilst in itself a simple relation of I and iii, is in no way the result of an immanent logic; the first phrase implies no self-evident continuation and on reaching G is in effect complete. For Subotnik it is the literal rise in pitch level which makes this continuation feasible, the oiriy real link being the retention of the pitch B. In resorting to this gesture Chopin has been forced to employ a rhetorical device in order to effect a plausible continuation. Hence the first phrase does not project its identity into subsequent events - as an initial proposition, but remains consistent only within itself; it is not temporally, but spatially conceived. Even when, by bar 11, a sequential pattern has ^^Developing Variations. p.l24. 51lbid., p.130.

been established and interrupted, Subotnik argues that because of the lack of initial premise we do not experience this disjunction as ‘the kind of deviation from implied progress

which

increases

propulsiveness

towards

a

goal’.52 Any sense of

interruption at this point results merely from a retrospectively conceived momentum of repetition. Thus the extreme dissonance of bars 11-15, far from increasing the harmonic tension and desire for resolution, suspends the sequentially generated harmonic motion. Similarly the resolution of this dissonant harmony at bar 15 cannot be construed as the necessary outcome of an ongoing process, but is rather an arbitrarily imposed solution; there is no inherent reason why the harmony of bars 11-14 requires a resolution to A minor. In this way Subotnik concurs with Leonard Meyer’s statement that ‘any technical explanation of bars 12-16 in terms of harmonic goals and modulations must be inadequate’.53 And so it is with the entire piece. As the work progresses there is a successive accumulation of interpretative problems, each subsequent harmonic unit having to wrestle with problems not only of its own tonal identity, but also of its identity in relation to each preceding fragment. Overall the work demonstrates a condition of tonal and harmonic parataxis. We do not, as Schenker contends, refer every event to a single concentric tonic; instead each harmonic event changes its tonal identity depending on the orientation of the listener. Even the final cadence, being entirely consistent within itself and effecting a plausible resolution of the 6-4 chord of bar 15, cannot be seen to function as a logical and necessary conclusion, for there has been no initial premise out of which this necessity could have arisen. RecoUectively one may easily relate the various harmonisations of E, as I and as V, to the closing V-I cadence, yet to reverse the process, to see each harmonic event as it occurs as referentially subordinate to the final tonic, is for Subotnik not possible. In practice, the idea of the premise-conclusion model suggests what Schenker suggests, i.e., that we refer events in the foreground to an omnipresent background. Hence, by arguing for a lack of logical implication in op.28, no.2, Subotnik contends that the work has no single background in the Schenkerian sense. One might instead imagine a succession of potential fundamental structures which emerge and recede as each phrase goes ~by. Because no overall tonic has been asserted except in retrospect, the background itself has become a foreground event; it can be

52DeveIoping Variatinns. p. 131. 53Meyer, L.-Emotion and Meaning in Mii.sic (Chicago 1956), p.96.

projected on the evidence of a single phrase, but cannot be made to remain consistent throughout the whole piece. In this way Subotnik’s idea relies on the assertion that this piece is essentially classically diatonic; the absence of any connective logic supposes a diatonic tonality in its negative form. Yet it is entirely possible to conceive of large-scale connections in this work, prodded we admit the possibflity that it does not result from an entirely diatonic modality. What Subotnik is telling us in effect is that works which lack an entirely diatonic basis will not make pufely diatonic connections. If the possibility of an expanded modality is ignored, then Subotnik’s argument is reduced to the status of a truism. As it stands, her idea is dependent on the philosophicahhistorical background, a connection which in turn derives its validity from her analysis of this piece. What she has proposed, in other words, is a self-justifying argument.

IV Drawing these various interpretations together, it becomes apparent that the differences between Schoenberg’s, Schenker’s and Subotnik’s positions conceal essential imderlying similarities. When these differences are put aside we are left with an identical interpretation of nineteenth-century tonality; in each case it is considered to be a transitional phase. In effect the differences between Schenker and Schoenberg lie in their dialectically opposed formulations of the same idea. Both considered tonality to be a single system being necessarily grounded in a set of naturally derived diatonic relationships. Ultimately both considered chromaticism to be a destructive historical force; the phenomena which for Schoenberg prefigure the development of a new system Schenker took to be symptomatic of a descent into incoherence. In particular the prominence of foregroimd voice-leading transformations as a means of chromatic harmonic connection disturbed the relationship with the background to the point where the Ursatz is no longer feasibly apparent. Schenker expressed this opinion with particular vitriol in his analysis of the ninth variation of Reger’s ‘Variations and Fugue on a Theme by Bach’: Apart from the tones of the theme, it is the joining together of the sonorities on the most minute level to which the composer’s every effort is directed here. This endeavour sometimes produces third-progressions, sometimes reaching-over progressions, neighbour-note formations and so forth[..,]These numerous formations now have a deleterious effect on the outer-voice counterpoint; they influence it, instead of being formed by it; they impede the emergence of linear progressions in the outer-voice

coimteipoint-progressions which would unify its paths on the large-scale; finally, however, since they do not derive the law of their combinations from a larger unity they even forfeit some of their own effect[...]^^

The passage Schenker' is objecting to' fails because, as a direct result of its chromaticism, it has collapsed the sense of the music entirely into the foreground. In other words, the necessary precondition for a work being both coherent and a genuine manifestation of the musical art has been lost. The prolonged employment of remote dissonances and the transition from a diatomc to a chromatic modahty undermine the diatonic foundations of tonahty in both interpretations. The dislocation of foreground and background which Schenker perceived in nineteenth-century tonality is the same phenomenon upon which Schoenberg based the concept of ‘pantonality’ and the emancipation of the dissonance. Their respective interpretations of nineteenth-centuiy tonality therefore amount to the same idea; in both instances it is

a transitional, post-classical

phenomenon. It is accorded no status of its own; either we see nineteenth-century tonality as an extension of classical diatonicism or as the prehistory of atonality. Therefore the application of Schenkerian theory to the music of this period, in the sense of a reductive ^alytical approach founded upon a diatonic Ursatz, amounts to a confirmation of Schoenberg’s historical model. Subotnik, in turn, is heavily dependent on Adorno’s interpretation df the development of ■ nineteenth-century music. Her analysis of Chopin’s op.28, no.2 presents (in a fashion which Adorno would never have emulated) a justification of the idea that western music from Beethoven’s late style onwards betrays the emergence of a negative dialectical truth. The various aspects of Chopin’s Prelude which Subotnik considers disruptive to the classical idea of tonal structure, the apparent elimination of a prolongational relationship between beginning and end and the employment of what seem to be cosmetic effects of thematic and harmonic repetition by way 'of compensation, amount to a defence of the idea that nineteenthcentury music IS altogether concerned with a negative critique of the totalising aspects of the classical style. Thus Subotnik, by demonstrating an allegiance to

Job S6b Bach fur ^ ™d Fuge uber ein Thema von r ■5 n ^ Das... Meisterwerk m der Mnsik B (Munich, Vienna, Berlin 1926)Uanslated as A Counter-example; Max Reger’s Variations and Fugue on a theme by Bach oo81 5" ” 3h^^&terk_mMuric vol.2, tr. Bent, I., Drabkin, W RoSeb J 4d SteS’ TUs ,uotatt»,pp. 114-115. His and other voiomes

24 Adorno, locates this piece in the context-of an idea which forms a philosophical correlate to the idea of the necessity of atonality. Subotnik’s philosophical context and Schoenberg’s music-historical context are one and the same thing. These various interpretations therefore stand as dialectically related versions of an identical process. What Schenker and- Subomflc take to be the negative esthesics of the classical style, Schoenberg interpreted. as the positive poietics of atonality. Schenker observes a deep strucmral diatonicism in Chopin’s op.28, no.2 where Subotnik observes only foreground progressions, yet both ideas are equally dependent upon a diatonic notion of tonal structure. More fundamentally the historical perspective which each inteipretation engenders identifies an evolutionary historical process; the development towards a negative dialectical truth where ‘the whole is the untrue relies on an evolutionary notion of musical history no less than a transition from the hegemony of tonality to the hegemony of serialism. Yet if all these arguments amount to the same idea, then they must also submit to the same critique. If Schoenberg, by mistaking his own discourse for an objective historical fact, involves himself in circular reasoning, then we cannot employ the Schenkerian technique, or Subotnik’s analytical ideas, without associating with the same problem. The suggestion of an alternative model would involve a re-evaluation both of what might constitute the foundations of the tonal system in the nineteenth century, and of how that system is related to developments in twentieth-century music. In the first place, the notion of progress as a motivating historical force must in this context be reconsidered. Its manifestation in Schoenberg’s music differs essentially from previous music in so much as the relationship between what is radical and what is normative undergoes a significant change. The progressive elements of nineteenth-century music are always circumscribed by the imderlying notion of tonality; radical departures are anchored to the ‘procmstean bed of tonality’ in such a way .as to make them comprehensible as individual manifestations of a single system. The idea of atonality does not submit to a similar characterisation. The break with tonality defines the new music, despite Schoenberg’s protestations of continuity, not from a common systemic vantage point but as the antithesis of the idea of a generalised systematic background.

The notion of what is progressive,

defined not in opposition to tradition, which remains fixed and immutable, but to moderation, the ‘middle path’ or ameliorating tendencies of the present, requires substantial revision in the light of this development. At no time prior to

25 Schoenberg’s break with tonality would it have proved necessary to isolate the system itself as the path ‘which does not lead to Rome’. Schoenberg’s solution to the problem, the concept of dodecaphonic serialism, ultimately only serves to exacerbate the condition. The serial technique does not facilitate the detection of a universal language as Schoenberg intended, but rather allows the composer to develop a priori systematic foundations for a Composition which, in their specific characteristics, need be shared by no other work. What is universal in serialism is a set of abstract theoretical procedures which allow the specific foundations of a work to come into existence. The idea of the row as an underlying principle cannot therefore be compared with the system of key relationships represented in tonality, since serialism as a universal organisational principle demands a level of abstraction from the work which is

considerably in

excess of the conceptual foundations of the tonal system. In both instances a genuine universality is rendered impossible by a reversal of the relationship between composer and system. The substance and motivating force of musical history is from Schoenberg onwards determined entirely by the effects of the composer’s discourse, with theoretical universals either performing a regressive function (as with composers who choose to retain tonality) or else being manifest as enforced mutual acceptance of an individual’s conception (as with the avant-garde of the post-war years and the concept of integral serialism). Yet if this is the case, then it must be possible to consider nineteenth-century tonality as a period of common practice, that is to say not as part of' a linear development which leads to atonality but as a structure in itself. This structure would certainly manifest developmental tendencies; it would internally evolve, and may develop towards a condition of maturity. However it is related to post-tonal musical procedures not by a smooth progression but by means of a sudden dislocation, defined as the moment when Schoenberg’s theoretical discourse is allowed to overcome the notion of a universally held musical system. In order to substantiate this contention we must do more than identify passages of diatonic tonality and/or their disruption in late nineteenth-century music. The refutation of Schoenberg’s position does not, as Thomson contends, involve the refutation of the idea of atonality as a perceptual phenomenon, but the demonstration of how the elements of nineteenth-century tonality might be described as a theoretically discrete system as distinct from eighteenth-centmy diatonic tonality. The basis of such a system is to be sought not in diatonicism but in the concept of a stable notion of tonality derived ultimately from a chromaticised modal background.

26 2: Mode and Progression

—

I As has been suggested, the most prominent factor unifying the above viewpoints is the common opinion that diatonicism forms a basic prerequisite for designating a work or musical system as tonal. Ascribing a transitional character to the nineteenth century, whether in a negative or a positive sense, results in no small measure from the conviction that its harmonic and tonal procedures are bound by the same system which governs eighteenth-century tonal practice. The first task of a theory of nineteenth-century tonality which wishes to assert its status as a period of common practice is therefore to lay out the possibility and specific properties of a tonal system based upon a fundamental chromaticism. The recognition of an expanded modality as the basis of nineteenth-century tonality can be traced to Schoenberg’s own observation of the ‘transition from twelve major and twelve minor keys to twelve chromatic keys’. Elsewhere, the theoretical approaches of some of Schoenberg’s contemporaries can be seen as deficient at least as a result of their failure to accept this phenomenon. Schenker, as has already been noted, overlooks or ignores many events of considerable importance in his de&e to reduce works of this period to a diatonic Ursatz. Hugo Riemann, whilst in many ways far more sympathetic to remote harmonic relationships than Schenker, managed, by means of the concept of harmonic dualism, to keep modal identities firmly separated. Moreover Riemann’s desire to construct a pure, antithetical minor system leads at times to a striking separation of theory and practice. Similarly, Ernst Kurth’s conception of romantic harmony as resulting from an intensive process of chromatic alteration largely relies on a diatonic modal foundation; Kurth’s alterations might be reinterpreted as embedded chromatic passing notes. In truth, a measure of modal mixture is already apparent in classical tonality; the diatonic minor system can in itself be understood as an example of mixed modality. Minor tonality does not rely on a single modal foundation, but permits three variants, as follows: Ex.i

.

•-

:

’

The chromEtic Elteration of the nEtursl minpr scEle which produces the vsriEtions of degrees 6 and 7 has in the past given rise to some considerable theoretical controversy. Indeed the idea that the harmonic minor scale might contain the interval of an augmented second has proved indigestible to some theorists, and led Simon Sechter^S to characterise.it thus: Ex.2

The problem arises here because the interval content of the natural minor mode conflicts

directly with the voice-leading procedure necessary to secure

the

relationship of tonic and dominant. Despite Riemann’s proposition that the minor system is dialectically related to the major, and that the cadential structures determining minor tonality are antithetical to the V-I relationship and rely on a resolution through IV, nevertheless in practice it seems clear that the semitonal resolution of the leading note as a means of determining the tonic is as essential to the minor system as it is to the major. Therefore, the multiple interpretation of degrees 6 and 7 results from a mixture of major and minor modalities. The sharpened leading note of the major mode is imported to preserve the relationship of I and V. The triad on 5 is thus not restricted to a single modal identity but may be presented as major or minor. The idea that nineteenth-centuty tonality is characterised by the expansion of this phenomenon to the point where it becomes more appropriate to consider the total chromatic as the modal basis of the system has been given theoretical consideration in

the work of Gregoiy Proctor.56 Proctor traces two essential

tendencies: the mixture of asymmetrical modalities and the inclusion of symmetrical Sechter, S-D.ifi Gnindsatze der musikalischen Komposition 3 vols. (Leipzig 1834-1835). This quotation, vol.l, p.78. For a general consideration of Sechter’s ideas see Wason, R.-Viennese Hamionic Th.eorv from Albiechtsherger to Schenker and Schoenberg (New York 1995), pp.31-66. For a specific consideration of this exariiple see -Harrison. D.-Harmnnic Function in Chrmnafic Music (Chicago 1994), pp.28-29. 56proctor, G.-Ihe Technical Basis of Nineteenth-Centurv Chromatic Tonality (Ph.D. Princeton 1978). The general purpose of Proctor’s work is not to establish an analytical techniqne, but to explore the theoretical foundations of nineteenth-century harmony if one considers its source to be the cliromatic scale. In this sense his first intention is to distinguish this System from diatonic tonality. The first part of his thesis is therefore given over to an account of the nature of the classical tonal system, the general description of which follows the Schenkerian model.

modalities and symmetrical compounds. The first procedure involves the elision of the major and minor systems, and the possible substitution of the diatonic modps for the non-diatonic church modes. Thus the level of modal ambiguity inhefent in the minor system is extended to include mixture of the third degree. In addition to the pure major and . mixed minor systems, we now have the hybrid major/minor modality, thus: Ex.3

Supplementation of the diatonic modalities with remaining church modes extends Schenker’s six combinations to encompass the following; Ex.4

The second procedure imports two categories of permissible symmetrical structures into the .context of a controlling notion of tonic centricity, which might be summarised as follows: Ex.5 Modes

'

Compounds

The mature. chromatic system ift its linear aspect can be characterised- as the sum of possible symmetrical and asymmetrical modalities arising from the background of the chromatic scale. As will be demonstrated with respect to harmonic and tonal structure, so with modality it is only through common relation to the deeper chromatic that these disparate modal identities can be brought within the orbit of a single system. Indeed the development of nineteenth-cenmry tonality can be viewed altogether as a process of expanding the phenomenon of mixmre beyond the point where it is possible to relate the various combinations purely as alterations of a single discrete asymmetrical modality. The chromaticisation of mode should not be mistaken for Schenker’s notion of mixture; in the current sense it is intended as a background phenomenon, as a change in the foundations of the language. Schenker’s objection in the Harmonielehre to the possibility of mixture involving the phrygian mode is based principally on a failure to accept this process; the lesulting flattened second chromaticises the initial diatonic collection to an extent which he deemed disruptive to the tonal system. The absorption of the morass of modal identities into the context of the chromatic scale is first comprehensively achieved in Wagner’s mature work, specifically in his practice from Tristan und Isolde onwards.

II Consideration of the nature of modality within the chromatic tonal system suggests an exploration of harmonic progression along similar lines. The harmonic properties of a fuUy modally mixed tonal system have to some extent been explored by Robert Bailey.^'^ Bailey’s thinking encompasses three main areas, being functional' substitution, chromatic voice leading and tonal strucmre. Although Bailey’s classification of the harmonic properties of mixed modality stops with a consideration of the voice-leading.procedures arising from the mixture of major and minor systems, Proctor’s^® inclusion of a resource of non-diatonic asymmetrical modalities and symmetrical modes of limited transposition, and his absorption of the idea of transposition operation into the lexicon of tonal harmonic procedures.

Bailey, R-'The Structure of The Ring and its Evolution'in Nineteenth-Centiirv Music vol.l, (1977), pp.48-61. See also Bailey, R.-Tristan und Isolde: Prelude and Transfipiiration (New York 1985). ^ ^Although Proctor recognises tlie coexistence of synunetrical and asynunetrical modalities, his taxonomy does not go so far as to explain the derivation of the chromatic treatment of seventh chords from this system. The consideration given below therefore combines the modal thinking of Proctor and the harmonic thinking of Bailey and takes them to a logical conclusion.

suggests that a more exhaustive taxonomy pf harmonic resources and their respective resolutions is possible. In the first instance the coexistence of asymmetrical modalities makes possible the functional equivalence of chords held in common between major, minor and modal systems. Hence perfect, plagal aird interrupted cadences might be presented equally, legitimately in any one of the following forms; Ex.6

Similarly, the relative major and minor relationships may become interchangeable: Ex.7

-ttl:...... %

The admittance of the phrygian mode makes possible the substitution of the flattened second either (in the phrygian cadence) as a substimtion for V, or (in the case of the Neapolitan region) as a substitution for IV;

E2L&

In the mixture of asymmetrical modalities the hierarchical structure of the diatonic major system might now occur in isolation, in combination with relationships from other modalities, or may be superseded by any possible stracture existing within the body of combinations.

■

V

31 Such diatouic/modal relationships might also exist in conjunction with S5unmetiical relationships, most prominently hierarchies based on the augmented and diminished chords, derived from the whole-tone and octatonic modes respectively: Ex.9

Both modes supplant the cycle of fifths as the basis of hierarchical arrangement with tertiary structures; in each case the central axis in opposition to I becomes the tritone. These modalities might form closed structures in themselves controlling the harmonic and melodic operations of extended passages, or they might exist as background structures supporting passages of foreground diatonicism. In principle!, a work might employ some or aU possible hierarchies arising from any symmetrical or asymmetrical modality, with the single provision that these arrangements make reference to a central pitch or sonority. The emergence .of the chromaticised mode also lends new prominence to the process of semitonal voice-leading, that is to say, chordal relationships which do not arise from an asymmetrical modal foundation will employ semitonal motion as a means of melodic connection. Chromatic progression between chords can occur in three essential forms: multiple resolution of dissonance, transposition operation and reinterpretation of diatonic progression.

The first category is already apparent in

classical diatonicism, in the treatment of the diminished seventh and augmented sixth chords. By the early nineteenth century the treatment of both as chromatic sonorities allowing multiple chromatic resolution had been fully established. Thus, the following resolutions are possible: Ex. in

,:?r ■i'i'

From Tristan onwards the employment of the half-diminished seventh chord in the same fashion becomes commonplace. The half-diminished seventh submits to any one of eight possible resolutions to new dominants, as follows: Ex. 11 Half-Diminished Sevenths

The treatment of dominant seventh, diminished seventh and half-diminished seventh sonorities as chromatic phenomena (as opposed to

their respective

resolutions in the diatonic system) is founded on their derivation from the octatonic mode. The twelve transpositions of the dominant seventh and half-diminished seventh form three groups of four, the members of each group being related as common subsets of one of the three respective octatonic collections.^^ The hierarchical arrangement of each group finds a basis in the tertiary structure of the diminished seventh: Ex. 12

Moreover, the process of seraitonal resolution produces a modulation between octatonic collections. Thus for collection I the resolutions of the half-diminished ^^The classification of octatonic collections, here and at later stages of this thesis, follow Peiter Van den Toom's taxonomy. See The Music of Stravinsky (Yale 1983), pp.50-51.

■

seventh produce new triads on each de^ee of collection HI, the resolutions for collection II produce new triads on each degree of collection I, and for collection HI on each degree of collection II: Ex. 13 Hatf-Diminished Sevenths

.

Rodts of New Dominants

In each iustance four resolutions are held in common and four excluded between adjacent collections. In the system of chromatic tonality the minor seventh chord may come to be treated in the same manner. The resolutions of this chord do not form a distinct category but are rather variants of the resolutions of the half-diminished seventh. Minor seventh chords therefore reveal an identical network of octatonic derivations to the half-diminished chord, thus: Ex. 14

Minor sevenths - octatonic derivation

Resolutions onto new dominant sevenths also follow the same pattern. Allowing for the voice-leading alterations necessitated by the raised degree of the chord, the same eight resolutions result:

33

5 s>:-

34 Ex. 15

Although in late nineteenth-century harmony the treatment of ninth chords as fundamental sonorities capable of inversion becomes commonplace,analysis of their derivation and resolution shows that they are closely related to the non-diatonic treatment of seventh chords. Two categories,

being minor and major ninths, are

apparent, yielding three and five chords respectively: Ex. 16 Minor ninths

Minor ninths as elaborations of major and minor seventh chords have been omitted, since they generally stand outside nineteenth-century tonal practice. Furthermore the equivalent chords in the second category are not given further consideration as they amount sunply to elaborations of a tonic triad and do not behave as free-standing dissonances. Whilst the first category might be traced collectively to an octatonic origin, only the diminished major ninth chord in the second category reveals membership of the octatonic mode: Ex. 17

is verified by a number of sources, Bruckner’s theoretical thinking considered ninth chords in this way. See Wason, D.-Viennese Harmonic Theory from Aihrechtsberger to SchenVer and ■Schoenberg, pp.71-74.

35

For each chord two forms of resolution can be identified, determined by the internal structure of the chord, which may be seen as a compound of two interlocking sevendi chords. The types of resolution arise from the interaction of the possible resolutions of the upper chord with those of the lower chord. Thus for the diminished minor ninth eight resolutions are possible; membership of a common octatonic set means that the four resolutions of the lower seventh chord are shared with the upper seventh chord and are therefore contextually identical. In each case the extra pitch, that is either the ninth or the bassnote, is retained or else moves semitonally: Ex. 18 Upper- and-lower chord resolutions

pf'W

i'n~:

Lower chord resolutions

The half-diminished minor ninth behaves in the same fashion: Ex. 19

^

For the dominant minor ninth six resolutions are possible, four arising from the upper diminished seventh, two from the lower dominant:

Both dominant and half-diminished major ninths display the eight resolutions appropriate to their component half-diminished sevenths, plus two for the dominant seventh in the former case, and two for the upper seventh in the latter case, which behaves simply as an embellishment of G minor or an altered chord of E-flat minor: Ex.21 Dominant major ninth

The diminished major ninth behaves irregularly. The upper chord as part of the open form constitutes a first inversion major triad; we either have to construe the seventh from the bassnote or else present the chord in a closed form. Six resolutions are then possible: Ex. 22

Clearly for ninth chords the network of octatonic relationships pertaining to each component seventh will be maintained. Treatment of ninth chords in the above sense occurs only in the veiy late stages of the history of the chromatic tonal system. A famous example can be found in the following passage from Schoenberg’s Verklaite Nacht:

37 Ex.23 _____ ____________________ L_

^

dim.

--------

^ O-

--------------

The second chord is simply a dominant major ninth on A-flat in its last inversion. The relationship between it and the first chord involves resolution seven of example twenty-one in reverse. Similarly, the resolution onto the succeeding half-diminished chord constitutes resolution eight of example eleven in reverse. Lastly, nineteenth-century harmony comes to treat the augmented triad in a ■similar fashion. Chromatic voice leading produces three new triads: Ex. 24

The chromatic resolution of seventh chords may move entirely within an octatonic system, or the new triad/dominant seventh may be reinterpreted as part of an asymmetrical modality. Furthermore any of these resolutions may be used in conjunction, as in the following example from Gbtterdammerung: Ex.25 Wagner - Gunerdammerung - Act J. Scene 2,

38 As Proctor notes®!, chromatic voice leading might also be employed to perform ‘transposition operations’, that is, to provide a logic of coimection between sonorities existing in a non-functiortal relationship. In this regard, consider the following passage from Bruckner’s Fifth Symphony: Ex.26

The descending major triads here rely entirely on the chromatic unfolding of the fifth A-D to justify the progression. Transposition operations are hot restricted to semitonal progressions but can be built around any symmetrical modality, S5onmetrical compound or uni-intervallic tertiary structure. Hence, octatonic voice leading controls this passage from Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony: Ex.27

The following material from Liszt’s Eine Faust-Svmphnnie relies on the minor third as a transposition operator:

39

i

The archetype of such progressions can be found in the ‘sleep’ motive of Die Wahcure: Ex.29

Lastly, chromatic relationships might be employed within the context of a controlling local diatonicism. Consider the opening of Brahms’ A major Violin Sonata; Ex.30

In terms of its regional harmonic connections this phrase displays a pervasive diatonicism. The F-sharp seventh chord in bars 4-5 is easily interpreted as V7 of ii, and resolves as such in the following bar. The progression b-C can be seen as a local Neapolitan, and the following G major first inversion simply reinterprets C as IV. Yet at the next level of reduction it becomes apparent that the progression from b to G via C exists in a chromatic rather than a diatonic relationship with the initial tonality. Brahms has reinterpreted a diatonic progression to create a chromatic region within the context of a clearly prolonged tonic. Frequently this technique involves contextual reinterpretation of a local dominant, as in the closing section of the exposition of the first movement of the G major Violin Sonata: Ex. 31 in tempo

or the reinterpretation, of a single pitch within a chord in a fresh harmonic context. Ex.32 BrtOuns - Piano Concerto. opJSj Rondo

Such progressions tend towards a condition of harmonic relativity; the tonalmeaning of the progression shifts depending upon the harmonic Orientation of the listener.

41 The structural consequence of these phenomena comes to be the undermining of the classical notion of concentric tonal planning. In this regard, alongside monotonality Bailey has conceived of three new categories of tonal strategy, being ‘expressive’, ‘associative’ and ‘directional’ tonality respectively.62 ‘Expressive’ and ‘associative’ tonality derive from his analyses of Per Ring, and are concerned with the linking of tonal levels to elements of the drama. ‘Directional’ tonality, the practice of basing the tonal structure of a work on the progression from one key to another, is of much more general applicability, and finds its original formulation in Pika Newlin’s study of Mahler.63 in Tristan Wagner moulds these techniques into a much more subtle conception, that of the ‘double-tonic complex’. The directional practice of beginning and ending a work in different keys is now succeeded by the simultaneous pairing of two related keys, such that either might act as a local tonic: [...]the double-tonic idea goes well beyond merely beginning in a minor key and concluding in its relative major[...]In some ways, the new concept plays upon that very closeness, but we are now dealing with the “chromatic” mode of A and the “chromatic” mode of C. The two elements are linked together in such a way that either triad can Serve as a local representative of the tonic-complex. Within that complex itself, however, one of the two elements is in primary position while the other remains subgrdinate to it.6'1

These ideas have been developed by Patrick McCreless65 and Christopher Lewis.66 In Lewis’s study of Mahler’s Ninth Symphony Bailey’s categories of tonal structure are brought into direct conflict with Schenker. The elements of a tonal strategy standing outside classical practice become synonymous with a notion of tonality which cannot be reconciled with the concept of the Ursatz. Such aspects of a work are defined by Lewis as its ‘tonal plot’; While Schenkerian analysis might find a tonal fundamental structure behind such a piece, it will be so abstract and so distorted as to be far less useful in defining the 62xhe exposition of these categories can be found in 'The Structure of the Ring and its Evolution', pp.51-53. ■ . . 63 Newlin. D.-Bruckner. Mahler. Schoenberir (New York 1947). 6^ Tristan and Isolde: Prelude and Transfiguration, p.121-122. 65 McCreless, P.-'Ernst Kurth and the Analysis of the Chromatic Music of the Late NineteenthCentury' in Music Theory Spectrum vol.5 (1983), pp.56-75. 66 Lewis, C.-To.nal Coherence in Mahler’s Ninth Symphony (Michigan 198.4). For a more recent study of nineteenth-century tonality along similar general lines, see Kinderman, W. and Krebs, H. (eds.)-The Second Practice of Nineteenth-Centurv Tonality (Lincoln 1996).

language of the work than are other aspects of the tonal structure. The other aspects may be considered the ‘tonal plot’ of the work.®^

Whilst we may perfectly well accept the above taxonomy of modal and harmonic properties as the basic materials of the chromatic tonal system, yet the progress here from small-scale harmonic' thinking to large-scale tonal structure proves to be ill-conceived. Despite the fact that Bailey is arguing for the nineteenth century as a period of common practice, nevertheless his conception is flawed precisely because it accords a normative rather than a stylistic status to romantic tonality. His categorisations commit the same offence that theorists of the nineteenth century committed in their classifications of eighteenth-century form, that is to say, of imposing a normative definition a posteriori which splits the phenomena it describes into ‘the rule’ and ‘exceptions to the rule’. Furthermore Bailey never satisfactorily resolves the issues raised by Schenker’s analysis of Chopin’s op. 28, no.2, that is of how tonalities in the background can be supported by the chromaticised foreground. In his analyses of Per Ring the tonal categories are imposed from without by isolating significant tonal events and then laying them out as formal schemata, without any explicit consideration of how these events are supported or connected by the harmonic detail. Even the idea of the- double-tonic complex, which goes some way further towards addressing this issue, does not adequately explain how surface harmony reduces to background tonality. To achieve this one must do more than show a simple comparison between harrnonic events which, it would seem, appear in passing, and harmonic events which coincide with obvious structural downbeats. Cert^nly in the Einleitung of Tristan one may observe a vacillation between harmony which implies A and harmony which implies' C. However the recognition that the climax at bar 83 resurrects the harmony of bars 1 to 3, or that the closing imperfect cadence refers to the same tonality as the second phrase of the work, or generally that a given moment within the piece may be hierarchically related either to A or to C, does not in itself explicate' a functional relationship between harmony and tonal stracture, Bailey has simply subsumed the tonal background into the harmonic foreground. The form-defining tonal events which he identifies do not result from a sense of prolongation; in tmth they are themselves apparent as locahsed phenomena. The idea of,the double-tonic complex, if it does not carry with it some explanation of how

'

Tonal Coherence in Mahler’.s Ninth Symphony, p.3.

these phenomena might retain a structural function despite the loss of a clear sense of diatonic prolongation, amounts to a basic admission that the Schenkerian Ursatz has coUapsedinto the harmonic detail. Unless he can demonstrate an analogous notion of prolongation arising from the chromaticised mode the formal categories Bailey erects are destined to remain surface phenomena. Similarly Lewis’s formulation of Schenkerian Ursatz plus ‘tonal plot’ does little to alleviate these problems. If we characterise a work’s tonal stracture as diatonic tonality plus the structural application of non-diatonic relationships, then once again this amounts to the assertion that nineteenth-century tonality only has an identity in terms of its negative relation to classical common practice. Indeed, in a study which purports to adopt Bailey’s and Proctor’s concept of chromatic tonality, Lewis explicitly defines a notion of tonality in relation to the Schenkerian idea of common practice. This reasoning associates directly with Schoenberg; again we are left with a conception of nineteenth-century tonality as a collapsing system. In the succeeding chapters we will therefore attempt to formulate a theoretical system which resolves these difficulties, whilst retaining the categorisation of modal and harmonic phenomena described above.

3: Theory Tlt-The Harmonic Field I Introduction In suggesting the outline of a theory of nineteenth-century tonality, we might adopt the following position as a starting point. First of all the theory must consider the nineteenth century as a period of common practice in the history of tonality. Secondly, it becomes clear that any theory predicated entirely on the Schenkerian norm will be inadequate. In applying

Schenkerian theory

we

unavoidably reduce nineteenth-century works to a diatonic Ursatz, and therefore to an eighteenth-century norm. The antithesis of Schenker’s theory, the idea that prolongational tonal function has irretrievably dissolved into tonal parataxis and a negative concept of tonality, shares the same difficulty. In both cases we are forced to regard nineteenth-century tonality in terms of its negative relationship to the classical style. Lastly we must avoid the difficulties of normative definition encountered in Robert Bailey’s thinking. Our consideration must see nineteenthcentury tonality

as a stylistic principle in itself, which permits as many variants as

there are works written in that practice. It must not confuse aspects of the system which might be considered as categorical with those which are more properly defined as processual. If the later nineteenth century is to be viewed as a period of common practice, then an equivalent formulation to the Schenkerian Ursatz

must be

conceived. In other words, if we are to determine that the phenomena which Schoenberg considered to be destmctive are actually capable of supporting a concept of tonality as distinct from classical common practice, then such a system must be founded on an analogous notion of large-scale voice leading and bass arpeggiation arising from the chromaticised mode. At the same time the multiplicity of modal identities and potential hierarchical stractures produced by the process of chromaticisation undermines the possibility of an entirely reflexive relationship existing between foreground, middleground and background. Not only is it no • longer necessary for the Ursatz

to reflect the

unfolding of the tonic sonority as it occurs at the foreground, the very nature of the language engenders a rupture between the higher stmctural levels, which submit to the regional control of given symmetrical and asymmetrical modalities, and the deep middleground and background, which subsume the higher modalities into the

45 total chromatic. Certainly the modal and harmonic basis of a given region-in the foreground might be reflected in the tonal structure and large-scale voice leading, however the possibility of such a relationship no longer forms a necessary ahd allembracing characteristic of the system. In opposition to the classical idea of tonality, we might instead identify a tonal system characterised by a dialectical relationship between foreground and background. We can describe this system with reference to two basic concepts: the harmonic field, and the chromatic background.

II Basic Terms and Notational Conventions The notion of the harmonic field, in the current context, can be defined as an area of material exhibiting a consistency of modal derivation and/or means of progression. The nature of a field might be determined by two essential features: in the first place the relationship between initial and final tonalities, in the second the mode or modes of progression by which these tonalities are connected. The first characteristic exists in three essential forms: 1: fields which are circumscribed by a single tonic (hereafter referred to as 'single-tonic fields'); 2: fields which progress fi:om one tonic to another (hereafter referred to as 'progressive fields'); 3: fields which reveal the simultaneous presence of two or more potential tonics (Bailey’s 'double-tonic complex'). As has been suggested, the characteristic modes of progression are of a limited quantity, and might be reduced to the following categories: 1: diatonic progression between diatonic sonorities producing diatonic relationships; 2: diatonic progression between diatonic sonorities producing non-diatonic relationships; ■ 3: chromatic/symmetrical progression between diatonic or chromatic sonorities producing non-diatonic relationships (Proctor’s transposition operations); 4: chromatic/symmetrical progression between chromatic and diatonic sonorities

I

producing diatonic or non-diatonic relationships. Fields may involve the modes of progression either singly or else in combination. The idea of the harmonic field associates closely with Rose Subotnik’s idea of a tonally fragmented foreground and higher middleground. It asserts that the

1

46 harmonic structure of a work, if reduced according to a purely diatonic concept of function, will not necessarily continue to reveal a similar harmonic syntax at each successive level, rather the effect of diatonic function potentially becomes increasingly localised. The possibility of large-scale function can only be maintained through recourse to the chromatic background. What emerges instead at the foreground are areas of harmonic activity which, although connected by the same modes of progression which define their internal structure, nevertheless form discrete regions of material which are most .properly described and analysed according to a process of segmentation. Note that this idea does not necessarily exclude the possibility of a work revealing a substantial diatonicism, it simply locates diatonic harmony as a subset of a much wider range of modal and harmonic resources. The first theoretical concern arising with respect to this idea is therefore the issue of the practice and technique of segmentation. In this regard the -analyst encounters similar problems of formal delineation to those observed in the application of the theory of pitch-class sets and of the paradigmatic techniques of semiological analysis.68 Yet whilst we can accept Forte’s definition of segmentation as ‘the procedure of determining which musical units of a composition are to be regarded as analytical objects’,65 his contention that ‘this process is seldom prbblematic in tonal inusic, due to the presence of familiar morphological formations (harmonies, contrapuntal substructures and the like)’70 conceals a more general problem common to all segmental approaches. The essential question remains consistent m each case; is a formal theory of segmentation derived exclusively from within the parameter under consideration (in this case harmony) a possibility? The fact that the present consideration is bounded by a concept of tonality does suggest

SI ■

M

theoretical contexts, see Forte. A.-jhe_Structuim_Qf d’une S6mio1o^ie de la Mnsigne.

^ music. To do so would theoretical orientation back towards the concept of an invasive chromaticism For a consideration

The Structure of Atonal Music, p 83 I ’Ofbid., p.83.

a fundamental difference between the formulation of this problem in thercurrent context and in the other cited analytical theories. The notion of what constitutes a segment is in this instance not external to the musical system (as is the case in semlological analysis), but neither is it taken as the fundamental substance of the system (as is the case with set-theoretical analysis). Rather we must consider the segment to represent the formal manifestation at a particular structural level of the system’s constructive substance, which is considered to be the categories of modality and progression described above. In this way a central problem for the process of segmentation present in set theory and semiclogy requires qualification in this context. The location of the idea of the harmonic field within the context of the system of nineteenth-century chromatic tonality places limits on the dimensions of the field which ameliorate the problem of determining when a segment ceases to be a segment. Clearly the disappearance of the idea of the set or paradigm info the single pitch is -not an issue here, since the characterising idea of the field is not simply membership of a meaningfully discrete set of pitches or the observation of practically relevant motivic recurrence, but rather the mode of connection between pitches and chords. The lowest limit of the segmentation process might therefore be considered to be the smallest unit of material capable of submitting to analysis as a progression. Theoretically the smallest conceivable segment would thus consist of two chords. In practice, however, segmentation to this level is hardly ever pertinent. In nineteenthcenmry music the grouping of material into units which carry the sense of a single field tends to rely not simply upon the establishment of a mode of progression but on the identification of a consistent continuous employment either of that mode or of one or more modes of progression as the arbiter of struemre. It is determined , not only by the recognition of a mode of progression but by its repetition. Concomitantly we must address the question of what the largest possible dimensions of a field might be. As will be shown, the categories of field structure advanced above also have relevance at the background. Determination of the difference between these two applications is thus a matter of isolating the point at which the field structure

becomes identical to the governing fundamental

relationships of a work. In practice this difficulty hardly ever arises, since on the one hand the isolation of what is tonally significant about a region of music involves the subsumption of a local multiplicity of modalities and modes of progression into the context of the governing local chromatic key or keys, and on the other hand a segmentation which identified only one field for a work would

48 either- involve no tonal movement at all or else would be so small "ftat the foreground progression has become the sole processual characteristic. Thus, if a work submits to analysis as a series of harmonic fields, then it must also imply a background structure which subsumes the distinguishing characteristics of the fields into the all-encompassing chromatic modality. The two levels do not mingle because they are antithetically related. The segmentation process cannot be carried to the level of the background structure because one reaches a point at which the definition of the field ceases to operate. A further point which must be considered is the problem of how segments might be differentiated. The musical surface infrequently consists exclusively of discrete segments, and even when the segmentation seems uncontentious the question nevertheless arises of whether it is ever possible for two harmonic events to stand in no conceivable relationship. Consideration of a piece of tonal music in a segmental fashion must therefore address the question of how one delineates regions of music when there is never a point at which two adjacent harmonic events could be considered truly discrete. The problems of formal segmentation in this regard can be demonstrated with recourse to an example, Grieg’s Scherzo, opus 54, no. 5: Ex.l Prestissuno leggiero

•

4. .... gp, ma il basso manats

\

' ~

—.:

1

^ J . ■■ ■F >■

11^ I j II

As the wave progresses the motive ‘z’ is subjected to a process of expansion. Immediately in bar 5 it is given in rhythmic augmentation; throughout the elaboration this augmentation is retained in the woodwind interjections of bars 9, 13 and 17, and against it motives ‘y’ and ‘z’ are elongated to produce a variant of the socalled ‘Bruckner rhythm’: Ex.7 y expanded

variant of 'z'

'

* \‘r

^

jig

Finally at bar 18 the new form of ‘y’ and ‘z’ is detached from ‘x’ and alone forms the basis of the liquidation. In thematic terms the nature of the wave is defined by this process, the apex being achieved at the point at which the moment of separation occurs. Kurth goes to some length to assert that Such motivic processes in no way undermine the synthetic notion of theme he has erected:

The beginning of the Eighth Symphony[...]throws some light on how little-^the

motivic uniformity is impaired amid this whole art of dynamic continuities, refined down to the smallest linear strands, how it in no way degenerates, perchance, into free 'coincidental forms’.-For even here the second principal theme appears as a developmental structure derived from the first theme such that there is at once the greatest motivic logic[...]as well as the greatest motivic economy.^®®

Each thematic fragment simultaneously represents a local component wave in itself and altogether describe a continuous upward motion towards bar 18. In so doing, the individual motivic processes participate in the gradual process of ‘unfolding’. It is not a developmental process in the Beethovenian sense; the theme is not stated and developed, but engages in a process of transformation directed towards a goal, first of all bar 18 and eventually the second subject, where the ‘Bruckner rhythm’ is taken up as the principal material: Ex.8

We might expapd the application of this idea to provide an overview of the thematic and gestural structure of the movement as a whole. Passing to the second subject, we see that this group shares the essentially symmetrical division of phrase groupings found in the first subject. Here, however,, the repetition evident in the first subject is replaced by a process of statement and varied continuation. The clear ascent to an apex apparent in the first component wave is not reflected in the second, which dissolves into a transition preparing the third subject: Ex.9 _______

------------------------------- --—

. .

Segmentation:

b,69 Wave Formatinn.s:

Selected Writings. pl98.

b.73

,t__

139 b.69 Apex:

In contrast with the first subject, the gestural weight of this group is located in the first wave, at the climax of bars 69 to 71. However in both groups a similar dualism exists; a symmetrical bipartite structure coexists with an overall wave form which locates its apex asymmetrically. The thematic structure of the group again indicates the significance of the distinction between definitive and preparatory forms. Here the definitive form is stated immediately, and returns at the beginning of the second component wave. The material succeeding each statement results from a mixture of intervallically contrived developments, and developments relying on the notion of rhythmic variation suggested by Dahlhaus. Two motives might be identified, thus: Ex. 10 b - rhythmic inversion

jy ly ^ j i j^j Ji|J^p The first component wave involves two transformations. The first variant retains only the rhythm of motive ‘a’, the second combines a version of the immediately preceding variant with an inversion of ‘a’: Ex. 11 .

In the second coniponent wave three further developments can be identified: Ex. 12

140 The first variant, is again derived rhythmically, the second imposes the rhythmic structure of the second subject onto a variant of the interval structure of the first subject, and the third dismantles the theme in preparation for the third subject, a preparatory version of which emerges as the primary melodic material of the final bars. The exposition of the two subject groups has instigated two basic structural oppositions, between a binary wave form which locates its apex in the second component wave and a binary wave form which locates its apex in the first, and between a thematic structure which states the definitive form in the second component wave and a strucmre which states the definitive form immediately. Both groups ar? thematically related to the following group by the same process of syntagmatic motivic mutation. At the same time the wave formations and thematic stmcture can be seen to stand in a dichotomous relationship. The waves formations are presented as two successive representative organisational ideas, and therefore carry the function which in the classical sonata would generally be performed by the themes themselves. On the other hand, the thematic structure is essentially anticlassical. Even though the respective groups are characterised by opposed modes of thematic organisation, nevertheless in both cases the subjects are caught up in an ongoing process of development which, although specifically defined by the placement of defimtive types, in general suggest a more global procedure pointing beyond the confmes of the exposition. In essence the waves are concentrically conceived, whilst the themes are teleologically conceived. The dichotomy between symmetry and asymmetry ,is temporarily resolved in the third subject group in favour of asymmetry. The group comprises a single continuous wave, marking out a gradual ascent to the apex at bar 125, and then subsiding towards the perfect cadence at bar 139; Ex. 13 b.l25

A division into two smaller waves is evident, thus; Ex.l4 ' ' : b.l09 Wave Formations:

.

'

b.l25

The initial wave^ is not juxtaposed with the second, but is clearly subsumed into tbe overall ascent. This apparent resolution is not however carried into the thematic detail. The thematic procedures of the third group are generally characterised by a process of disintegration. The initial statement of the theme suggests a preparatory form, but in practice this material is abandoned after bar 100 ifa favour of rhythmic variants of the triplet accompaniment, one of which takes up the intervallic shape of the first subject. The apex does not reinstate the theme, but instead introduces new material, which in turn gives way to a cadential variant of the first subject: Ex. 15

The definitive statement is therefore absent; the third subject responds to the duality initiated in the prior material by avoiding it. In so doing the closing section contributes to the teleological process suggested by the first and second groups. The resolution of thematic ..problems is deferred to a later point in the fonn. The bifurcation of structural principles is maintained by the development section, which simultaneously engages in a process of development and pre development. Three component waves can be identified, thus: Ex. 16 b.l53

b.l79

b.l92

The second and third waves collectively form a larger wave formation, the apex of • which is established with the apex of the third component wave:

142 Ex. 17 b.l93

b.224'

b.249

I I Each component wave is associated with specific material, the first with the first subject, the second with the second subject, the third with the augmentation of the first subject. These associations do not however reproduce the associated wave forms of the exposition, instead each corresponding form is variously extended or contracted. The first wave expands the sentence structure of the first component wave of the first subject group in the exposition to a five-part form, thus: Ex. 18 Bars: 153

-

168

172

178

182

192

In contrast, the second wave truncates the formation associated with the second i

subject, dissolving into a sequential preparation of the third wave: Ex. 19 Bars: 193

201

I- - - - - -

Free Inversion

—r~

224 Sequential Repetition of Second Subject, motive ‘a’.

The third wave then expands the form of the first subject itself: Ex.20 Bars: 225

r

•

. 249

143 The waves are treated here'as themes might be treated in a classical sonata, as representative characteristics of the exposition which might be expanded or contracted. With respect to the manipulation of thematic material, no such development takes place, that is to say Bruckner does not dismantle his themes in order to exploit their motivic content. Instead the developrhent participates in an ongoing process of preparation. We graduaUy come to see that the forms of the first subject initiated by the exposition are not definitive, and that the eventual goal of the development is therefore the attainment of a definitive statement. In this sense the thematic content is assembled rather than developed. This process takes place in three stages. The first wave states the inversion of the first subject alternately in augmentation and in its original form. Treatment of the second subject in the second wave proceeds in the opposite fashion; the theme, also stated in free inversion, quickly dissolves into sequential repetition. The third wave then locates the definitive statement of the first subject. Two basic conflicts have emerged, between the augmented and original forms of the first subject on the one hand, and the first and second subjects on the other. The alternation of forms of the first subject has a preparatory function. The initial form of the theme is gradually being replaced by the augmentation; at the apex the original form is reduced to a thematic afterthought, and finally, in the recapitulation, to a rhythmic identity; Ex.21

Establishment of the definitive form of the first subject takes place at the expense of the second subject, the dissolution of which is achieved by means of a large-scale contrapuntal procedure. The ascpnt to the beginning of the third wave gradually reintroduces motive ‘x’ of the first subject in the bass. When the definitive ■ statement of the first subject is reached, at the original pitch level, in the bass, the inverted second subject material is retained in augmentation in the treble •accompaniment. The material which the development has so far presented in

isolation has thus been combined, such that the second subject is subordinated by the first: Ex.22

The disparity between the motivating processes of the wave formations and the thematic structure continues into the recapitulation. The wave formations essentially recapitulate the forms of the exposition, but with three cracial amendments: the first subject now locates its apex in the first component wave, the second component wave, of the second subject is considerably curtailed, and the closing section of the third group is extended to form a component wave in itself. The structural problem created by the opposition of types of wave formation in the exposition is in a sense resolved here. The balance of waves in their respective subjects establishes a much closer correspondence between the first and third groups, which are now both bipartite waves placing their apices at the end of the first component wave. The abbreviation of the second subject assists this process; the collapse of the second component wave accommodates the extension of the third subject. Alternatively the recapitulation of themes is characterised by- complete fragmentation. No stable return of the first subject is evident; initially the identity of the theme is represented only by its rhythmic content. As the wave formation progresses the intervallic form of the subject is gradually recovered, in the following manner:

f

145 The forms of the theme in the s^Ond component wave are however markedly less stable than their exposition counterparts; the statement occurs in the wrong lc6y, and the liquidation is fragmented rhythmically and cadentially curtailed. The same conditipn exists in the second subject, where the abbreviation of the wave form correspondingly disrupts the recapitulation of the theme. The third subject and coda are similarly negative. The extended apex reintroduces the first subject, but again it is represented only by its rhythm. The interval structure of the theme is to some extent regained in the coda, but (as will be demonstrated below) it is plagued by harmonic ambiguities, and dissolves at the end into repetitions of motive ‘z’: Ex .24

The form therefore has at its centre a thematic processual ‘blind-spot’. The music moves towards a definitive statement of the theme in the development, the consequence of which is entirely negative. There is pre-development, statement and negative aftermath, but no region of thematic stability. The thematic strqcmre of the movement is thus characterised by an unresolved dichotomy, between the organisation of the wave formations on the one hand, and the organisation of the thematic content on the other. This duality might be characterised as & conflict of the inherited demands of the form, which insist upon a concentric, positive structural process, and the demands of the melodic language, which unfold a teleological procedure which ultimately remains unfulfilled. II The affinity between the concept of the component wave and the idea of the harmonic field is immediately apparent in the harmonic structure of the first subject group. The group' sets out an harmonic field in two forms, corresponding to the division between definitive and' preparatory thematic statements (bars 1 to 22 and 23 to 44), succeeded by a six-bar transition (bars 45 to 50). Within each form the field splits into three parts, corresponding to the subdivisions statement, elaboration and liquidation respectively. Each segment of the form associates with a specific kind of modality and mode of progression: modal mixture (in the statement), chromatic voice leading supporting transposition operation (in the elaboration) and diatonicism

146 (in the liquidation). Altogether the field corresponds to the category ‘double-tonic field’; the statement asserts two potential tonics, the initial implication of B-flat minor/D-flat major and the subsequent resolution to C. Ex.25 Bars:

0

ELABORATION STATEMENT

Mixed mOamity - transposition oper0ion

’

Traruposthn operation! _____

,

Diatonicism

USVlDAnON

Transposition

STATEMEUT

ELABORATION

LIQUIDATION

The characteristic sense of tonal relativism is abundantly clear in this field. Neither potential tonality is allowed a definitive statement. To begin with, in the absence of any clear, tonally definitive relationships the initial octave F" itself becomes a point of tonal orientation. With the entry of the theme the presence of the G-flat in bar three forces a shift of focus; F is now heard as a preparatory dominant. The leap of a sixth to D-flat in bar four changes this implication to Dflat major. Yet at bar 5 the initially expected resolution to B-flat minor is undermined by the phrygian cadence resolving to' the open fifth C-G. The tonal orientation has shifted again; the initial. F is how heard as a subdominant, the implication of B-flat minor/D-flat major as part of a phrygian harmony. A subordinate function for b-flat/D-flat is potentially suggested by the harmonic balance of the first subject; B-flat minor is implied by its dominant and D-flat occurs as a

147 passing harmony.. C. despite the immediate absence of the modally determinate third degree, is at least presented in root position. C minor furthermore receives forceful diatonic support in the liquidation, yet the implication of B-flat minor/D-flat major is reasserted in bar 24 before it can be definitively stated. If the statement relies on a notion of modal mkhire, the elaboration exposes Bruckner’s concept of chromaticism. It seems dear that the harmonic sense of this passage will remam obscure if one attempts to explain it in terms of conventional functional relationships. Hence, one may see bars .9 to 18 as a local prolongation of A-flat minor, where the B7 and P-sharp7 chords constitute an enharmonically respelled movement to the relative major. F-sharp7 then becomes an altered secondaiy dominant in relation to the foUowing G7, which subsequently resolves diatonically to C. Alternatively, one might emphasise the harmonic mixture which takes place here. The overall motion is from A-flat to G, and therefore once more outlines what is essentially a phrygian progression. Embedded within this is a I-V progression in B major, thus: Ex.26

The central harmonies, by this interpretation, would seem to interfupt the phrygian motion, or rather function as a passing chromatic insertion. However in both interpretations the essential sense of this passage, as a goal-directed progression towards G7, is only partially elucidated. The elaboration is more satisfactorily explained if one emphasises voice leading over chordal, identity. The cohering factor is not the relationship of chord to chord but the rising chromatic line from A-flat to B. Bruckner conceives a progression which relates chords principally as sonorities placed upon degrees of the chromatic scale. In other words, the mode of progression in both the statement and elaboration correspond to the third category of progression, that is to say, they rely on transposition operation as a means of harmonic connection. Overall the progression is contained within the context of the extended fundamental G, against which the A-flat harmony appears as a neighbour-note formation:

148 Ex.27

The liquidation then temporarily establishes diatonicism as a mode of progression. At the apex in bar 18 the chromatic progression is broken and G7 resolves to an implied C mihor. The second form of. the field reveals local harmonic adjustments to the elaboration and liquidation. In this form the chromaticism of the elaboration is successively dispersed as the diatonic liquidation approaches. The final pitch of the bass theme in bar 31 is immediately harmonised as part of a B7 chord, and the progress of the elaboration resolves this sonority to B-flat7 via the functionally ambiguous diminished seventh E-flat - F-sharp - A - C of bars 35 to 36. The elaboration of the second field relies on a mixture of the categories of progression, passing from transposition operation to diatonicism via the fourth category. In other respects the modes of progression and category of field remain the same in both forms. We therefore see a close relationship developing between the wave formation which represents the first subject and its harmonic structure.' The repetition of harmonic procedures which determines the segmentation corresponds to the regional divisions of the wave formation. The position of the apex is defined in harmonic terms as the point at which' C minor is established as a potential tonic. The first subject is thus represented not only by an associated wave formation but by a particular harmonic field, which will be treated in a similar fashion as the form progresses. Tracing this correspondence -in the second subject reveals that the opposition of wave formations between first and second groups is supported by an opposition of field structures. In the second subject the repetition of double-tonic fields yields to the exposition of a single-tonic field and a progressive field- respectively. The

component fields^ are made up of tripartite structures, which can again be described after the manner of the Schoenbergian sentence: Ex.28 Bars:

EH

STATEMENT

ElABOKATION

UQVIDATION (CONT.)

The first statement submits to a potential multiplicity of harmonic interpretations. Here, as in the elaboration of the fifst subject group, the individual harmonic relationships cannot be subsumed into the general context of the wider G'major tonality or of the motion between G and C at bar 59 as a I-IV progressions Once more the sense, of the passage lies in the mode of progression, which again relies on transposition operation. This is reflected both in the most regional harmonic relationships, which rely on ascending chromatic motion in the outer parts, and in the G-G-flat progression which., frames the two statements of the second theme. Progress towards the apex again associates with'the gradual emergence of diatonic progression. The elaboration is controlled altogether by third relationships, ‘ but only the second pair results from transposition operation, the first being a local I-vi

reladonship in C.major. As in the first subject group the liquidation, and location of the apex, are supported by diatonic progression. The field of the second wave varies the structure of the first: Ex.29 category______________________________________

Transposition operation

In the statement the process of semitonal voice leading produces a large-scale I-IV relationship through the reinterpretation of the diminished seventh chord which concludes the first phrase of the theme. The elaboration contains only the single third transposition F-shaip - A, and the liquidation abandons the apex statement of the local tonic present^in the first wave in favour of a preparation of the third key area. The processual relationship between wave formation and field is clear. The opposition of bipartite wave forms differentiated by a change in the placing of the apex is supported in the harmonic structure by the opposition of types of field differentiated by the specific configuration of modes of progression. In the second group the harmonic function of the apex is also changed. The gestural climax is represented in the harmony not by the first clear suggestion of the potential-tonic, but by the point of return to an already established tonic. The temporary resolution of the opposition of gestural structures in the third subject is thus carried into the field structure in a similar fashion. Three successive modes of progression are suggested! The first wave exposes a field controlled by octatonicism, both as an harmonic, phenomenon and as a mode of voice leading. The second wave proceeds first of all by chromatic voice leading and ultimately by diatonicism (see following page):

Ex.:^o Bars:

Hi] Transposition operadon - (krtatonidsm

-

octatonicism coVJ

oaatoniclstn (conr.)

The first wave initiates an ascent based on octatonic collection n. From bar 103 to the end of the component wave the voice leading is controlled by octatonic collection I. The diminished seventh chord which subverts the first ascent and prepares the second is held in common between collections I and III, but absent from collection n. Observe also that the harmonic structure of the wave as a whole is determined, either by statement or by implication, by the arpeggiation of the diminished seventh chord E-flat - F-sfiarp - A-C. The chromatic voice leading of the second wave relies on two procedures: chromatic alteration around a stated or .implied pedal, and chromatic alterations producing connections determined by the third and the fourth categories of progression. The progression as far as bar 116 can be explained as a series of alterations around the pedal point E-flat, bars 116 to 120 as alterations around a

152 pedal B-flat. Wijh the increasing proximity of the E-flat major 6-4 chord, at bar 125, the progression abandons its reliance on a referential pedal point, first of all in favour of the transposition operation C7-E7 between bars 120 and 121 and the pivotal augmented triads G-sharp - C - E and A - C-sharp - F, and latterly the augmented sixth complex in bars 123 to 124 which returns the music to E-flat. The final cadence of the exposition then simply prolongs a 1(6-4)-V-I cadence iri E-flat major. Both the wave structures and the constitution of the fields unequivocally locate the climax of the third subject as the apex of the exposition and as a point of relative harmonic stability. This is evident in the choice of field type; in opposition to the first and second subject groups, which ultimately favour binary structures 5

and double-tonic or progressive fields, the third subject favours a single-tonic field presented in a single form. The gestural weight of the resolution at bar 125 is contributed to not only by the nature of the preceding harmonic preparation (the most prolonged and extensive of the movement so far) but by textural elements, specifically the most prolonged employment of the full orchestral forces to this point and the most extreme and protracted expansion of tessitura. In many senses the classicistic procedures of the form have thus also been represented in the configuration of field structures. The analogy extends to the development section. Just as the development expands the gestural forms of the exposition, so too it also develops the associated modes of harmonic organisation. Each component wave constitutes a field defined by clearly delineated modes of progression. The first field relies on the first and third categories of progression, employing diatonic progression in the form of plagal

t

cadential harmony, and transposition operation at the minor second, minor third and major third: Ex.31 Ban:

[HI

‘ Plagal harmonyitransposition operation

I

153 The two forms of component field both employ the modes of progression in the successibn minor third transposition, minor second transposition, major second transposition and plagal harmony, each application corresponding to a cadential reinterpretation of the first subject as rectus or as inversus. Middleground application of the same modes of progression are also discernible. The first component field on the %ger scale reveals two minor third transpositions E-flat-Gflat and F - A-flat, the second suggests the ascending diminished triad C - E-flat - Gflat, and the overall minor second transposition C - D-flat. The' component fields themselves are connected by the major third transposition A-flat-C. The fields adhere to a concept of development in so much as they develop the field structure of the first subject as it occurs in the exposition. There are two senses in which this occurs. In the first place, the employment of semitonal transposition operations exploits a significant intervallic property of the first subject itself. Secondly, the structure of each component wave reflects the progress from modal mixture/transposition operation to diatonic harmony; the apex of the field in both instances harmonises the inversion of the subject as a plagal cadence. Moreover the second component field is in itself a 'development of the

first

component field; the apex progression in bars 182 to 189 extends the phrase through two major third transpositions. . The same condition exists with respect to the second and third waves. The field supporting the second wave establishes and extends the mode of progression by semitonal voice leading which characterises the second subject. The field is controlled by two ascending chromatic bass progressiorjs, the first producing the minor third transposition operation G-flat - A - C, the second supporting the progression from G as a local dominant to the preparation of b-flat in bars 217 to 224: Ex .32 Bars:

[Ml Transposition operaxion - third relationships

-

,_____

fourth category semitonal ascent (coni.)

-

fourth category sendtonal ascent

The third field is occupied with a contraction of the process identified in the first field. Rather than bfcing concerned with the structure of the first subject group as a whole, it specifically develops the harmonic structure of the statement. This is the case both in and between the statements of the theme. The three augmentations once more outline an ascent by thirdsEx.33 • , Bars:

.

In each wave the notion of development has become the province not of the material itself but of the means of organisation. The field structure also asserts a positive concept of recapitulation. The revision of the wave forms of the first and second subjects causes a parallel change in the nature of the representative fields. Segmentation of the first group proceeds as follows:, Bx.34 Bars;

‘ •

I--------- ------------------------------------------------ Mixed 7---------------—Li __________________________________________ modality

____________

_Fourth category

_____________

155

i-- » if. r

The repetition of a structure which progressed towards C is replaced here by an arch form which positions C at its outer perimeters. The first field moves from diatomcism to a consistent diminished seventh hannony. the second, whilst retaining the sentence stmcture of the original, replaces the double-tonic field in the statement with a prolongation of D-flat major. Disruption of the exposition form of the group replaces a double-tonic field with a single-tonic field. In contrast, the revision of the second group produces a less stable structure. The apex carries the same function within the field, but here the defining return to the local tonic characteristic of the exposition form is abandoned in favour of an interrupted cadence: Ex.35

156

t

At the end the transition to the third subject is removed, and the group is_abrpptly discontinued. The organisation of the fields in the recapitulation has so far favoured the first subject which, despite its chromatic deviations, is at least represented by a single-tonic field. The process is consolidated in the third group. This is achieved precisely because the group largely retains its original foim, the principal revision being the considerable expansion of the cadence at the apex: Kx.36 Bars:

[36ll

The first and third subjects are now functioning cooperatively rather than antagonistically. Both groups assert a single-tonic .field circumscribed by a statement of C minor. Ill If the field structure can be said to demonstrate a processual similarity with the treatment of the wave formations, so too the tonal background is closely associated with the observed thematic procedures of the movement. Furthermore, it is possible to identify a nascent tonal strategy in the first subject group of the exposition which proves to be of central importance not only to this movement but to die whole symphony. This strategy is exposed immediately in the opposition of B-flat minor/D-flat major and C minor which forms the mixed modality of the first

subject statemeAtJO® The classical opposition of key areas is expanded- into a conflict of tonal polarities, producing a network of possible relationships, thus: Ex.37 D-flat/b-flai

C

One can identify three kinds of tonal relationship in this opposition: keys specifically related to c, keys specifically related to b-flat/D-flat, and keys related to both b-flat/D-flat and c. The latter act in such a way as to mediate between the two polarities, and can therefore perform opposed functions; either they heighten the functional ambiguity surrounding c, or else they behave synthetically, as a means of resolving b-flat/D-flat onto c. A further product of this strategy is that the cadential effect of the dominant is undermined. Except at the most local level the perfect cadence is replaced either by phrygian or else by plagal progression, the former produced by the resolution of the b-flat/D-flat polarity onto the c polarity, the latter exploiting the synthetical function of f as subdominant. Such a strategy differs prominently from inherited classical models, and indeed from many of the tonal strategies conceived by Brahms, in that it collapses the work’s tonal dialectic not only into the first subject group'but into the very first phrase. Subsequent tonal events in the exposition do not therefore occur as keys established in opposition to the tonic, but as particular orientations within an existing duality. The" first structural consequences of this vastly expanded

idea of

tonal

strategy become apparent in the transition to the second subject. Following the motion towards the subdominant in bars 41 to 43, the minor ninth harmony of bars 43 to 49 establishes what appears to be a dominant preparation of D-flat. Yet the goal of this progression is to be G major, at bar 51, the bassline falling through bar 50 to provide a slim dominant preparation over an F-sharp diminished seventh. The

’O^The relevance of the initial modal mixture for the structure of the work has been recognised in Davvson-Bowling, P.-‘Thematic and Tonal Unity in Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony’ in Music vol.33 (1969), pp.225-236, and more recently in Benjamin. W.-'Tonal dualism in Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony’ in The Second Practice of Nineteenth-Centurv Tonality eds. Kinderman, W. and Krebs, H. (Lincoln 1996), pp.237-258. In the former the key opposing C is taken exclusively as B-flat minor, in the latter it is taken primarily as D-flat major. In truth the polity opposing C tends to shift between the implication of both these keys in a way which neither of the above essays satisfactorily demonstrates. Moreover in neither essay is the significance and range of the structural force of this mixture given adequate consideration.

158 music implies a related key of the b-flat polarity only to undermine it and replace it} with a related key of the C minor polarity: ' J Ex.38

--------—---------------..................... 3_^

-----------------

---------------------

iti

j

The transition does not set up an opposition to the tonic, rather it represents a first structural composing-out of the initial duality. In this sense G major supports rather than confounds the stability of C. It becomes possible to conceive of a background structure for the group on three levels, indicating the simultaneous presence of two potential Urlinien: a suggested descent fronq. the Kopfton 8 in C, a suggested descent from the Kopfton

5 in D-flat, and the ambiguous mediating tonalities, which might associate with either background: Ex.39

In the first subject group the backgfound for both polarities performs an., overall half-closure; the C minor progression falls to § at the apex of the group, the D-flat

5 falls to 3 in the transition to the second subject. The diatonic fragments of the field which represents the second subject compose-out an incomplete 5-progression, to be reinterpreted in the context of the fundamental structure

of the movement as a whole as a covering progression

around the Kopflon. 8 of the C minor Urlinie : Ex. 40 Bars:

C polarity

As has been noted, in the tonal climate of this movement the presence of G supports rather than confounds the stability of c. Yet this support is far from unqualified. The nature of the field is such that the initial G major tonality is immediately reinterpreted as a passing harmony. Despite the dominant support provided by the apex progression, the reinstatement of G at the beginning of the second wave is also a reinstatement of that key’s transient character. This is made the more acute by the nature of the second field as a progression undermining G and preparing E-flat minor. The liquidation reinstates diatonicism as a mode of progression in order to undermine the existing tonality. The sense of ambiguity generated by the double-tonic strategy is compounded by the emergence of E-flat as the tonality of the third subject. The end of the exposition does not'simply complete a three-key strategy which complements tbe dominant with the relative major; in the context of the b-flat/D-flat - c duality. E-flat acts as a mediating tonality. 'The . ultimate key of the exposition may therefore result from either possible background, as the, subdominant of b-flat or as the relative major of c. The tonal identity of the cadence therefore exists in an antithetical relationship

with its harmonic and gestural implications. The large-scale voice

leading supports this claim. The Urlinie of the C minor polarity takes up the

160 Kopfton § and reinterprets it, at the cadence in bars 125 to 139, as 5 of E-flat. The third subject group from its inception to this point can be seen to express an ascent to this degree. A remarkable feature of the voice leading in the second component wave, an aspect which contributes in no small measure to the gestural effect of the climax, is the double octave registral transfer of the pitch B-flat, from its origins in the bass in bar 116, to the reaching-over which places it as a covering tone above the 5-3-1 descent from bar 125 to the closure at bar 139. Alternatively the cadence to B-flat can also be seen to express a reinterpretation of § in the D-flat Urlinie, and so to participate in a partial descent of the 5progressiOn suggested for the b-flat/D-flat polarity. Altogether, the background of the movement to this point therefore emerges as follows: Ex.41

V/e see that exposition is characterised on a number of levels by a pervasive dualism. On the one hand the wave formations and their, harmonic manifestation in the form of the various field structures, correspond very closely in their manner and application to the procedures of the classical sonata principle. That is to say, in the exposition the effect is not so much of the opposition of prolonged keys in their respective subject groups, but of the opposition of types of field, not of the material itself but of the means of organisation. The temporary resolution of the opposition of symmetrical and asymmetrical wave forms, and of single and double field structures, apparent in the third subject produces an imbalance which the form must seek to redress. Simultaneohsly, the tonal structure and the thematic processes behave in an antithetical fashion. .The Ursaiz of the exposition is entirely concerned with the initial and omnipresent double-tonic strategy. No opposition is apparent between groups because it is already apparent within the first subject group itself. The material content of the form appears as divorced from its inherited governing principles.

In the same way the tonal operations of the development section reflect the process of pre-development detected in the thematic structure. The music does not engage in the exploration of fresh key areas, but rather reassembles the double-tonic strategy engendered in the first subject. The key areas covered by the first and second waves reverse the relationship between double-tonic polarities as they occur in the exposition. In the two forms of the progression characterising the first wave, the first operates entirely within the context of the mediating tonalities E-flat, F and A-flat; the second inverts the phrygian relationship of the first subject, progressing from C to D-flat:

Just as the second wayp prepares the definitive statement of the first subject, so it proceeds from a relation of the b-flat polarity to an extended statement of F as the dominant of b-flat: Ex.43

9 , S F7

iTf .... ^ .-zx:....—t--- ■ 1 ■■ It

^

3

....

.-.=t 1 ------ ipn

The definitive statement of the first subject thus also conveys the most substantial exposition of the double-tonic strategy. The three augmentations of the ■theme lay out in alternation, with the exception of the dominant of c, the principal

162 keys of each polarity, as two extended phrygian progressions in augmentations one and two, and as a diatonic IV-VI-T(6-4) cadence in the final augmentation: Ex.44

* m Such tonal procedures perform an antithetical function to that of the development in the classical sonata principle; the climax does not reassert the tonic in the wake of a prior motion to the dominant or relative major. The existence of the work’s essential tonal strategy as a simultaneity rather than a succession of keys turns the return of the first subject into an expansion of the existing tonal problem rather than a resolution of jt. When C minor is finally established at bar 249, its concomitant ambiguities remain intact. The composition of the background of the development clearly demonstrates its pre-developmental characteristics. The whole process in effect pieces together the double-tonic opposition. In the first component wave the elements of the strategy are presented disparately, through the separation of mediating tonalities and keys specifically related to one of the two polarities. The second wave progresses from a specific relation of the b-flat polarity to the functionally ambiguous F pedal of bars 217 to 224. The alternation of ciouble-tonic keys in the apex wave has the effect of compressing the separate tonal polarities back into the confines of a single melodic Identity, whilst altogether composing-out a motion from D-flat, via the mediating keys E-flat, f and A-flat, to c: Ex.45

Bars:

ii

rte synaetical character which Kurth ascribes to the thematic coatent thus clearly extends to the tonal foundations of the form. Such intimations of the double-tonic strate^ as are present in the exposition are revealed as initial shadow forms which

m

n y find then defimtive form at the apex of the development, these terms the statements of the first subject in the third wave represent the apex of the entim This reversal of tonal procedure forces a parallel shift in the function of the recapitulation. In essence, the movement has progressed towards a single definitive statement of the underlying tonal conflict from which it cannot recover. The consequence of this event is thus not stability but increased ambiguity and stmctuml fragmentation. Despite the achievement of C minor, in the immediate wake of the apex the first subject is not reinstated so much as collapsed. Neither the accompanimental flute ostinato nor the bass repetition of motive -x- do anything to assert convincingly the stability of c; the bass motive reiterates the root of the chord as a second inversion, the flute atpeggiates the open fifth and octave From bar 263 any pretence of a stable assertion of c is abandoned. The Kcent to bar 271 replaces the intimation of C minor with the tonally ambiguous t^shed sevenths F-A-flat-B-D and D-flat-B-G-B-flat. When the sentence structure of the first subject group is re-estabhshed between bars 279 and 303 the statement now almost entirely favours D-flat major. The elaboration partially recalls e B major msertion of its exposition counterpart, and the liquidation

entirely

recalls the liqmdation of the fiist component wave. Yet again this fragile attempt to rr,!'' '>y “■= 303. When the second subject returns

cadence leading to E-flat minor in bar in E-flat major theambiguity surnmnding

tins mediating tonahty is amplified rather than dispersed. G major, as the tonality of the second subject in the exposition, proves far more supportive of C than the paraUel tonahty m the recapitulation. If anything, the extended presence of D-flat in tte recapitulation of the first subject puUs the functional identity of E-flat further from the orbit of c. Other features of

the group support a negative reading. The

support for the local tonality is minimised by the foreshortened second component wave, which at its inception escheWs the original return to the regional tonic in favour of an interrupted cadence. In its. revised form the second wave also abandons any attempt to prepare the tonality of the third subject, culminating instead on the dimmished seventh F-sharp - A - C - E-flat. ^ a consequence, the establishment of C minor in the third subject appears as a discoiporated event. The fragmentation of tonal identity in the recapitulation of

164 the first subject,.the tou4 ambiguities of the second subject and the total-:-lack of harmonic preparation effectively separate the third group from any tonal implication generated by the climax of the development. Even the monumental effort of the coda to establish C minor ultimately negates this purpose. In the ascent frbm bar 306 to the climax of bars 381 to 385 the repeated plagal assertions of c consistently resolve onto the least stable inversion of the tonic triad. At the climax itself the harmony, far from solidifying the attempted preparation, retreats even further from it; C minor remains in its second inversion, and is preceded by a third inversion augmented sixth chord. More than this, both the reiterated plagal cadence and the A-flat7 - C progression attempt to bring two. mediating tonalities into the control of the tonic. The effort proves to be futile. In the immediate aftermath of the climax the repetition of the rhythm of the first subject not only once more reduces that subject, with all its tonal potentialities, to the status of a rhythmic identity, it also reduces the tonic from a triad to a single pitch. The epilogue is profoundly ambiguous. The reharmonisation of

the first

subject in the repeated cadential phrase between bars 393 and 405 reverses the tendency of the climactic section; c is now made to behave as a local dominant. That is to say, it is itself subsumed into the context of a mediating tonality: Ex.46

In the closing bars the ambiguity is preserved, the modally determinate third being absent from the final chord. Moreover the melodic approach to this chord retains the descent through D-flat which comprises motive ‘z’. Right at the end, the double-tonic polarities are juxtaposed without mediation or resolution: Ex.47

The effort of asserting c has thus ultimately produced the opposite effect.

165 We are now in a position to complete the background graph. The movement is concerned not with executing the descent of the potential fundamental lines, or with the descent of one at the expense of the other, but with the mutual negation of thfe possibility of descent. Both the c and D-flat fundamental lines are nowhere closer to resolution than in the first subject group in the exposition. At the end of the exposition the 8 of the c Urlinie falls through F to E-flat, yet as we have already seen this descent may equally be associated with the D-flat Urlinie. In the development the juxtaposition of polarities results in the re-establishment of both the A

A.

5-and 8-progressions without any attempt at mutual or selective resolution. The fragrnented return of the first subject makes an abortive attempt to resolve both lines, first of all in the prolonged A-flat dominant ninth harmony of bars 279 to 286, latterly in the reinstatement of the 8-6^^-3 descent of the liquidation. The former effort is disrupted by the progression to the liquidation, the latter by the interrupted cadence in bar 303. The conflict of the two lines reaches a point of crisis in the coda. The possible resolutions of, both lines are thrown into direct opposition in bars 3.81 to 385. The A-flat7 sonority suggests a partial closure of the D-flat Urlinie, yet this is engulfed by the ensuing C minor chord which, however, simply reasserts the Kopfton § of the C minor Urlinie. In turn, the final cadence makes no effort to resolve this line; G is left suspended above the texture and is denied any Ijnear connection with the final 1. The collision of the two fundamental structures has resulted in their mutual negation. The background can be represented in its entirety as follows: Ex.48 Bars:

I

166

A

8

IV The analysis has so far identified as a central feature of this music the tendency for a given parameter to exhibit dialectically opposed processual characteristics. In the first movement this property has taken two forms

The

dualities evident within parameters are defined by the dichotomous extent to which structural problems are afforded a degree of resolution. Consistently it is the case that positive structural procedures are not to be found in the areas with which they would normally be associated in the classical sonata, that is in the treatment of themes and of tonal conflicts, but rather in the particular types of gestural and harmonic modes of organisation betrayed by the subject groups. The very existence of this distinction, however, points to a more general dichotomy which remains unresolved at the end of the first movement, that is the duality between the classicistic tendencies of the patterns of organisation and the post-classical procedures

of the. tonal background and the thematic material itself. The

reformulation and possible ultimate resolution of these manifold dialectical tensions, as we shall see, constitutes the guiding structural principle! of the Scherao, Adagio and Finale.

I

3a); Scherzo I Bruckner’s approach to the symphonic scherzo might in many respects be regarded as conservative. None of the numbered symphonies attempt, in their dance movements, an expansion of form to anything like the extent of Beethoven’s mature scherzi. Bruckner never repeats the trio, or introduces bridging material between the trio and the main body of the scherzo, after the manner of Beethoven’s Third, Fifth, Seventh or Ninth Symphonies, or introduces a second trio, after the practice of Schumann’s First and Second Symphonies. Experimentation with the generic expectations of the scherzo are similarly absent. The Brahmsian practice of replacing the Beethovenian scherzo with an intermezzo, or Mendelssohn’s decision in the Fourth Symphony

to reinstate the minuet, afe never emulated' by Bruckner.

Although elements of sonata procedure can be observed, the form is never (with the single exception of the Fifth Symphony) expanded to include a

secondary

thematic area. In general the formal aspects of Bruckner’s scherzi, proportional expansion notwithstanding, adhere closely to the classical model. The Scherzo of the Eighth Symphony represents a departure in at least two respects. First, in placing this movement before the Adagio Bmckner diverges from a practice common to, all his previous symphonies, both numbered and unnumbered. Second, there is a degree of motivic economy here which is more extreme than in any of his symphonic scherzi to that date. The Scherzo is cast in an expanded rounded binaiy form, which in its tonal and thematic procedures betrays elements of the sonata principle. The form may be tabulated as follows: Ex.l Schematic Representation of the Form A1 (Exposition): bars i-64 B (Development): bars 65-134 (transition, bars 65-94; central section, bars 95114; retransition, bars 115-134) A2 ('Recapitulation): bars 135-195

The material of the movement is derived in its entirety from the ’cello theme of bar three, the descending accompanimental figure in the upper strings, and the repeated horn call onG:

The theiiatic material and gestural organisation of the Scherzo undertakes a reformulation of the wave/theme dichotomy as it was construed in the first movement. Comparison of the general formal scheme, the organisatioii of the component wave formations and the location of significant thematic events clearly demonstrates this dichotomy. With the exception of the amended final cadence, the A2 section represents an exact repetition of Al. Subdivision of A1 with respect to its principd gestural units might proceed as follows: Ex.3

The section comprises two asymmetrical waves: the first locates its apex at the climax of the ascent to G-flat in bars 19 to 24, the second moves to an initial apex in the A major material of bars 33 to 36, and ultimately finds its gestural highpoint in the plagal cadence which completes the section. The wave strncmre of A2 is substantMly the same; the harmonic v^iation which leads to the final cadence produces no concomitant revision of the gestural character. In contrast, the B section consists of a single symmetrical wave, thus: Ex.4

The section pivots around the central perfect cadence in C minor of bars 91 to 95. In opposition to the thematic processes of the first movement, the apices represented here in the gestural structure do not correspond to the definitive

169 statements of thematic material. Instead, despite its slight gestural stature, the definitive statement of the movement’s core material is to be found in the opening bars. The progress of the material involves the Scherzo in a developmental process of departure from,

and return to,

the theme’s primary form, through the

manipulation of rhythmic identity. In both A1 and A2 this process takes the same form; Ex.5 A1 andA2

In each case the return, of the primary, form is located at the major apex of the section. Bmckner has here abandoned the clear distinction between thematic statement and pre-thematic gesture which we have observed in the first movement, and which forms a hallmark of his mature symphonic style. The dichotomy between the employment of wave structures as a classicistic tendency and thematic procedure as an innovative tendency is therefore reversed in the Scherzo; the thematic material follows a pattern of statement and development, whereas the wave structure seeks to undermine this process.

II A similar reformulation of the duality asserted in the first movement is apparent in the relationship between foreground harmony and background tonality. In general the field structure still forms an' harmonic correlate to the wave formations. The partitioning of the material into fields of harmonic activity is clearly apparent. The segmentation of A1 reveals four fields: bars 1 to 6,- 7 to 24, 25 to 32 and 33 to 64;

170 Ex.6 Bars:

B

The segmentation is for the most part unproblematic. Each partition is determined not only by changes in the harmonic structure, but by clear differehces of texture and of dynamic setting. Segment one results from a mixed modality. As with the first subject of the first movement, the material conflates C and D-flat; unlike the first movement, the mixture of modes is not presented successively, as the implication of one mode followed by the implication of another, but simultaneously. The thematic material suggests c, the accompaniment evades an uncontentious support for the tonic. The harmony which initially implies the dominant resolves instead to E-flat; the imperfect cadence which closes the figure is prefaced by a D-flat phrygian inflection. The material therefore implies C minor in its melodic aspects and • C/D-flat in its harmonic aspects.

171 In contrast, segment two is characterised exclusively by a diatonic modality suggestive of D-flat/G-flat. However the harmonic structure of the field introduces .an ambiguity of tonal orientation which prevents either key from acquiring the status of an unequivocal local tonic. In bars 7 to 10 D-flat appears not as I but as the dominant of G-flat. The diminished seventh harmony of bars 11 to 14 dispels this interpretation, and the first inversion D'-flat major triad of bar 15 situates D-flat as a potential tonic. The tonal orientation is immediately shifted again in the rising sequence of bars 15 to 18; the introduction of C-flat pushes the music towards Gflat major. Yet in the final phrase of the field G-flat fails to gain an adequate tonicisation. The harmony implies G-flat via the relative minor and the subdominant, and eventually collapses onto A-flat minor at bar 25. Segment three again introduces the technique of chromatic progression exploited in the elaboration of the first subject group aS it occurs in the exposition of the first movement, that of semitonal transposition operation about an implied fundamental. In this instance the motion from A-flat minor to D-flat major by chromatic ascent is framed by the inverted pedal A-flat held consistently in the first violins. The closing segment of A1 relates two areas of diatonicism by means of semitonal transpositioii operation. Bars 33 to 40 express a I-V motion in A major, bars 41 to 64 conclude A1 with a I-iv-I cadence in E-flat. • Examining the mpre fundamental characteristics of the field structure, we see that the phrygian relatibnship introduced in segment one in fact controls much of the voice leading in the higher middleground. In the first place, the relationship between segments one and two is effectively a middleground expression of the Dflat - c progression contained within the accompanimental figure of segment one; the bass motion which connects the fields simply inverts the semitonal progression; Ex.7

Locally the progression might be explained as an intermpted cadence. The reinterpretation of C as dominant introduces a motion towards F; the diversion towards D-flat7 therefore reinterprets fiat-VI as V. A similar procedure is apparent ■ in the relationship between segments three and four. The rapid implication of keys

172 in segment three obscures the fact that the overall progression involves a semitonal ascent from A-flat to A. The guiding voice leading between the segments is therefore the registral transfer of the sustained A-flat leading to the bass A of bar 25: Ex.8

The techmque through which the phrygian relationship becomes reinterpreted as an ascent is the same here as it is in the connection between segments one and two. The ultimate chord of the progression in segment three is D-flat; A major therefore appears locally as flat-VI. Ultimately the phrygian motion is also instrumental in facilitating the connection of harmonic areas in segment four, in the form of the closing Phrygian cadence E-E-flat. •Altogether, A1 might be described as a progressive field controlled in its fundamental harmonic relationships by semitonal progression. The closing phrygian cadence carries a structural function first of all because it reverses the direction of the semitonal shift (two semitonal ascents as interrupted cadences are answered by one semitonal descent as a phrygian cadence), secondly because the E - E-flat motion realises on the larger scale a property of the accompaniment presented in segment one. The B section yields three component segments, bars 65 to 94, 95 to 114 and 115 to 134. In general the segmentation is uncontentious; the fields reveal distinct harmonic procedures and tonal functions. The single area of ambiguity is the relationship between segments two and three; the final phrase of segment two and the initial phrase of segment three are related by the common tonality of F minor. However, the circumscription of the material between bars 115 and 134 by the pedal C in the timpani groups the

sequential passage of bars 115 to 123 more

appropriately with the retransition in bars 124 to 134. The three segments are distinguished by clearly delineated modes of progression:

Fourth category

Segment one may be further subdivided into its component phrases. Motion between the phrases is determined exclusively by the fourth category of progression. The Eflat, F-sharp and G regions are all connected through reinterpretation of a halfdiminished seventh chord, and the shift of harmonic emphasis in bars 81 to 94 which reinterprets G as a dominant is made possible by the intervention of diminished seventh harmony. By contrast, segment two is exclusively diatonic. The three component phrases unambiguously prolong C minor; bars 95 to 102 prolong I, bars 103 to 106 the dominant'and 107 to 114 the subdominant. Segment three reinstates the D-flat/c modal mixture in anticipation of the recapitulation at bar 135, a process which takes place in two stages. The sequential descent in bars 115 to 126 asserts the primacy of f through dominant implication; the return of the horn motive on G in bar 123 indicates an interpretation of C at 'this point as 'V. However, the retransitional passage superimposes onto the open fifth C - G first of

174 all B-flat minor and latterly D-flat major. The reprise is therefore made possible not by a stable dominant preparation of I but "by progressive subdominant movemeptEl truth what is being prepared here is not C minor at all but the modal mixture associated with the principal subject. The reprise presents the material of A1 virtually without alteration, the sole amendment being the following change in the cadential stracture of segment four: Ex. 10 Bars:

________________________________ Transposition oparalton_____

The alteration causes a change in the category of progression employed within the first component field of segment four; a diatonic relation of A has been replaced by a chromatic relation, connected by -means of a transposition operation. At the same time the intervention of D-flat changes the relationship between segments three and four. The initial A major triad of segment four is now framed by D-flat major harmony, and therefore' occurs in A2 as an imbedded flattened-VI relationship. The

I:l!

function of the dislocation is clear; the reversal of the controlling semitonal motion of the middleground has simply been transposed so that it now occurs in the tonic. The Phrygian implications of segment one are therefore ultimately fulfilled at pitch.

mm

Ill We may now turn to the tonal strategies of the Scherzo. Ostensibly, the movement might suggest the following Schenkerian readings: Ex. 11 S i'-'l

I:

175 i

II

5

41

:

2

/:k

A

—

________-—

-

^5

II

.

II

54/

^

.

A

2

I

A

Both readings are problematic. The inception and resolution of an unambiguous 3progression is constantly frustrated by the harmonic details of the music. In the upper voice of the opening accompatiimental figure 3 is initially harmonised as 1 m E'flat. The single C minor triad stated in the figure locates 3 in particular as an

inner voice and C minor in general as a passing harmony in the context of an imperfect cadence. We would therefore be forced to infer 3 by displacement; Ex. 12

The

persistent presence

of D-flat

in

the

accompaniment,

and

the

rapid

reinterpretation of c as V, introduce further elements of tonal uncertainty which compound the instability of the Kopfton. This remains true for each subsequent structural cadence. Neither the E-flat cadence which concludes Al, nor the cadence which completes the Scherzo as a whole, involve dominant support sufficiently to justify the existence of a clear diatonic 2-i descent. In both instances support for the regional tonic relies more significantly on phrygian and plagal harmony. In truth, at no point in either Al or A2 is harmony supporting the diatonic Ursatz given even local prominence. In the closing cadences of each section the dominant merely embellishes I over a tonic pedal. C minor only occurs in an uncontentiously diatonic form, and with adequate ■dominant preparation, in the development section. We are therefore forced to derive

unequivocal consonant support for the Ursatz from the centre of the movement, in an area traditionally associated with tonal mobility. Interpretation of the Ursatz as a 5-progression encounters similar, difficulties. Selection of the hom-call motive on G as the initial Kopfton

suffers the same

problems of displacement as 3. Even assuming that the accompanimental motive can be considered to perform the function of a covering progression, nevertheless the harmony of the first two bars can most satisfactorily be interpreted as a prolongation of V. Tonic support for 5 would be unequivocal if the G were carried over to bar three, but the motive is abandoned before the principal subject enters. Later recurrences of the Kopfton compound rather than resolve this problem. In the retransitioti the Status of 5 is further undermined by the simultaneous presence of b-flat/D-flat and c; in the closing bars of the Scherzo the G returns as the outer voice, but no attempt is made at a supported cadential descent (the ‘descent formed by the repeated- diatonic reinterpretation of the accompanimental motive is entirely circumscribed by a tonic pedal). The C minor passage in the development section lends credence to neither of these interpretations. The only material here which might

support the

existence

of an

unambiguous Kopfton, bars 95 to 103,

uncontentiously states a diatonic 8 as an outer voice. The discrepancy between c as a diatonic phenomenon and c as part of a mixed modality is reinforced by the voice leading, which separates the voice-leading structures of the A1 and A2 sections from that of the 'B section. As we have seen in the first movement, so too here the

significant tonal

relationships are not to be found between tonal areas, but within

the first subject

itself. The initial material once more introduces the D-flat/c duality, and the tonal scheme is similarly concerned with the working-out of the stractural potentialities of this opposition. Segments one and two in both A1 and A2 present c and D-flat as contentious but nevertheless equally plausible tonics; in Segment one the stability of c is called into question by the persistent presence of D-flat, in segment two the harmony vacillates- between the assertion of D-flat as I and D-flat as dominant. The prevalence of phrygian progressions as a middleground phenomenon also arises directly from this opposition. The closing progressions of A1 and A2 both amount to cadential

realisations of the essential tonal duality. The dislocation of the field

structure in

segment fourof A2 exists to allow the harmonic

dualism of the

material of -segment one to be composed-out as a cadential device in the tonic, and therefore to bring the implications of D-flat finally within the orbit of C minor. The

111 tendency for c to behave as an extended anacrusic sonority leading to D-fiat is dispelled only in the final bars. In such an environment the tonal rdle traditionally associated with the development is reversed. The B section jfunctioils here not as a region exploring fresh tonal areas, but as an opportunity to separate c as a diatonic phenomenon from c as part of a mixed modal structure. The material surrounding the central field carefully dissociates C minor from the tonal strategies of the exposition and recapitulation. In the first segment of the development, the diatonic 1(6-4) - V cadence which immediately precedes segment two is prefaced by a descending chromatic ptogression which effectively divorces G as part of a sequence governed by the fourth category of progression in bars 80 to 82 from G as a dominant in bars 91 to 94. Conversely, the retransition progressively undermines the diatonic identity of c in preparation for the reprise. The passage immediately preceding the recapitulation rejects a dominant preparation of c in favour of harmony which conflates the essential tonal duality of the work into a single sonority; Ex. 13

The harmony owes something to the idea of the double-tonic sonority, although in an important respect this notion is here substantially inadequate. The conflation of tonal identities is not restricted to two possible tonics, rather the harmony simultaneously represents c (in the hom and timpani) and b-flat/D-flat (in the seventh chord of bar 133). The harmony set against the G-C pedal passes from bflat minor to D-flat major via a sonority which implies both. Therefore, like the first movement, the Scherzo is also concerned with the exposition of a double-tonic background. Again the mutual existence of the two fundamental lines results in the ultimate incompletion of both. As we have seen, the C minor level itself suggests two possible but ambiguous voice-leading strucmres, both of which remain essentially unresolved at the end. Simultaneously the D-flat material of segment two posits the existence of a' potential parallel chromatic ^^-progression. This structure is reinstated by the intervention of D-flat in

4

segment four of A2, but the subsequent motion directly onto c simply absorbs this line into the resumption of the c UHinie: Ex. 14

The pairing of possible tonics has again resulted in the mutual negation of their respective associated voice-leading structures. Similarly, the burden placed on the function of F minor and E-flat as mediating tonalities is once more evident. At the end of A1 the parallelism with the- end of the exposition of the first movement is clear; here we are similarly unsure of whether E-flat functions as subdominant or as relative major. The mediating function of f is also made Clear at a number of significant structural junctures. Initially it is an apparent modulation to F minor which undermines the sense of C minor in segment one. In the final segment of the development section the motion to F minor makes possible the reinstatement of the modal mixture of segment one at the beginning of A2. At the end of the movement it is by means of plagal cadential harmony that the ultimate tonic is asserted. Yet, despite the resumption of the tonal strategies of the first movement, the Scherzo does not treat these procedures in the same way; in particular the dialectical opposition of - field and background processes is reconceived. Foreground and background seerhingly work in cooperation; it is precisely because of changes wrought in the nature of the field structure that the background processes are allowed to unfold. In A1 the tonal scheme is determined by the nature of the progression developed in the harmonic field. In A2 the global prevalence of c is determined not by the eradication of a stmctural modulation, or the establishment of a universally prolonged tonic, but by a single change in the harmonic detail. Yet the reformulation of this opposition does not perform a synthetical function, rather

the motivating features of the tonal strategy have collapsed into the foreground. At the end of the Scherzo the D-flat/c duality remains unreconciled, because no attempt bas been made to remove the modally intrusive D-flat (at the end c apd D-flat at simply juxtaposed), and because throughout c as a diatonic phenomenon plays no part in the structural procedures of A1 and A2, and is instead represented in the development in complete segregation. In this sense the background strategy in truth cooperates with the thematic processes of the movement. Just as the primary form of the theme is also the definitive form, so too the D-flat/c duality now finds its definitive formulation in the opening bars. In both cases the effect is the same; the parameter is devalued in its structural function and appears as a regional characteristic of the wave formations and the thematic process.

IV The second movement altogether plays a critical r61e in the development of the symphony. The various processual elements advanced in the first movement are presented in the Scherzo in their most concise form. The opposition of c and Dflat/b-flat is concentrated by the namre of its relationship with the field structure. Whereas in the first movement the unfolding sonata form allows sufficient space for the idea of the prolonged tonal area to exist independently of the field stracture, in the Scherzo the brevity of the formal design causes the notion of prolongation to collapse entirely into the construction of the harmonic progressions. The D-flat/c duality is therefore represented here primarily by isolated harmonic events, perhaps most tellingly in the progression which immediately precedes the reprise, where the fundamental conflict of the work is concentrated into a single sonority. This distillation of the processual aspects of the first movement is carried into other areas of the tonal strategy. The employment of f and E-flat as mediating tonalities is likewise maintained, although their establishment turns on the most insubstantial harmonic preparation. The juxtaposition of c and D-flat between the first and second segments of A1 relies on the implication of F minor through brief passing reference, and the progression which produces E-flat at . the end of Al, and by extension the amendment of the same progression such that it leads to C at the end of A2,

are similarly

dependent upon

the

most abbreviated harmonic

progressions. In general the process of concentration reveals an aspect of this music which exists as a latent phenomenon in the more substantial movements, which is that the expansion of form is paradoxically a product of the containment of the

governing procesSual elements within the smallest harmonic details. The exposure of this phenomenon in the Scherzo effectively locates the movement as the symphony’s centre of gravity.

3b): Trio I Many of these features are carried into the Trio. There is here a similar adherence to the formal expectations of the classical symphony; the movement exploits an unproblematic rounded binary structure: Ex.1 Schematic Representation of the Form All bars 1-44 B: bars 45-60 A2: bars 61-93 The most obviously novel feature is the manipulation of generic expectations. Bruckner is here displaying a preference, first observable in the Trio of the Fourth Symphony, for slower, more reflective material, an innovation which perhaps betrays the influence of Schubert.no Also, despite ah apparent increase in the freedom of the melodic material, the motivic processes reveal close affinities with those of the Scherzo. Again the primary and definitive statements of the principal theme correspond; in this form the thetne is stated only twice, in bar one and at the beginning of A2. T^he developmental technique in both A sections involves the gradual employment of shorter rhythmic values as a means of melodic extension. Dahlhaus’ observation of rhythmic motivic procedures is pertinent to this example, inj so much as the process of elaboration is based on the matiipulation and extension of the rhythmic identity of the first phrase, in the A1 section, thus: Ex.2 ' _______

primaryform

^^^See, for example, the trio of the C major string quintet.

182 and in the A2 section, thus: Ex.3

As Albm in transposition

The Trio also demonstrates a very similar approach to gestural structure. A1 describes a Single continuous asymmetrical wave form locating its apex in bars 29 to 33, and subsiding to the cadence in bars 37 to 44: Ex.4

The B section responds with a symmetrical structure, as follows: Ex.5

In A2 the wave form of A1 is fragmented. Two apices are discernible: there is an initial ascent to the first phrase of segment two, and a second apex located in the second phrase of segment three: Ex;6

These structures do not arise and subside in smooth succession but are related by sudden dislocations. The flanking of a single symmetrical structure with two asymmetrical wave formations closely follows the pattern of the Scherzo. The ■precedent of the Scherzo is only broken by the dislocative procedures of A2.

II

The division of phrase groups and uniformity of hypermetrical structure in the Trio also clearly delineaites the harmony, and renders the process of segmentation relatively uncomplicated. Subdivision of A1 into individual phrase units, and subsequent grouping of phrases into component fields, might proceed as follows: Ex.7

Three modes of progression can be identified. Characteristically, segment one involves the mixture of modal identities; the overall cadential I-V motion and the initial I-vi progression result from A-flat major, the internal inflection which produces F-flat and C-flat results from A-flat minor. Segment two comprises two distinct component fields; the first involves chromatic progression by transposition operation, the second involves motion by the second category of progression (in bars 17 to 20) and by transposition operation (in bars 21 to 24). The two fields form a larger unit by virtue of their common reliance on chromatic modes of progression, and because, the deviation of the third phrase notwithstanding !, they

184 mark out altogether a chromatic ascent from B-flat to E. Segment four is-entirely diatonic, and essentially prolongs, a perfect cadence in E m^or. The B section could be taken to form a field in itself. The four constituent phrases however form two distinct groups, the subdivision being determined by a change of modality: , Ex.8

This mixture has a pivotal function. The reinterpretation of C major as C minor allows the motion to the local relative major in bars 54 to 56 to form the basis of a dominant preparation of A-flat. Exploitation of relative keys above and below the central axis of C/c enables the undermining of E major and the resumption of the tonic. The reprise of A1 severely disrupts the original structure. In segment one the harmony, rather than more positively asserting the identity of the tonic, instead seeks further to undermine it. The return to E-flat at the end of segment one in Al, a progression which at least circumscribes the field with a limiting tonicdominant motion, is abandoned. The harmony instead retains the initial C-flat tonality of the second phrase and extends it to the end of the field. Similarly, changes in the material content of segment two, most significantly the replacement of the first and second phrases with an expansive fortissimo gesture in A major, replace the original semitonal ascent with largely diatonic harmony (see following page):

•

Mixed modaliiyitnnSposltidA operation

dUnonieism/fourih category

The final segment of A2 reinterprets the material of the closing segment in an environment which links its component phrases by transposition operation; the tonic is here the goal of the, arpeggiation of an augmented triad. The process underlying the construction of the fields is therefore essentially negative. The reconstitution of the component fields in A2 reverses the functions allocated to the diatonic and chromatic modes of progression. In A1 the concltiding tonality is the product of a systematic chromatic rise in pitch level, and is consolidated by means of the most extensive and unambiguous prolongation of a key to that point. In A2 diatonicism is more consistently the domain of the second segment: Although a high degree of harmonic mobility is apparent, the harmonic goals of the component progressions in this segment are now generally contained within the same- key area, whereas the relationships represented in the third segment are exclusively chromatic. The reprise is therefore the very antithesis of the classical concept of recapitulation. There is no encompassing prolongation of A-flat‘, indeed the progression which in A1 facilitates the modulation to E is not even transposed in A2 such that its goal becomes the tonic. It is only by fracturing the original structure'completely, that the A section is able to begin and conclude in the same key. The process here supports the wave structure identified above; the composition

186 of the fields again forms the harmonic correlate of the gestural process observed in the Kurthian interpretation.

Ill As with the Scherzo, so beneath the field structure it is ostensibly possible to posit the existence of a diatonic Schenkerian background for the Trio, as follows: Ex. 11

Once again this model tells very little about the tonal structure of the music. From the start the harmonic/detail places the, status of A-flat as a tonic in considerable jeopardy. In segment one of A1 the initial triad and its counterpointing Kopfton are rapidly reinterpreted as the passing relative major of F minor, and in the following phrase are completely abandoned in favour of C-flat. Interpretation of what seems like an uncontentious Kopfton as being clearly prolonged throughout the segment, or as participating between bars 1 and 8 in an overall diatonic 3-2 half-closure, is therefore severely hampered by the modal character and harmonic mobility of the material; More appropriately one might imagine a dual structure emerging in these bars. The music associated with A-flat asserts a possible chromatic 5, the material associated with A-flat minor/C-flat major asserts a complex of possible keys which in fact most strenuously suggests a chromatics in C-flat; Byi:

■

■

-

• . 5

.........................

187 In context the dominant is much more closely associated with a-flat/C-flat than it is with A-flat major. The continuation of the Schenkerian reading encounters further, difficulties. The diatonic line can be observed to recur at the beginning of A2, and is resolved through i onto 1 in the final cadence. Dominant support is however extremely localised. It is surely untenable to lend stmctural prominence to the large-scale half closure between bars 1 and 60, whilst simultaneously relegating to the middleground the much more prolongationally prominent A-flM - E relationship which defines the tonal structure of Al. Moreover the tonicisation of E major in bars 25 to 44 is not simply a chromatic i33ixture encroaching on the prolongation of A-flat, it arises out of the tonal implications of segment one in Al, as a possible enharmonic relation of the subordinate structure around C-flat (F-flat is actnally the chord through which this stmcture is first introduced): Ex. 121

-

The same argument holds for the resolution of the Schenkerian Urlinie. The concluding diatonic ^-2-1 is an entirely regional gesture; in the absence of any prolongational function the dominant is reduced to the status of a foreground elaboration. A more pertinent structural force in the Trio is the inception and realisation of an augmented hierarchy.

The tonal strategy relies on the descending and ascending

arpeggiation of the 'triad A-flat - E - C. The return to the tonic at the beginning of A2 is prefaced in B by a modulation which relies on the exploitation of the pivotal function of C major/minor (note also that this moment corresponds to the apex of the second wave formation, the only point at which the tonal strategy and the wave ■ structure overlap). Between bars 1 and 61 it is therefore possible to observe the descending unfolding of the triad, thus;

188 II

Ex. 13

II

III !■

i'l.H

The disruption of the field structure in A 2 facilitates the reversal of this arpeggiation. The final segment successively tonicises C, E and finally A-fiat: Ex. 14

S'

Overall, we arrive at the following voice-leading model: Ex.l5

Bari:

Im

i

The dominant participates in this strategy not because it has a form^defining structural function, but simply because its presence in the closing bars allows the resolution of the B-natural associated with E major through B-flat onto t. Furthermore we must relate this reading to the tonal implications of the first component field. The tonal structure of the Trio might be characterised altogether as the successive tonicisation and mediation of the tonalities suggested in the initial mixed modality! Enharmonic relations of the a-flat/C-flat modality * assume a successively more prominent role. In A1 the tonicisation of E is at least separated from the events of segment one, both by the intervening progression and by the retreat from C-flat to the dominant of a-flat at the end of the first field. In A2, Cflat and its enharmonically respelled relations are allowed to dominate the material; the continuation of segment one and revision of segment two extends C-flat and brings it into direct contact with A, E and B. Mediation of the two regions is achieved by the- intervention of C, which is instrumental in returning the nlusic to A-flat after the development and in initiating the ascending augmented triad which concludes A2. The background is thus most appropriately represented on three levels: Ex. 16

In each case the relationship between modal regions is made possible by the exploitation of upper and lower relative

keys. This is immediately apparent in

segment one; A-flat major leads immediately to'f, modal reinterpretation as A-flat minor allows the introduction of C-flat, and by extension E. Similarly, as has been noted,

the mediating r61e of C in the development hinges on the a - C/c - E-flat

190 axis. Locally E becomes reinterpreted as the dominant of a as relative minor, and the subsequent chord of C minor is then itself reinterpreted as a relative minor.

IV The manipulation of large-scale key relationships is more adventurous here than at any point in the first movement or' in the Scherzo. The dominant and the relative major, despite the substantial revision of their functional capacities necessitated by the D-flat/c opposition, assume prominent rbles in both previous movements. The introduction of large-scale chromatic tonicisation in the Trio is similarly a function of the conflation, of a tonal problem into the initial material; however here, for the first time, the invasive modality is allowed entirely to control the key structure.

The decision to extend the structural tonal palette is further

reflected in the choice of A-flat major as the

new governing^ tonality. The

tonicisation of .A-flat has . contextual significance in so much as the mediating function which A-flat performs within the D-flat/c opposition is here operating between movements. The new key functions as a large-scale upper neighbour-note to C minor within the Scherzo, and also as a preparatory dominant to the D-flat tonality of the Adagio. Relating the various elements of this analysis reveals that the relationship between field structure ^and background has once more been reformulated. Again they stand in a dialectical relationship,

but

I in contrast to the first movement it

is the fields which are involved in a negative process, whilst the process which motivates the tonal strategy is afforded a positive conclpsion. More than this, the successful resolution of the latter is dependent upon the nature of the former. It is precisely the dislocation of the field structure of A1 which makes the completion of the augmented hierarchy possible. The point of contact between these two procedures is again the technique of collapsing the elements of the tonal conflict into the initial material.

191 4; Adagio

I Bruckner s

generic

approach to symphonic style is perhaps nowhere more

evident than in his conception of slow movement form. The symphonies reveal the progressive and consistent application of a formal idea, which has been described in rather disparaging terms by Tovey; The plan of [Bruckner’s] adagios consists of a broad main theme, and an episode that occurs twice, each return of the main theme displaying more movement in the accompaniment and rising at the last return to a grand climax, followed by a solemn and pathetic die-away coda. The official view derives this scheme from the slow movement of Beethoven s Ninth Symphony; mistakenly, for Bruckner never has anything to do with the variation form.^

Tovey’s location of the origins of this form seem somewhat wide of the mark, citing ‘The slow movement of the Eroica Symphony[...]if its two episodes were not different; and the Allegretto of Beethoven’s F minor Quartet would be nearest of air. 112 In. neither of these examples is the

cumulatively elaborative sense of the

Brucknerian slow movement emulated. A more pertinent Beethovenian source might be found in the slow movement of the Seventh Symphony, and by extension in the slow movement of Schubert’s ‘Great’ C major Symphony, both of which instate the alternation of successively texturally elaborated episodes as a structural procedure. Bruckner departs from these models in his expansion of the coda to include a climactic elaboration of the first theme, an area of the form which in both cited examples behaves decidedly as an afterword. This formal scheme is already embryonically apparent in the Adagio of the First Symphony. Here Brackner conceives an essentially tripartite structure in which the A section is texturally and gesturally expanded in its second form. The form reaches its first maturity in the slow movement of the Second Symphony, and is taken up and expanded further in the 1873 version of the Third Symphony, although both the 1877 and 1889 revisions reduce the Adagio to an expanded ternary form. Fully-developed versions of the idea are observable in the Fourth, HlTovey, D.F.-Essays—in—Musical__Analysis, vol. II. Symphonies. Variations

and

Orchestral

polyphony (London 1935), p.75. The idea of variation form in the strict sense of either Variationen or Veranderungen also has veiy little to do with the slow movement of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. ^*2ibid., p.75.

Fifth and Seventh Symphonies. The form is subjected to revision in the Sixth Symphony, where the. tendency towards statement and variation yields to a threesubject sonata structure, and in the Ninth Symphony, where the climactic section is formed from an elaboration of the second subject. In

the Eighth Symphony

these tendencies

find

their most

expansive

representation.- A synoptic view of the movement reveals the following formal divisions: Ex.1 Schematic Renresentation of the Form Exposition A1 (first subject): bars:

Development/Repri.se bars:

Bl (second subject):

T-46)

47-811

Transition: 81-94

-

A2:

B2:

95-140

141-184

A3: 185-254

Coda: bars:

255-291

-

Exact characterisation of the form is complicated by the fact that the structure suggests two competing formal archetypes. On the one hand, despite the fact that Tovey’s statement is in a narrow sense true, for it can scarcely be denied that Bruckner’s form has little in common with the classical notion of either Variationen or Verdnderungen, nevertheless in a broader sense the structure of the Adagio is fundamentally dependent upon a notion of statement and varied repetition. This tendency results less from the specific elaboration of a static harmonic pattern and/or thematic identity, and more from an idea of recursive episodic elaboration as a constmctive principle. At the same time the form betrays clear affinities with the sonata principle. Sections A1 and Bl, taken together, might be described uncontentiously as performing the function of a two-subject exposition. Problems in the subsequent description of the form result primarily from the tension generated by the conflicting demands of these two archetypes. The episodic character of the material acts against the demands of the sonata design, such that determination of the function and position

of the

development

interpretations are possible, thus:

and

recapitulation

becomes

obscured.

Three

193 Ex.2 A1

Exposition

B1 A2

Development

Recapitulation

B2

Recapitulation

A3 Coda None of the above proves entirely satisfactory. A2 and B2^ taken together, might be considered as a varied repetition of the exposition. The key structure tends to support this reading; A2 begins with a statement of the first subject in the tonic, and the material of the second subject recurs transposed. Yet as a recapitulation of the first subject A3 proves markedly more comprehensive. The first'twelve bars of A1 are faithfully represented at the beginning of A3, albeit with a degree of textural expansion, and the climactic arpeggiation twice present in A1 also forms the climax of A3, whereas A2 departs from the structure of A almost immediately. Furthermoie the proportions of A3 are such that it can scarcely be' appropriate to assign to the whole of the movement from bar 185 to the end the status of a closing gesture. Characterisation of A2 as a development encounters similar difficulties. The above considerations lend ‘ credence to the idea that B2 and A3 might together be considered as a reversed recapitulation, and that the tendency towards thematic restatement in A2 is therefore developmental. Yet this reading is undermined by the features which establish A2 as a return, that is to say, the fact that it begins in the tonic, and that A 2 and B2 together reflect the overall structure of the exposition. Explanation of the form in terms of any one single formal archetype will therefore remain incomplete. Rather it becomes necessary to view the structure of the Adagio as being motivated by a conflict of formal types, a conflation of variations, sonata form and sonata-rondo.* *3 **3xhis aspect of the form is entirely overlooked by Tovey. His objection that ‘Bruckner’s difficulty[...]even in his most perfect slow movements is, first, that his natural inability to vary the size of his phrases is aggravated by the slow tempo, and secondly, that the most effective means of relief is denied him by his conscientious objection to write anything so trivial and unWagnerian as a symmetrical tune. Consequently his all-important contrasting episode is as slow as his vast main theme.’lEssavs in Musical Analysis, vol.n, p.75). Notwithstanding the simple point that there is no reason why change of tempo should folm a necessary criterion' for formal differentiation, Tovey’s view relies on the contention that the music engenders no ambiguity in its formal conception.'

194

II The more regional organisation of the music is well represented by the Kurthian perspective. Both subject groups in their initial and subsequent forms can be clearly subdivided into component wave formations. The first subject group reveals two component waves, the second being a truncated variant of the first: Ex.3

■ First Wave

. Second Wave

Both these formations are themselves comprised of two subsidiary waves, bars 1 to 17 and 18 to 28 in the first form and 29 to 35 and 36 to 46 in the second. Each of the first waves locates its apex asymmetrically, in bars 15 to 17 and bars 33 to 35 respectively, whilst both second waves establish a central apex, the first at bar 26, the second at bar 43. In each of the larger component waves the apex of the first subsidiary wave also forms the apex of the whole wave, which is therefore placed symmetrically. ■ In the Adagio as in the first movement Bruckner introduces the opposition of types of wave formation as a means of differentiating the first and second subject groups. Thus, in the B1 section the bipartite, symmetrical structures of the first subject group are supplanted by a single, asymmetrical wave, as follows: Ex.4

More detailed consideration of the second group suggests a tripartite subdivision; the initial two statements of the theme in bars 47 to 56 and 57 to 66, and the climax and supporting ascent in bars 71 to 81, are distinguished from the intervening bars by melodic, tonal and textural means (see following page):

195 Ex.5

Analysis of the regional gestural structure yields a different segmentation. The first two statements of the second subject both exist as independent, asymmetrical wave formations, whereas the material from bar 67 to the end of the group behaves altogether as a single wave locating its apex at the climax of the entire section. Thereafter, A2, B2 and A3 are all conceived as expansions or truncations of the structures suggested in the exposition. The underlying process here involves the inception and divergence of two organisational models, stated respectively as the wave forms of A1 and Bl. The progress of the movement reveals the successive extension of A1 at the expense of Bl. In B2 the shortening of the third component wave collapses the second and third waves into a single unit. In becoming a bipartite structure the wave form has effectively succumbed to the formal tendencies of Al. At the same time the truncation of Bl takes, the material in the opposite direction from that of Al; we therefore observe a process of expansion associated with Al and a process of contraction associated with Bl. Turning to the thematic structure, an examination of the material of bars 1 to 17 reveals three principal motives, marked ‘x’, ‘y’ and ‘z’: Ex. 6

-

The second subsidiary wave, bars 18 to 28, yields four further motivic units, the < delineation of which follows the phrase structure:

Ex.7

Description of the subsequent treatment of this material will remain inadequate if it is considered in terms of a notion of developing variation. The process of development m A2 and A3 does not proceed by the variation and extended treatment of single motivic units, but rather by the restatement and extension of the first subject themes as paradigmatic ‘blocks’. In this way we might consider the first subject group altogether as it occurs in the exposition in the first component wave as an initial form which is-to be expanded and contracted. Therefore, we might identify the functionally significant material of the first subject less in the thematic ideas and more in the phrase.units. The first example of this procedure occurs in the immediate repetition of the first wave in bars 29 to 46. The first subsidiary wave is truncated; the unit associated with motive ‘y’ and the repetition of motive ‘x’ are omitted, and the first unit is harmonically varied. The structure of A2 and A3 involve similar developmental processes. Both sections are concerned with the extension of paradigmatic units present in the first subject group. In A2 the first two phrase groups take up and cadentially extend the unit associated with motive ‘x’, and the subsequent ascent from bar 109 to the apex in bars 125 to 128 involves the elaboration and extension of motive ‘y’; Ex.8

197 The technique finds its most extensive application in A3. The three wave formations which comprise the section are all conceived as elaborations of the paradigmatic units of the first subject group. The first wave itself consists of three component waves, bars 185 to 196, 197 to 204 and the first apex of A3 in 205 to 210. The first wave constitutes a textural expansiofl of the units associated with motives ‘x’ and *y’, the ascent to the apex involves two sequences derived firom motivic unit ‘d’ of the first subject group, and the apex section introduces tutti, fortissimo restatements of motives ‘x’ and *z’. The second and third waves both comprise single ascents built from an extended variant of motive ‘y’, and the climactic apex in bars 239 to 243 is formed from a texturally and dynamically expanded augmentation of motive ‘z’. The aftermath then proceeds unchanged, except for the harmonic reinterpretation of motive ‘b% Throughout the movement the constituent phrases of A1 and their associated material are subjected to a progressively more protracted process of textural elaboration and temporal elongation, culminating in the augmentation of motive ‘z’. The technique is essentially additive; the structure of A3 differs from that of A1 by virtue of the insertion of extended variants of the paradigms of A1 between the second statement of the unit associated with ‘x’ and augmentation of ‘z’ and its aftermath. The teleological nature of the process is supported by this augmentation; the expansion of blocks of material as a formal device culminates in the extension of motive ‘z’ as a thematic idea. This is the only moment in the Adagio where such a motivic technique is exploited. In contrast, the second subject and its recapitulation involve precisely the opposite procedure. As the description of the wave structure has shown, B2 represents a truncation of Bl: Ex.9

The omission of the six-bar sequential passage between the central chorale and the climactic restatement of the subject performs a dislocative function, an effect heightened by the abrapt change of dynamic between bars 164 to 165.

In the Adagio the relationship between wave form and thematic process has been freshly reformulated. As iii the Scherzo, we no longer observe a predevelopmental stage in the statement of themes, instead both first ,and second subjects expose their definitive forms immediately. However this does not lead to a developmental technique founded on the manipulation of motivic cells, rather! the idea, of the motive is expanded to encompass entire phrase units, producing the paradigmatic treatment of .phrase groups described above. The process identified in this regard reflects the manipulation of the waye formations; the addition and subtraction of motivic units contributes directly to the expansion of A1 and the truncation of Bl. In this sense the opposition of characterising processes which forms an essential component of the first two movements is dissolved in the Adagio.

Ill The delineation of the material into fields of harmonic activity, and the correspondence between the field structure and the wave formations, is ostensibly clearer in this movement than at any other point in the work. Reduction of the first wave of the first subject group suggests the following structure: Ex. 10

The first subsidiaty wave may be subdivided into two component fields, bars 1 to 10 and 11 to 17. The first field displays an underlying modal mixture; the material arises not from the diatonic mode of D-fiat major, but from a mixture of the major and minor modes. In truth the harmony is more prevalently suggestive of d-flat/csharp; the second, third and fourth phrases introduce c-sharp, C-sharp7 as dominant of IV and t-sharp respectively. Even the D-flat tonality of the first phrase is robbed of an unequivocal stability by the presence of the flattened upper neighbour-note inflection in the first subject.

199 In contrast the second component field adopts transposition operation as its governing mode of progression. The specific operation which motivates this passage is again the familiar B'rucknerian technique of justifying a non-diatonic, progression through the maintenance of an implied or apparent fundamental. In this instance the process takes two forms; in bars 11 to 14 the mode of progression is determined by the semitonal transposition of a dominant seventh over a pedal point; in the relation of bar 14 to the apex in bars 15 to 17 the mode of progression relies on the functional reinterpretation- of the bass-note. An application of the technique apparent in the first form is also responsible for establishing a connection between bar 11 and the previous field; the half-diminished seventh chord in bars 9 to 10 is related to the succeeding dominant seventh by means of semitonal voice leading. In truth, allowing for the presence of an octave registral transfer between bars 14 and 17,' the entire progression is characterised by a continuous semitonal ascent from Fsbarp to A: Ex. 11

As we have already seen in the first subject group of the first movement, so too here it is through an examination of the voice leading that we have been able to account for a progression which resists interpretation in terms of individual functional identities. In the above passage the sonority present in bars 11 and 12 is difficult to justify in relation to the apparent governing D-flat modality. The C-sharp bass-note proves unproblematic, but no justification can be found for the G7 sonority it supports, either as a relation of the overall tonic, or in relation to the preceding sonority, or indeed, in combination with the bass-note, as a diatonically tonal sonority in itself. The surrounding chords are easily related to I, as the enharmonic subdominant minor and enharmonic dominant respectively, but the intervening chord can only be accommodated by assuming the sudden intervention of a tritone substitution, or the momentary adoption of octatonicisiri as a modal Jx..- *

0

foundation. Such-an explanation tells us very little about the context of the chord or the motivation of the progression. The field as a whole reveals a further governing principle;, the entire progression from D-flat to A involves a successive harmonic reinterpretation of the bass-note D-flat / C-sharp, first of all as I then as root of V, then as a dissonant pitch against the prevailing harmony, then as I against V7, and finally as 3. The prdcess is characterised by two related harmonic procedures. The motion from D^

—

A

flat as degree 1 to C-sharp as 3 involves a progressive increase and decrease in the contextual dissonance of D-flat/C-sharp, pivoting around a point of maximum dissonance which is the sonority of bars 11 to 12. At the same time the progression achieves this reinterpretation by divorcing the chord of A-flat from its assumed role as a dominant. The subdominant minor inflection of bars 7 to 10 and the dissonant interpolation in bars 11 and 12 effectively separates the G-shaip7 chord of bars 13 and 14 from the functional implications of the initial tonic. The second wave may be similarly subdivided into two component fields, the division being located at the centrally placed apex in bar 25: Ex.l2

The first field mixes an oblique diatonicism with a single instance of the fourth category of profession. The progression between bars 18 and 23 falls within the diatonic orbit of D-flat; the harmony of bar 18 can be interpreted as an inverted augmented sixth chord embellished by a voice exchange, and the harmony of bars 19 and 20 resolves the dominant of the dominant onto D-flat as V. Yet, as with the first component field of the movement, the cohering factors of this progression are less the functional relationship with an overall tonic than the semitonal motion of the inner part and the reinterpretation of a stationary bass-note. Bars 21 to 23 are likewise concerned with diatonic relations of D-flat. The cbntrol of diatonic

201 progression is only broken in the final bar of the field. The relationship -between the B-flat minor harmony of bar 23 and the F-flat major of bar 24 is brought about by the reinterpretation of a diminished seventh chord, which functions initially as the dominant of B-flat minor, and retrospectively as the dominant of E. The progression comprising the second field of the wave is entirely diatonic; despite the fact that its outer limits suggest-a motion from D-flat minor to F major, the progression in fact simply moves through a cycle of fifths. The distribution of relationships within the cycle is however uneven. The unfolding of the sequence does not trace a continuous dominant motion, rather the first three chords are grouped together as a local iv-TV around A-flat, and the b-flat - F progression and subsequent cadential confirmation suggest a iv-I progression in F major. The remote relationship implied between the peripheral harmonies is therefore ameliorated by the nature of the intervening progression, which construes d-flat as a regional subdominant and F as the dominant of ii. It is only the V-I cadential confirmation which ultimately reorientates the progression such that F becomes the tonal goal. Despite the apparently clear segmentation of the material, the boundaries, between fields are at every juncture obscured by connective procedures which cause the modes of progression to overlap. Thus, for example, the shift of harmonic focus which demarcates the boundary between fields in bars 10 aiid 11 overlaps with an upward chain of semitohal transposition operations, which potentially includes the harmony of bars 9 and 10. Similarly, in bars 17 to 18 the process of reinterpreting the bass pedal D-flat/C-sharp which seems to culminate in the statement of motive *z’ is in fact carried into the next field. The material of bars 18, 19 and 20 takes the A major harmony of the preceding phrase and relocates it as an augmented sixth harmony in D-flat, before finally reinterpreting D-flat itself as V. The goal of the harmonic process instigated in the first field is therefore only tmly realised in the first phrase of the second field, where the apparent chromatic motion away from I is counteracted by an absorption of that motion back into the context of the tonic. The same procedure might be observed in bars 24 to 28, where F-flat as a chromatic relation of the preceding B-flat minor is reinterpreted in the following bar as the relative major of d-flat. The first complete break between fields in trath occurs at bar 28, before the second statement of the first subject. Restatement of the first wave in bars 29 to 46 reveals two amendments to the field structure (see following page):

202 Ex. 13 TMrd andfourth categories

DlatomcismJfourth category

The first component field is extensively truncated, and the second component field is denied, its ultimate cadential confirmation. The abrapt turn from the first to the last phrase of the first field is- brought about by means of the following progression: Ex. 14 b

1---------^--------- 1

The statement of modal mixture present in the first form of the field is replaced here by two forms of chromaticism. The area bracketed as ‘a’ in example 14 might be considered as part of an ‘omnibus’ progression, and therefore stands as an application of the fourth category of progression. The progression bracketed as ‘b’ Can be explained as a semitonal transposition operation, and the progression bracketed as ‘c’ reinterprets the G7 chord as an augmented sixth, and thus reinstates the fourth category. The shifts between the categories are consistently the product of semitonal voice leading, in this instance not only in the' upper part but also in the bassline.

This revision moves the entire field structure up a tone; from the restatement of motive ‘z’ to the end of the subject group the progression of the first wave is reproduced in transposition. Two significant processual changes facilitate this transposition. Firstly, the governing idea of the first field in its initial form, that is the harmonic reinterpretation of a consistent bass pedal, is abandoned in favour of a bassline which follows the semitonal ascent of the upper voice. Secondly, the catalysing factor which initiates this ascent is the movement of the bass in order to accommodate the introduction of the G7 chord. This is the same sonority which the bassline resisted in the first version of the field at bar 11. The progress towards and then away from a central point of maximum dissonance which characterised the first field, a process which in a sense acted against the placement of the first apex, is removed here by the capitulation of the bassline to the demands of the harmony. Turning to the deeper processual aspects of the first subject group, one sees that the structure of the group in its first form is controlled by the unfolding of an augmented triad. Isolation of the principal harmonic centres of the two fields gives the following reduction: Ex. 15

Revision of the field in the second form disrupts this stracture; the initial D-flat is now succeeded by a descent from B to G, thus: Ex.16

Both fields, and . indeed the first subject group altogether, might be descfibed as progressive fields controlled in their fundamental relationships by the third category of progression. The arpeggiation of the augmented triad in the first form coexists with a tonal scheme which obliquely asserts the identity of the tonic as the chromatic key of D-flat, first of all in the reinterpretation of A as an augmented sixth in bars 17 to 19, secondly in the placing of the D-flat minor chord as the apex of the second wave. This and the augmented triad can be seen to unfold in parallel: Px.l7

The alterations which dislocate this structure in the second form of the field therefore also serve to disrupt the stability of the tonic, since the above events return here in transposition. • The field structure of the second subject group maintains a close relationship with the wave form: Ex. 18 DiatonicismJtnvisposhion operation

Transposition operaiionl^imonicism

205 The first field may be further subdivided into the two component statements- of the subject, bars 47 to 56 and 57 to 66. The first subsidiary field is differentiated from the second by a change in the governing mode of progression. In the first field the first and second phrases, although both diatonic in themselves, are connected by means of the second category of progression. The first chord of the second phrase, in the context of the preceding harmony. Would be interpreted diatonically as the dominant of the relative minor; however the chord is enharmohicaUy fespelled, and is made to function subsequently as the subdominant of E-flat, and ultimately as III of F minor. In the second subsidiary field no such dislocation occurs. The second phrase here begins on IV of A, and the whole statement falls within the diatonic orbit of both the initial E major tonality and the cadential B minor. Both subsidiary fields, and the field as a whole, submit to characterisation as ‘progressive’ fields. The central field (bars 67 to 70), remains within the diatonic - control of the local tonality of C major. The only harmonic anomaly which challenges this interpretation is the motion from D minor to B-flat in bars 69 to 70, an insertion which is easily explained as a plagal inflection of the ensuing subdominant. The third field then returns to transposition operation as a 'mode of progression. The guiding factor in the voice leading- here is the ascent of the ‘ceUo melody, which unfolds an embellished chain of thirds and a single semitonal transposition. The process of transposition's not entirely regular, rather the progression segments into two regional third transpositions, D-flat - E and C - E-flat7. The continuity of voice leading therefore bridges a change in the function of the bass note from root A

to 5. The ensuing cadence to G-flat is made possible by the diatonic reinterpretation of a further application of transposition operation. The semitonal shift between bars 76 and 77 establishes C-flat at the apex of the group as a potential tonic, yet the goal of the progression is to be G-flat major, in the light of which C-flat functions as IV. ■ In opposition to the first subject, the governing procedures of the higher middleground in • the second group consist principally r)f semitonal relationships. Specifically, the structure of the group is determined by the composing-out of two large-scale neighbour-note forma:tions around E and B respectively (see following page):

206 Ex. 19

This process is not confluent with the divisions of the field structure at a more regional level. The E-F-E motion of the first formation occurs between the first phrase of the first subsidiary field and the first phrase of the second subsidiary field, and the B-C-B formation is initiated at the end of the second subsidiary wave (bar 65) and completed with the establishment of C-flat at bar 77, the enclosed C major occurring as the' initial tonality of the central field. The final cadence to G-flat therefore arises as the continuation of an ascending sequence of fifths.

?

Consideration of the group as a whole reveals that, despite the chromatic relationship between the peripheral tonalities, the governing relationships of the field are in fact more prominently diatonic than those of the first subject. The chromatic excursions which tempt one to view the tonal goals of the group as E-C-G-flat mask the fact that the most significant relationship before the cadence to G-flat in bars 79 to 80 is that which exists between the opening and the apex. Enharmonic reinterpretation as C-flat should not be allowed to obscure the fact that this is simply a movement from I to V. Against this framework the more chromatic regions appear as local inflections. An overview of the exposition is now possible. At the level of the harmonic field a number of structural oppositions have been introduced. In the first place, although both the first and second subject groups' involve progressive harmonic fields, in their specific composition the characterising modes of organisation in their respective subject groups are in truth dichotomously conceived. The first subject group IS concerned on a number of levels with binary structures. This is apparent in the segmentation of the group on the largest scale, and within the structure of

the component fields themselves. The second subject group in contrast characterised by a tripartite stracture, and by the asymmetrical placement of a single apex. The controlling relationships of the fields are similarly opposed, the overall transposition by thirds of the &st subject being set against the neighbour-note formations around E and B in the second subject. The transition to A2 forms a single field in itself. The modulation from G-flat to D-flat is achieved not by the simple installation of a preparatory dominant, but through a chain of transposition operations and fragmentary diatonic sequences, thus: Bx.20 Diatoruclsniltransposition operation

Three; modes of progression are discernible. Bars 81 to 87 contain an ascending sequence of minor third transpositions. The two sequences in bars 87 to 93 are both substantially diatonic, and in bars 87 to 90 the ascent from f to the dominant of b is formed from part of a cycle of fifths, the material of bars 91 to 93 by an ascending cycle of fourths. Lastly, the turn to the dominant of D-flat in bar 93 results from the seimtonal transposition operation C - D-flat. The transition therefore presents no extensive preparation of I, but rather acts to obscure the relationship between' D-flat and the concluding tonality of the second subject. The eventual return to the home dominant is not a logical product of the preceding progression, but is rather imposed upon material which has been hitherto ostensibly concerned with a motion towards C. In both A2 and A3 the. expansion of the material of A1 finds a counterpart in the treatment of the field structure. At the same time, the development of harmonic procedures tends to act against the original tendencies of the themes they support. Broadly speaking, A2 yields two primary fields, bars 95 to 108 and 109 to 129, and an appended transition, bars 130 to 140. The first primary field may be further segmented according to the phrase structure:

208 Ex.21

The first. segment is entirely diatonic, indeed this is the first example in the Adagio of a diatonic single-tonic field. The harmonic tendency of the first subject in the exposition is reversed; the reinterpretation of a tonic pedal such that it produces chromatic relationships is replaced by a phrase which is entirely circumscribed by| D-flat inajor.

[

The field stmcture of the second segment also runs contrary to the initial tendencies of the material. In this field however the variation results from an increase rather than a decrease in harmonic mobility. The field is characterised by a single transposition operation, the minor third transposition f - a-flat, and by the concluding plagal cadence a-flat - e-flat. Far from resisting the transposition, the basshne here moves in ?compliance with the change of harmony. The harmonic strategies employed to connect the first segment to the second, and the second segment to the second field, follow the modes of progression established within the segments themselves; the bridging material of bars 101 to 102 leads to a dominant preparation of f, and the close of the field is related to the subsequent E major tonality of bar 109 by transposition operation. The technique of resituating the material of A1 in fresh harmonic contexts is taken up again in the second field. This field has three segments, being delineated as follows: Ex.22 Bars:

Transposition operation

the first two

209

The first segment relates three diatonic fragments by minor third transposition. The second segment, notwithstanding the fact that it seemingly complies with the notion of chromatic alteration about a pedal or sustained pivdtal pitch, in truth falls within the parameters of a diatonic field (each chord of the progression is contained within a potential F major/D minor tonality^ The only harmony which might be considered problematic is the progression between bars 122 to 123; yet even here Bruckner is simply employing an inverted augmented sixth in order to approach the local V/iii. Ultimately, this explanation also encompasses the connection with the third segment, which in this context might be characterised as an interrupted cadence. The third segment itself reveals two harmonic regions related by the maintenance of a pedal F. The first (bars 125 to 128) consists simply of I and ii7 in B-flat, the second (bars 129 to 140) of two transpositions of a Tri.stan chord at the distance of a minor third. The two regions might be considered to overlap, since the harmony of‘ bars

127 to

129 may also be grouped together as

transpositions of a Tristan chord about a common bassnote: Ex.23

.

.

Fourth category

The sfecond field places motive ‘y’ in a new harmonic context in the same way that the first field reinterprets the harmonic environment of motive ‘x’. At the level of the field structure we therefore have a consistently applied concept of development founded on the idea that the material of the first subject group should be relocated within fields governed by fresh modes of harmonic

organisation. This procedure cannot be said to form a direct haimonic coirelate to the Idea of paradigmatic expansion discovered in the motivic structure; the field structures of the exposition are not being expanded so much as replaced. , Nevertheless, the notion of development here is the same as that evident in the first movement, which is to say that Bruckner is not only exploring the thematic content of the first, subject group, but also its associated modes of harmonic organisation. Alternatively, the recapitulation of B1 in B2 subjects the field structure of B1 to precisely the opposite procedure. Here the harmonic organisation submits to a process of dissolution rather than expansion. Change of tonality and textural elaboration notwithstanding, the first field of the group appears as before; however the second and third fields are in this version conflated into a single field through the omission of the sequential ascent which connects the second field to the apex of the group; Ex.24

The clear distinction between second group and retransition is also dissolved; the apex concludes weakly on an imperfect cadence, and the transition preparing the second return of A1 is subsumed into the structure of the group as a third component field. The conflation of the second and third fields into a single unit relates two diatonic fragments by the major-third transposition operation F-flat-C. The transitional field is similarly conceived, consisting of two eight-bar units which relate dominant ninth harmonies on G and A-fiat by means of an unmediated semitonal transposition operation.

'

The process of truacation concomitantly disrupts the more fundamental governing relationships of the field structure. The creation of the hybrid second field undermines the dominant neighbour-note formation instigated in the exposition. Instead, the fundamental bass motion between the end of the first field (bar 160) and the apex unfolds the semitonal ascent B-flat - C-flat - C. Revision of the harmonic character of the apex, specifically the introduction of the ‘weak’ imperfect cadence, furthermore changes the relationship between apex and closure. The process of reinterpreting C as subdominant remains incomplete; instead in bars 168 to 169 the apparent motion to G is itself undermined and subsumed back into the context of C. On the larger scale, the semitonal ascent of the bass is not concluded at the apex. The implication of C in the transition, and the subsequent cadence to D-flat carries the bass motion through to the beginning of A3, thus: Ex.25

In this way, not only is B1 fragmented and abbreviated, but the weakening of its ultimate cadential structure subsumes the latter stage of the group into the preparation of A3. In this respect B2 has become the antithesis of the form of the material in the exposition, in so much as the various harmonic devices which in B1 acted to isolate the second subject from the surrounding material have here been revised so that they perform the opposite function. > The conflict between recapitulatory and developmental tendencies observed previously in conjunction with the thematic characteristics of A3 are also amply demonstrated in the harmonic structure (for example 26, see appendix I). Five component fields are discernible: bars 185 to 196, 197 to 210, 211 to 226, 227 to 238 and 239 to 254. Bars 185 to 196 recapitulate the structure of the first field of A1 without the concluding arpeggiation. The nature of the field is ostensibly the same, although in tfuth the essential underlying process has been subtly altered.

212 The bassline no longer resists the transposition operation which leads'-to the dominant of C, but rather moves semitonally in accordance with the harmony. The •accent Culminates in the resolution of the second inversion dominant seventh of Aflat in bars 185 to 196 onto 1(6-3) in C at the beginning of the second field. In abandoning motive ‘z’, Bruckner has therefore also abandoned the process of which that motive formed the concluding point, namely the ongoing reharmonisation of the D-flat / C-sharp pedal. The first field of A3 is thus simultaneously the closest the movement has yet come to a recapitulation of the field structure of Al, and also the most satisfactory example to this point of a development of Al, in so much as the field, is for the first time elaborated rather than replaced. Any tendency towards recapitulation is discarded by the second field. Three component segments are suggested, the two ascending sequences in bars 197 to 200 and 201 to 204, and the apex resumption of motives ‘x’ and ‘z’ in bars 205 to 210. Both sequential segments are conceived as compounds of diatonic and chromatic modes of progression. The first sequence betrays the operation of three categories. The characterising idea is that potential V - I cadences should be instigated and then either fulfilled or else undermined by the intervention of nondiatonic modes of progression. Thus, the progressions D7 - E-flat and G7 - b-flat both confound potential perfect cadences through the introduction of a transposition operation, whereas the intervening cadence B-flat7 - E-flat fulfils its diatonic cadential expectation. Furthermore the first sequence is connected to the second via an application of the fourth category; the concluding diminished seventh relates both the preceding b-flat chord and the succeeding E first inversion as a potential substimte dominant. The second sequence amounts to a varied restatement of the first in transposition. The intervention of the third category is restricted in this version to the E - F-sharp7 - G progression; the ensuing dominants all resolve diatonically. Lastly, the b-flat - A-flat harmony of the apex might be confirmed as a diatonic ii I fragment in A-flat major. Both the third and fourth fields function in combination as an ascent to the beginning of the fifth field, the climax of which constitutes the apex of the entire movement. The third field comprises three subsidiary segments: bars 211 to 214, 215 to 222 and 223 to 226. The first segment is entirely diatonic. The second displays two controlling modes of progression; in bars 215 to 220 the ascending bassline supports a diatonic sequence, comprising a 10-10 linear intervallic pattern embellished by accented passing notes. The progression is circumscribed by a prolongation of C-sharp minor; the intervening linear intervallic pattern therefore

213 unfolds an octave registral transfer between E and El in the upper voice. In bars 221 and 222 the mode of progression becomes chromatic; the relationship between the C-sharp of the previous bar and the initial G of bar 221 results from a tritone transposition operation, and the relationship with the ensuing harmony from semitonal transposition. ' The connection with the third segrnent reverts to

diatonicism. Despite

considerable chromatic embellishment, the progression here might in fact • be considered as a fragment of a rising diatonic sequence. The ascending chromatic harmoiiy of bars 223 to 224 is contained by the ‘ inverted pedal E-flat in the woodwind, and the apparent dissonance of bars 225 and 226 results from the maintenance of the chromatic passing notes F-flat and G-flat, over what is in reality the transposition of a dominant seventh. Overall, the unifying feature of the field is to be found once more in the structure of the bassline, which is concerned with a continuous double octave ascent from the initial E of bar 211 to the concluding E of bar 226, at successively diminishing rhythmic intervals. The fourth field displays a similar mixture of harmonic procedures. Two segments are discernible; bars 227 to 234 and 235 to 238. The field.here relates two areas of diatonicism by means of semitonal transposition operation. The mobility of the harmony is encouraged by the consistent employment of, second inversions, which weaken^ the stability of each implied tonality. The preparation of the apex in bars 235 to 238 prolongs G-flat and the dominant of F-flat around a maintained pivotal G-flat pedal. The field is in this way circumscribed by E major; the internal diversions to D-flat and G-flat ultimately only result in the enharmonic reinterpretation of E. Connection with the ensuing field involves the reinterpretation of the concluding V7 of F-flat

as an augmented sixth.

The apex field is formed from an harmonically varied repetition of motive ‘z’ and the. second field of the first subject. The reinterpretation of C-flat as an augmented sixth between bars 243 and 245 accords, albeit in transposition, with the parallel moment in the exposition. However the original retention of the bassnote has been abandoned,-and the bassline now takes up the viola part of the original form. The second amendment (bar 248) shifts the progression to its initial transposition in the exposition, and the field proceeds as a verbatim restatement between bars 249 and 257. Lastly, the culmination of the field in C major arises from the inclusion of the transposition operation A-flat-c between 251 and 252. Altogether, the harmonic structure of A3 might be taken as a further expansion of the process, which began to emerge in A2, of developing or

214 reinterpreting the field structures established in Al. In A3 this process-can be observed to operate on a number of levels. In the first place the structure of Al submits to a literal process of eldngation, in so much as the elements of the original form are taken up and sequentially extended. This is clearly apparent in fields one and two, where the greater part of the second field takes the form of an interjection between the third phrase and the apex phrase of the field in its Al form, based on the ascending chordal material which constitutes the second phrase of the second field of Al. The idea is reflected in the apex of A3; the augmentation of motive ‘z’ in bars 239 to 243 acts as a thematic metaphor for the process of harmonic extension. The development of the means of harmonic organisation can also be seen in the internal structure of the harmony. In contrast with A2, where the material of Al is resituated in fresh harmonic environments, A3 displays' a successive accumulation of categories of progression within the context of single fields. This process starts to occur in the first field; abandoning the resistance of the bassline to the demands of the harmony in bars 193 to 197 emphasises the coexistence of diatonic and non-diatonic modes of progression within the field. The process is more acute in the third and fourth fields, where the mixture of modes of progression almost amounts to saturation. Finally we see this also in the apex field, in which almost every phrase of the original version in Al has been subjected to a process of harmonic reinterpretation. Comparison of the harmonic strachire of Al, A2 and A3 therefore reveals a clearly unfolding structural procedure, which is the teleologically motivated process of expanding and varying the field structure of Al. In A2 the scope of the procedure rernains limited; in each component field the harmonic reinterpretation of material, proportional expansion and harmonic variation notwithstanding, is restricted to the employment of clearly delineated, discretely presented modes of progression. In A3 the modes of progression are allowed to proliferate within the fields themselves. Moreover, the phenomenon is generally supported by an ongoing process of rhythmic diminution, so that, particularly in the fields which constitute the ascent to the apex, the rate of occurrence of harmonies increases as the modes of progression become more profuse. One sees a clear parallel with the thematic structure; the expansion or contraction of an initial definitive form is at each stage supported by a concomitant procedure in the harmonic fields.

215 The coda then engages the only mode of progression which has so'far had no extensive role in the movement, being entirely comprised of unambiguous diatonicism: Ex.27 ^ors-

No attempt is made to relate the harmony of the previous field to the II7 - V -1 cadence which prepares the coda; the relationship between the two regions therefore stands as a transposition operation mediated only by the intervention of a preparatory dominant. The coda itself consists of three harmonic areas which altogether prolong a I - IV -1(6-4) - V -1 cadence in D-flat. The stability of the harmony is not carried into the accompanimental texture,

which in effect

disintegrates as the final cadence approaches. The arbiter of this procedure is the motion to IV in bar 278, after which both the accompanying chords and the bass pedal are substantially absent. The relationship between theme and • mode of organisation is therefore disrupted in the coda; the culmination of the thematic and harmonic procedures in the apex of A3 brings about the negation of the thematic content, but the fulfilment of the harmonic process, since the final field of the movement unfolds' an harmonic structure which has been entirely purged of invasive non-diatonic modes of progression. The only remaining chromaticism is the flattened upper neighbour-note of the first subject, an embellishment which is never allowed to affect the underlying modal or harmonic stmcture.

216

IV Turning to a consideration of the background, we see that the movement suggests two primary areas of enquiry: the tonal strategies which are specific to the Adagio, and procedures which relate the Adagio to the tonal conflicts of the first, second and fourth movements. It is possible to detect the operation of a diatonic Ursatz in this movement.' The first subject group introduces an unambiguous diatonic degree 5, and the recursive nature of the form establishes clear points at which this Kopfton can be seen to be maintained. Moreover the fundamental line is afforded an unequivocal descent in the coda. The upper voice, present throughout in the horns, unfolds a 5-1 descent, albeit over a consistent tonic pedal, between bars 259 and 283. The reading emerges as follows: Ex.28

As we have observed in a number of previous examples, so too here the detection of this structure in fact tells us little about the tonal organisation of the movement. Isolated tonal events can be seen to cooperate with the diatonic Ursatz', the structural cadence in G-flat major at the end of B.l suggests a possible plagal diatonic 5-4 as the guiding strategy of the exposition, and the b-flat - A-flat progression which constitutes the first climax of A3 could be taken as forming a larger-scale imperfect cadence with the return of ^ at bar 185. Yet at best these events stand alongside a number of significant non-diatonic relationships, at worst the level of chromaticism both in the field structure and at the background isolates the diatonic key. relationships from the tonic and allocates them subordinate structural functions.' The resolution of the Urlinie in the coda is once' again presented as a disembodied event.' A more significant structural force is to be found in the D-flat - E major relationship which exists between the first and second subjects in the exposition. The progress of this strategy involves the composing-out of a descent from E through E-flat onto D-flat. In reality the E-E-flat relationship is situated within the tonal plan of the movement not only as part of a strategy in relation to I, but also

217 as a subsidiary conflict in itself. In this sense the emergence of E-flat-as the tonality of B2 does not constitute a large-scale resolution of the invasive E major tdnality of B1 into the wider context of D-flat, but is rather conceived as the instigation of a fresh structural opposition. The function of the return of both tonalities in A3, and specifically the function of the progression approaching the apex field, is to Juxtapose the two keys in the context of a single formal region and to resolve the opposition in favour of E-flat. The arbiter of this resolution is the reinterpretation of the dominant of E as a flattened upper neighbour note to the dominant of E-flat; the conclusive sonority of the fourth field, which retrospectively encloses the third and fourth fields altogether as a large-scale imperfect cadence in E, is resolved instead as an augmented sixth to E-flat major: Ex.29 Bars:

[a®®[i4i][ISllin]

ngng

At the same time the introduction of E major in Bl, despite the complete lack of harmonic preparation and apparent detachment from the underlying harmonic processes of Al, does not represent the introduction of an entirely chromatic relationship with the tonic. In truth, as has already been observed, the initial harmony of the first field of Al is not concerned solely with the establishment of D-flat major but with the mixture of D-flat major and D-flat minor, and in fact more prevalently favours the minor mode. The opening phrase therefore suggests a network of possible key relationships arising from both modalities. Tonicisation of E as the key of the second subject simply represents a modulation to the relative major. On the larger scale the resolution of E onto E-flat serves to eliminate a more fundamental structural duality; the progression occurring at the apex of A3 subsumes a relation of D-flat minor into the secondary dominant of D-flat major, a resolution which is subsequently completed in the perfect cadence to D-flat which begins the coda. This process is represented by a large-scale chromatic voice-leading procedure. The movement reveals a descent from F in the first subject, to E as t in ’Bl, then to E-flat as 1 in B2, and following the repetition of the E - E-flat

218 motion in A3, from E-flat to D-flat in the preparatory cadence of the coda. The diatonic Ursatz therefore coexists with a chromatic fundamental stmcture, thus: Ex.30

The diatonic 5-t in reality has significantly less stmctural force than the chromatic line, and so might more realistically be construed as a covering progression, particularly since the resolution of the diatonic line in the coda occurs after the tonal conflicts of the movement have been played out. In addition to the foregoing tonal procedures the Adagio is related to the surrounding movements through the introduction of elements of the C/D-flat duality. In this sense the tonality of the movement is in itself significant, since the wholesale tonicisation of D-flat both inverts the relationship between overall tonic and opposed modality apparent in the first movement. Scherzo and Finale, and also established the duality not' only within but also between movements. In this respect the Adagio represents a central area in the work which turns the fundamental tonal problem of the symphony upside down. The manifestation of this duality in the Adagio takes two forms: keys which have a functional significance only in this context, and keys which also perform functions at other levels of tonal procedure. The principal key of the first category is C itself, which is tonicised twice in the movement, initially at the apex of B2 and ultimately as the final tonal goal of A3. In both instances the tonicisation directly precedes the preparation and return of D-flat, and in both instances the two tonalities are juxtaposed without the introduction of a mediating process of modulation: Ex.31

219 As a tonal event the tonicisation of C thus occupies the most remote areas- of the form. Moreover both instances are essentially divorced from the structural tonal .events which precede them. In B2 C major has no preparation;, indeed its introduction forms one of the major contributing factors in the dislocation of the stmcture of Bl. In A3 C only becomes the outcome of the progression between bars 247 and 284 as a result of substantial alterations to the form of the progression as it had occurred in the exposition. No attempt is made to resolve the opposition of the two keys; the tonicisation of C in consistently a disembodied event, standing less as a direct threat to the tonic and more as a temporary vehicle of forrnal disruption. Secondly a number of the tonal relationships which exist as strategies specific to this movement might also be considered as subordinate relationships within the D-flat/C duality. Thus E-flat major is not only significant as part of the E - E-flat conflict suggested above, but also for its function as a mediating tonality. The apex at bar 239 has structural import in this regard because the gestural goal of the movement has replaced the tonic with a potential relation of the C polarity. Similarly, in B2 the second subject is subsumed into the context of C/E-flat. Lastly - the establishment of B-flat major as the goal of A2 and B-flat minor as the first stractural cadence of A3 carry a similarly dual functional significance, as a relation of D-flat on the one hand and as a participant in the C/D-flat opposition on the other. In all these instances the collapse of the stmctural force of the dominant observed in the previous movements continues. The diatonic relations of D-flat, in the context of. the C/D-flat duality, serve as confirmations of the tonic rather than opposed tonal polarities. Also in each case Bruckner exploits the equivalence of major and minor modes; C major may be legitimately paired with E-flat, and D-flat with B-flat major as weU as B-flat minor. Remarkably, not only the ambiguity of major and minor modes but also the potential significance of C are implied by the harmonic stmcture of the first subject group in the exposition. This implication exists in two senses. First, the ultimate goal of both component fields of the group is an unequivocal relation of C major. Furthermore, as soon as the initial phrase group of the first field has established the mixture of modal identities the first harmony of the next phrase introduces the dominant of C: Ex.32

Implication ofC

220 As we have already seen in the retransition of the Scherzo, so too here Bruckner introduces a sonority which conflates the essential tonal conflict of the work into a single chord at a critical moment in ^e work’s structure; the G7 chord implies C, the C-sharp bassnote implies D-flat. Drawing together these various procedures, the background of the movement might be represented in its entirety as follows: Ex.33

The analysis allows for three levels bf tonal activity: the diatonic framework, the E/ E-flat opposition, and the D-flat/C duality. Where a relationship is pertinent to more than one level it is reproduced accordingly.

221

V The relationship between field structure and background in the Adagio reproduces the dialectical tensions of the first movement in reversed tonal circumstances. Again the representation and opposition of subject groups is no longer the province of prolongation but has retreated into the modes of progression and means of harmonic organisation. Conversely the tonal strategy has again been collapsed into the initial material; subsequent tonal events dd not gain structural significance from the opposition of tonal regions but from conflicts which are inherent in the material from the start. One sees also that this relationship does not correspond to that which exists between the wave form and the thematic structure. The formulation of the dialectical tensions of the first movement has changed again; here the essential tension is between processual similarity in the relationship of wave and theme and processual difference in the relationship' of field and background.

4; Finale

I Perhaps more than any of his contemporaries Bruckner has suffered the widespread accusation that his work collectively falls victim to the so-called ‘finale problem’. Indeed, in the English literature at least, it is consistently remarked that the generic similarities betrayed by the symphonies conceal a deeper unity of purpose, which is that each work deals with the same problem of how to satisfy the demands of a monumental, teleologically conceived notion of symphonic form without sacrificing the constructive force of the sonata principle. Allied to this idea is the assertion that Bmckner was mostly unsuccessful in these efforts. This contention generally takes two forms: either the problem of achieving a large-scale balance between movements results in a finale which is apparently bloated and overburdened with material repetition, or else Bruckner attempts to circumvent the problem by producing an abbreviated finale which, by the truncation or omission of crucial areas of the form, fails to satisfy the proportional or processual implications of the first movement. The tortuous process of revision which many of the symphonies underwent is generally cited as evidence in favour of this position. Moreover the comparative levels of revision between works is taken to indicate that this problem emerges as Bruckner’s symphonic style develops. By this interpretation the first maturity observable in the Third and Fourth Symphonies corresponds to the emergence of an inherent difficulty in the construction of a satisfactory finale which neither work manages to overcome. The protracted and extensive revisions made to both these works, amounting to three complete versions of the Third Symphony, two versions of the Fourth, along with additional versions of the slow movetaent of the Third and the ‘finale of the Fourth, and the further alterations made in collaboration with the Schalk brothers in the preparation of the first published editions, might be taken as repeated attempts- to balance the proportions of the works in relation to the dimensions of the finale. Bruckner apparently only satisfies the burden of teleology twice; in the Fifth Symphony by turning the tonal problems inherent in the first subject of the first movement into a contrapuntal problem in the last movement, and, by means that will shortly be examined, in the Finale of the Eighth Symphony. Ultimately these difficulties apparently defeated Bruckner. The extensive sketch materials for the Finale of the Ninth Symphony indicate an inability to bring

223 the work to a satisfactory conclusion rather than a final solution to the-Tproblem which was only frustrated by death. A variety of analytical points have been raised in support of the critical view of Bruckner’s approach to the finale. Robert Simpson, in particular, points to moments where attention to the demands of the sonata form seem to run contrary to the implications of the material. The treatment of the moment of recapitulation seems particularly problematic in this regard. In the third version of the Finale of the Third Symphony the truncation of the form to the exclusion

of the

recapitulation of the first subject is perceived by Simpson to transfer a structural burden onto the approach to the coda which the material cannot sustain. The closing resolution to D major appears instead as a perfunctory conclusion grafted onto the movement: The fanfare leading to the last blaze of D major is in the first version commendably plain in harmony, unsullied by the dreadful penultimate dominant thirteenth that renders the resolution so bombastic in both revisions, where its prematurity is bad enough without over-emphasis.

A similar point is made with respect to the Finale of the second version of the Fourth Symphony. In this instance, the complete recapitulation is for Simpson an artificially imposed solution which stands contrary to the demands of the material: [...IBruckner unhappily seems still to regard [the form] as aiming at a sonata recapitulation, following [the retransition] at once and abruptly with [the first subject] in E-flat on- the full orchestra. Tonally this is plain enough[...]but the sonata momentum is missing.^

The material between the coda and the end of the development, by reverting to the classical' formal archetype, is seen to hinder the progress of the form in a way which cannot be entirely counteracted by the monumental designs of the coda. Whilst it cannot be denied that the uncertainties suggested by the prolonged process of revision indicate that in both these works Bruckner encountered an acute compositional problem with respect to the burden placed upon the finale, by the teleological concept of symphonic form, nevertheless the views expressed above are flawed at least because the theoretical tools employed to deal with the music are markedly inadequate. Despite Simpson’s recognition of a conflict between instinct ^*^Simpson, R.-The Essence of Bruckner (London 1967, revised 1992), p.83. ^*^Ibid, pp.108-109.

224

and a duty to the demands of the classical sonata^ his judgements of the-relative successes of Bruckner’s symphonic finales are based primarily on whether or not they fulfil the criteria of a rather traditional notion of sonata form. ,Instead, we might characterise the problems of the Brucknerian finde as an attempt to resolve or overcome an inherent dualism between the legacy of the classical sonata and the modernistic procedures of the post-Beethovenian style. This dichotomy is by no means a specifically Brucknerian phenomenon, as Simpson’s conflict between instinct and form seems to suggest, but in fact forms an essential feature of the nineteenth-century symphony from Schubert onwards. The tendencies which Simpson identifies therefore represent Bruckner’s specific response to this problem, and the relative merits and demerits of his essays in the genre therefore cannot be considered independently of this context.

II A synoptic view of the Finale of the Eighth Symphony reveals an expanded sonata form, possessing three clearly distinguished subject groups: Ex.l Schematic Representation of the Form Exposition First Subject Group ‘ Second Subject Group bars:

1-68

69-134

Third Subject Group 135-252

Development bars: 253-436 Recapitulation First Subject Group bars: ' 437-546

Second Subject Group 547-582

Third Subject Group 583-646

Coda bars: 647-709 On every level Bruckner attempts in the Finale to resolve the variously manifest dichotomy between material content and means of organisation which has been observed in each previous movement. One sees this in a consideration of the thematic structure and wave form. The first subject group is composed of two component waves, bars 1 to 30 and 31 to 68; the first wave ascends to an apex ib- bars 25 to 30, the second subsides from an initial apex in bars 31 to 40. The

225

group as a whole locates its governing apex symmetrically at the climax of-the first component wave: Ex.2 Apex

Two thematic units are apparent; the first wave consists of two statements of the principal subject, which in itself yields three constituent motives: Ex,3

If

f

The grace-note present in motive ‘a’ also forms the substance of the string accompaniment, which is to become a continuous feature of the group as a whole. The second wave is in turn built entirely from an extended variant of motive ‘b’, thus: Ex.4

Extension of ‘b’

,

This subject group differs from its counterpart in the first movement in two significant respects. First, despite the superficial similarity of the wave structures, the function of the component formations is in fact markedly different. There is no distinction here between preparatory and definitive statements, neither is there any correspondence between the constitution of the two waves. Rather the definitive

V

statement of the theme is presented immediately in the first waVe; the second wave behaves instead as a thematic appendix to the opening statement. Secondly, the

226

syntagmatic process of thematic transformation which relates the first and-second subjects in the first movement finds no parallel here; the opening group appears as. a self-contained thematic unit. Indeed the process of thematic mutation, if anything proceeds in precisely the opposite fashion. The principal theme is systematically dissolved; in the second wave, the subsidiary theme is eventually relieved of its initial statement of motive ‘b’, such that by the end of the group the material displays no connection with the first subject save the accompanimental ostinato, and this is in turn dispersed in the final bars: Ex.5

As we have observed both in the first movement and in the Adagio, so too in the Finale Bruckner opposes a bipartite form in the first subject with a tripartite form in the second subject. Yet again the composition of the material is essentially different here. The three component sectiohs of the group, bars 69 to 98, 99 to 110 and 111 to 154, collectively form a single asymmetrical wave, the apex of which is located at the climax of section three (bars 117 to 122): Ex.6

Bars: 69

98

107

111

116

134

i

227

Three principal motives emerge from the subject, thus: Ex.7

The two subsequent statements of the theme, in bars 79 to 98 and 111 to 122, both function as varied extensions of the initial material. In the second version the cadence of the first phrase is amended, and the antecedent phrase is extended by ten bars; in the third version the first two hars of the theme are employed as the basis of an ascending sequence. As in the first subject, so also in the second the definitive statement of the- material is not presented as a goal but as a starting point. The opposition of the subject groups as a structural device is not therefore characterised in its thematic aspect by an opposition of types of thematicism, as has been witnessed in the first movement, but simply by the successive statement of themes in their definitive and initially varied forms. The wave/theme duality is thus in a crucial sense dissolved by the exposition of the Finale; the first subject does not act against the expository function of this region of the form, but rather cooperates with it. This trend continues in the third subject. In sharp contrast to the single smooth ascent which characterises the wave stmctufe of the third subject in the first movement, the material here displays a series of dynamic, textural and harmonic disruptions. A division into four subsidiary areas is apparent, bars 135 to 158, 159 to 182, 183 to 214 and 215 to 252. The first component wave ascends to an apex placed in the final two bars, and can be subdivided into two further subsidiary waves, delineated according to the repetition of material and phrase groups. Both succeeding waves participate in the disruption of the ascent initiated by the first wave. In bars 159 to 182 the effect of the continuous literal rise in pitch level which leads to B-flat at bar 283 is counteracted by the rapid drop in dynamic in bars 181 and 182, against which the inception of the next wave appears as a dislocation. Again, at the climax of bars 183 to 234, which might be taken as the apex of the whole group, the connection with the concluding cadential section is achieved by a complete break in the texture (bars 211 to 214). The wave stmcture of the third subject therefore emerges as follows:

228 Ex.8

Bars: 135

252

Three principal motived are established in this group, thus; Ex.9

c - variant of 'b'

subsidiary theme

'c' from second subject

The changed character of the exposition in the Finale is therefore substantiated by the structure of the third subject. The temporary resolution of the opposition of bipartite, symmetrical wave formations and tripartite, asymmetrical forms in favour of a single asymmetrical wave in the exposition of the first movement in abandoned here. Instead the third subject fragments the wave formation into discontinuous blocks. Similarly the statement of the third subject itself in the first wave again represents that material in its definitive form; all subsequent versions occur as variants or repetitions. Therefore, in this exposition the wave formations and thematic identities do not stand in a dichotomous relationship. For each theme the initial form is also definitive, whilst the temporary resolution of the opposition of wave forms which in the first movement lent prominence to the third subject has been replace by a structure in which the wave forms become progressively. more diffuse. Both parameters locate the first subject group as the most stable region of the form so far. Paradoxically, the exposition of this relationship also results in the abandonment of the relationship betweer; the gestural apices and the definitive thematic statements. A similar state of affairs exists with respect to harmony and tonality. Both component waves of the first subject constitute clearly distinguished fields. The first

ilir

piii

229

field segments further into two component fields, the second being a traisposed repetition of the first: Ex. 10

^Bani

0

_________________________ DlaionMsniUransposUlon operation

Both these fields comprise two regions of diatonic material connected by means of a :major| third -transposition operation. In each case the regional progressions emphasise subdominant relations, the first being an apparent I - flat VI motion, the second suggesting a vi - IV - ii -1 cadence. ■Similar procedures control the harmony of the second field; Ex. 11 Bars:

Diatonieism/transposirfon operation

Further segmentation reveals three areas of harmonic activity, bars 31 to 40, 40 to 48 and 49- to 68. The progression which constitutes the first segment proves harmonically elliptical despite its unambiguously triadic composition. Tf our point of orientation is to be the beginning of each phrase, then the octave C might be taken

230 as a tonic. The -flat-II - V -1 progression which precedes the return to C-in bars 34 to 35 lends credence to this interpretation.’ At the same time C itself is not represented by a triad but by a single pitch; as such it is immediately subsumed into the context of the following progression, either as 3 in A-flat pr as 5 of f. The problem is not alleviated by the second segment. Connection between the segments relies on the minor third transposition E-flat - G-rflat, and the internal composition of the second segment itself consists of two diatonic fragments related by the transposition operation E-flat - C-flat. The plagal cadence to C which constitutes the final segment is made possible only by the pivotal reinterpretation of the concluding E-flat triad of the second segment as III. The second field can therefore be described as a single-tonic field, controlled internally by a series of transpositions, which ultimately dispels the initial ambiguity surrounding C by reinterpreting the A-flat/f inflections of the first segment as part of a large-scale plagal motion. Again in the second subject group the tripartite wave form is supported by a tripartite field. Despite the evenmal modulation in preparation of the key of the third group, the suecessive recurrence of A-flat indicates similarities with the structure of a single-tonic field: Ex. 12

i

Bars-: Diatonic!^

Ti

Diatonicismisecond categoryfiransposition operation

V Diatomclsmisccond categorylfotmh category

ha

'»

■

-»

’ 'I

Transposition operattonldimoriltlsm

Three subsidiary fields are apparent, corresponding to the three wave formations suggested above. The first field subdivides into two component segments, being the first and second statements and varied elaborations of the theme. The two segments are differentiated by changes in the governing modes of progression. The first is exclusively diatonic; the ..progression simply effects a modulation to the relative minor. The harmonic structure of the second segment is more complex. The cadence in bar 83 and the ensuing continuation exploit the mixture of the D-flat and C modes through the application of the second and third categories of progression. Thus, the progression in bars 82 to 83 reinterprets the dominant of the relative minor of A-flat as I. The C - D-flat motion in bars 84 to 85 might therefore either be interpreted as a semitonal transposition operation, or else, in the wider context, as an interrupted cadence in F minor. The tonicisation of D-flat in the ensuing bars potentially results from the employment of either category. Both categories are similarly active in the progression between bars 89 and 98. The ascending progression in bars 89 to 93 comprises two minor third transposition operations, and the oscillation between D-flat and C in bars 93 to 98 involves the reinterpretation of the subdominant of D-flat as a Neapolitan harmony in F major. The two progressions are connected through an application of the second category; the goal of the ascent by transposition operation becomes a local Neapolitan relation of D-flat.

232

The ascending sequential repetition which constitutes the central field mixes diatonicism with applications of the fourth category of progression. In the first phrase group this category is employed once, in the pivotal use the, augmented sixth chord which concludes the phrase. The application is replicated in the second phrase, and the fourth category also accounts for the E7 - F resolution which occurs between bars 106 and 107. The third field then reverts to the mixture of diatonicism and transposition operation. The two categories are employed in alternation; the first segment follows two consecutive ascending minor third transpositions with a diatonic confirmation of the conclusive D major tonality, the second segment involves a diatonic dominant preparation of the key of the third subject group. The connective progression between segments is formed from the major third transposition D - G-flat. The opposition of first and second subjects as an opposition of types of field structure is maintained. A clearly goal-directed, bipartite progressive field which makes exclusive use of diatonicism and transposition operation is opposed in the second subject group by a tripartite stracture making recursive reference to the governing local tonality and embracing diatonicism, transposition operation and the second category of progression. Moreover, in the first subject group significant tonalities are always presented as local harmonic goals, whereas in the second subject Bruckner has made a structural, procedure out of the idea that successive variants of the theme should be distinguished by an increasingly mobile harmonic departure from the initial tonality. Segmentation of the third subject group reveals three principal fields: bars 155 to 158, 159 to 214 and 215 to 252. The first field is exclusively diatonic: Ex. 13

Diaionidsm (cont.)

Diatonicism {com.}

At no point does the continuous octave texture imply any modulation or relationship beyond the diatonic confines of the E-flat minor tonality. Both component phrase groups simply articulate a continuous dominant motion, the first countered by a return to the tonic, the second discontinued on V of F. In the second field three modes of progression prevail; Rx.l4 Dlatonlclsmlthird category

Diatonicism'third category (corn.) Diaronidsm

The first segment, bars 159 to 166, exploits all three categories. The relationship between phrases, and between the first phrase and the previous segment, is consistently the product of transposition operation. Within the first phrase the raised third which embellishes the last chord of the closing plagal cadence produces a relationship between the enclosing harmonies determined by the second category of progression. In contrast the second phrase is entirely diatonic.

234

^

Each of the ensuing segments, bars 167 to 174, 175 to 182 and 183-to 214, is internally consistent as a diatonic unit, but is related to the consequent phrase

I* ^

groups by non-diatonic means. Segments two and three are linked by njeans of the semitonal transposition operation F-G-flat, and segments three apd four exploit the

^

second category as a mode of connection, treating what is ostensibly the dominant of the local, relative minor at bar 183 as a fresh tonic in its own right. The long B-flat pedal which constitutes .segment four does not support any significantly

3

chromatic diversions. The ascbnt which occupies the octave registral transfer between bars 183 and 211 redefines B-flat as a dominant; the intervening

I

diminishe4 seventh chords between bars 199 and 202 destabilise B-flat as a local

%

tonic, and the culmination of the ascent on B-flat7 completes the process. Finally dominant implication is realised in the closing section. Altogether the final section prolongs a I - vi - VI - ii - I cadence in E-flat, with the one significant chromatic deviation of the progression in bars 231 to 238: Ex. 15

The connective transposition operation C - a-flat in bars 234 to 235 is not sufficiently pronounced to obscure the wider cadential implications of the phrase, in which sense the A-flat minor phrase simply functions as an inflected subdominant. Observe also that the large-scale descent by thirds which characterises the cadence is reflected in tjie more regional bass motion; the chromatic insertion of bars 234i to 238. interrupts the resolution of a bass progression in bars 231 to 233 which would otherwise have exactly replicated the larger progression. There is a certain discrepancy between the segmentation of the material of the third subject as U series of wave formations and as a compound of field stmctures. Specifically, the dynamic disjunction in bars 182 to 183 is not carried into the harmony, where we are forced to assume a continuous ascent from bar 175. Nevertheless, broadly speaking the field structure of the third group supports the

235 proce.dure identified with respect to the wave formations. Notwithstanding-the fact that the group is circumscribed by a single key, and therefore repfesents the first unequivocal single-tonic field of the movement, nevertheless no attempt is made to resolve the antithetical tendencies of the preceding subject groups. Instead the field structure broadly concurs with that of the second group. Since both areas of the form involve tripartite segmentations. Moreover, at least in the relationship of first and second fields the disjunction between fields is possibly more extreme than at any point in the second group. At the same time the function of the apex is changed; in the third group the placing of the gestural apex coincides with the most significant harmonic event, which is the provision of a doniinant preparation for the concluding tonality of the exposition. The composition of the fields in the exposition has a profound effect on the character of the background. As we have seen in the relationship between theme and wave formation, so also in these parameters the dichotomous relationship between field and background is undermined. In the first subject group the D-flat/C duality is not collapsed into the initial material, but is imposed onto the group as a whole as a tonal framework. In the first component field the theme and its transpositions establish D-flat and E-flat as successive tonal goals. In each case the preceding progression subordinates B-flat minor and C minor respectively as passing harmonies. Two significant ambiguities which played prominent roles in the negative tonal strategies of the first movement are thus temporarily resolved in this material. The uncertainty surrounding the functional significance of B-flat minor as against Dflat major is, at least at this point, comprehensively • resolved in favour of D-flat, and E-flat is robbed of its mediating function and occurs either as a relation of C minor, or else as a potential tonic in its own right: Ex. 16

The second field then instigates a three-stage preparation of C, via the implication of f/A-flat in stage one and the temporary insertion of G-flat/e-flat in stage two. The first subject raises a further issue which carries the consideration of tonal strategy some way beyond the position of the first movement. Explanation of the Structure of the subject in terms of its formulation of the D-flat/C duality, and in terms of its consequences for the sonata form, must take account of the fact that an explanation of the initial F-sharp as the enharmonic subdominant of D-flat does not elucidate the contextual sense of the harmony. The transposition operation D - bflat marks a division within the phrase which separates the initial pitch from the subsequent progression. As is gradually revealed in the course of the movement the first four bars of the theme point to a subordinate but nonetheless apparent area of tonal activity around E: Ex. 17

This region effectively exists as a tonal middleground between the C and D-flat polarities; preceding back through the cycle of fifths leads to G, proceeding forwards leads to D-flat. One sees that this region has been granted more and more prominence as the symphony has progressed. In the first movement it plays no part in the tonal strategy. In the Scherzo the sudden intervention of A major in both A1 and A2 proves to be a pivotal moment in the tonal structure. In the Trio and the Adagio E major is given a primary place in the background strategy, forming the goal of A1 in the former and the key of the second subject in the latter. The Adagio also employs a series of tonal phenomena which establish a relationship between E and the D-flat polarity, in particular the modal mixture D-flat/c-sharp and the E - G-flat relationship of the second subject. The relationship between field and background has crucially changed here. In effect the establishment of the governing relationships of the field and the essential relationships of the background have become the same procedure. The immediate introduction of two potential initial fundamental lines observed in the first movement is concomitantly abandoned. Again the material presents a potential 5 in D-flat and a potential 8 in C; however in this environment the fundamental' tones are not directly juxtaposed but instead placed at opposite ends of the group. The force of

237

the oppositioti is further nullified by the intervening progression, which-at least initially more strongly suggests the pairing of D-flat and E-flat: Ex.18

ini

m

ill

The principal tonal conflict of the work is still present within the first subject group, however-in this version it has not retreated from the field structure into the initial material but has expanded to involve the group as a whole. In this sense, in spite of the clear triadic harmony and unequivocal statement of harmonic gods, the exact tonal orientation of the material has become less rather than more explicit than in the first subject of the first movement. Because the tonal strategy has becohie synonymous with the field structure, it therefore also falls prey to its paratactical nature.- The field in reality, lends near equal prominence to each tonal goal, none of which might be cited as an overall tonic beyond the confines of the immediately surrounding progression. We see a similar tendency in the second subject.- The voice leading of the group thwarts interpretation from a Schenkerian position. The statement of the theme establishes what seems like an initial ascent to a local chromatic 8, albeit as a Kopfton deriving consonant support from a first inversion: Ex: 19 Bars:

@

in

However in the subsequent material no attempt is made to establish 8 as a structurally maintained pitch. In the first repetition of the theme the potential restoration of 8 is undermined by the interrupted cadence D-flat - C in bars 82 to

238 83, and in the apex statement the Kopfton in abandoned altogether, in favour of the chromatic ascent to D. Alternatively, we might take the initial A-flat itself as thestructurally significant pitch. In this way the head of the theme represents a possible 13 in Aflat, implied by the unison which begins the first and second statements, and realised by registral transfer in the octave expansion of the theme which opens the third statement: Ex .20

Bars:

E

Yet in reality the centrality of A-flat is in turn contingent upon the statement of t, in so. much as the recogmtion of a possible 13 is referentially dependent upon the moment at which 8 is established for its consonant support. Moreover, despite the maintenance of the possible 13, the imphcation that it might descend to degree "l remains entirely unfulfilled. More properly we might see the conflict between these two dependent voice-leading models, and their mutual negation, as forming an essential component of the background structure of the subject. On the larger scale the A-flat will be interpreted as an uppej neighbour note to the 8 posited for the C Urlinie, or as a coverihg 8 to the 5 of the D-flat Urlinie, suggested by the first

subject. Concurrently a second background process can be identified, which is the relocation of the C/D-flat conflict into the context of the new local tonality. The employment of the second and third categories of progression in the passage between bars 79 and 98 facilitates the immediate juxtaposition of A-flat, C and Dflat: Ex.21

239 The nature of the progression serves to obscure the potential function of D-flat as a subdominant to A-flat. In the first example the interpolation of C stands between A-flat and D-flat, such that one is forced to consider the immediate semitonal relationship above the larger-scale subdominant motion. The attempt to establish Aflat as a local doinihant in bars 89 and 90 is immediately counteracted by the subsequent minor third transpositions, and the cadential approach to D-flat in bars 93 to 95 instead finds C major in bars 96 to 98. The character of A-flat as a mediating tonality is therefore preserved; continually the harmony of this passage forces an ambiguity of functional orientation upon A-flat. such that it is unclear whether it should in the global context be considered as IX of C or VUI of D-flat. The second subject group therefore reveals two interrelated structural procedures. The background establishes two mutually dependent and ultimately unfulfilled potential voice-leading strategies, whilst the internal detail of the harmony seeks to reinforce the position of the governing local tonality in the context of the C/D-flat duality. The relationship between field and background continues the process of attempted synthesis recognised in the first subject group. The foreground organisation of the harmony again supports the intentions of the background; the process of statement and varied repetition which characterises the field structure, and specifically the harmonic departures which succeed the second and third statements of the theme, cfeate the circumstances through which the implied voice-leading structures of the group ^e denied any kind of fulfilment. Therefore, in similar fashion to the opposition of field structures, so at the background the first and second subject groups present conflicting models of - voice leading and tonal organisation; the first subject establishes its principal tonalities and associated voice leading procedures as goals, whereas the second subject establishes them as points of departure. In both subjects the instigation of associated fundamental tones does not produce any subsequent local descent towards 1, although this results in the respective examples from antithetical harmonic procedures. In the first subject the C/D-flat duality forms the controlling tonal framework of the group, whilst in the second group C and D-flat are present as internal harmonic details. We might also observe two concurrent background procedures in the third subject group. The bass motion and accompanying voice leading which establishes E-flat does so via the inclusion of a 4/§ mixture, arising from the large-scale progression from E-flat minor to E-flat major. The intervening harmony enacts a progressive stepwise unfolding of the E-flat - B-flat interval in the bass, such that the background of the group as a whole emerges thus:

Again we must locate this structure in the context of the C/D-flat polarisation. In this sense there is an essential difference between this exposition and the exposition of the first movement. In the latter example the ambiguity surrounding the function of E-flat is preserved; the comparable motion from e-flat to E-flat in the first movement conspicuously avoids reference to either the C or the D-flat / b-flat polarities, and therefore at the end of the exposition E-flat may plausibly be a relation of either tonality. However in the Finale the cadence to E-flat at the end of the exposition is immediately preceded by a passage which exhaustively reinterprets B-flat as a local dominant. Therefore the influence which b-flat has previously exerted over E-flat is temporarily annulled. Placing this structure in the wider context therefore produces the following -background reading: Ex.23

The opening and the end of the third group have become disjunct as tonal events within the double tonic structure. The initial E-flat minor refers to the D-flat / b-flat polarity, whereas the concluding E-flat major associates with the C polarity. In this

way the association of field and background is again preserved; the hamionic dislocation which separates the first and second component fields also serves to distance the initial and concluding tonalities. A general appraisal of the exposition is now possible. As has been continually stressed, the insistently antithetical relationship between the processes representing the field structure and the background observed in the first movement is not replicated here. Even within the exposition the burden of synthesis which the Finale undertakes can be seen to have taken effect. This is not to suggest that the exposition has thereby abandoned teleology as a formal principal; on the contrary in a number of senses the level of irresolution at the end of the third subject is possibly in advance of the comparative point in the first movement. This is particularly apparent in the large-scale voice leading, where at least by this point in the first movement the suggested voice-leading models had demonstrated some attempt at resolution. Yet it is to suggest first of all that the teleological orientation of the material is a province not only of the background but also of the harmonic fields, and secondly that at specific moments, for example the resolution of B-flat onto E-flat in the third subject group, the possibility of a later resolution is positively asserted. In suihmaiy, the exposition introduces two parallel processes. The first and second subject groups introduce two conflicting notions of harmonic organisation, a bipartite structure which locates its apex in the first part, and a tripartite structure which locates its apex as a goal. The two fields are represented by specific and contrasting configurations of the four categories of progression. The third subject does not attempt a local resolution of this opposition, but rather introduces a more disjunct version of the form of the second group. Concomitantly the first and second subjects introduce two opposed notions of tonal planning, the goal-directed establishment of C and its associated Kopfton in the first subject, and the recursive statement of A-flat and its continually unfulfilled voice-leading associations in the second. The respective conceptions of the double-tonic structure support this opposition; the imposition of the C/D-flat duality as a tonal framework in the first subject confronts its application as an internal harmonic inflection within a prolonged A-flat major in the second subject. Neither opposition receives any effective resolution in the third group. Absorption of B-flat into the context of Eflat at the end contributes to the dislocative character of the group by divorcing the initial and concluding tonalities, and the return to G as a Kopfton in the final cadence instigates no descent to 1.

242

III Accordingly, the. development behaves thematically in precisely the opposite fashion to the ‘synthetic’ notion of theme advanced by Kurth. The section in its broadest outline comprises four component waves, bars '253 to 284, 285 to 345, 345 to 385 and 385 to 437. The first wave perforins the function of a transition, and is constructed around a single asymmetrically placed apex: Ex .24

The second wave forms the gestural centre of the development. The wave unfolds an ascent in three stages, each stage culminating in a regional apex, the third of which forms the apex of the whole wave: Ex.25

The third wave comprises two subsidiary waves, each placing its apex as a closing gesture:

The retransitional wave pivots around a symmetrically placed apex, thus: Ex.27

243

The thematic stracture of the development relies on the manipulation-of four thematic units: the subject and subsidiary theme from the third subject group, the subsidiary theme from the second wave of the first subject group, and the first subject alone in the third and fourth waves. Treatment of the material does not proceed towards a definitive statement but carries out a process of developmental expansion in the Beethovenian sense. The first four phrases of the first wave restate the chosen material in a variety of transformations and fresh contexts. In the first phrase the subsidiary theme functions as a bassline; in the second rectus and inversus occur simultaneously in the outer parts, and also in canon with the

inversion at the distance of a bar. The third phrase retains only the rhythmic identity of the theme, whilst the fourth employs the inversion as a hassline. Between bars 269 and 280 the material is first of all reduced to a variant of its first two bars, and ultimately dissolved altogether. The essential thematic action of the development takes place in the second wave. The governing procedure is the idea that the material of the third subject should be gradually superseded by that of the first. To this end each successive apex involves the combination of a variant of the third subject and the subsidiary theme from the first subject group: The combinations are conceived such that the identity of the third subject recedes into the function of an accompanimental figure: Ex.28 1.

In the intervening spaces the third subject and its sequential extension are freely developed. Between the second and third apices this process is contracted to a two-

244

bar interjection; the third subject is thus allowed a final moment of developmental space before it is suppressed by the apex statement of the first subject subsidiary .theme. Both third and fourth waves are entirely concemetT with the principal material of the first subject. Each subsidiary wave of the third wave comprises three statements of the subject, th^ third elaborated with a sequential continuation. The fourth wave puts this process into reverse; here the two motives undergo a threestage process of separation. In bars 387 to 400 the subject is again stated and sequentially extended. Motive ‘b’ is then detached, and bars 401 to 412 elaborate the sequential repetition of motive ‘a’ alone. The ascent to the apex and subsequent descent to the beginning of the recapitulation then enact a similar sequential elaboration of motive ‘b’: Ex.29

We have thus observed two thematic procedures, dovetailed at the apex of the second wave; the successive replacement of the third subject with the first subject, and the subsequent extension and dissection of the first subject. The wave formations display similar tendencies, which is to say that they also develop or extend the structures of the exposition. Thus, the second wave form, just as it combines material of the first and second subjects, so it also mixes the wave structures of the two groups, through the formation of a tripartite process which is nevertheless constituted from clearly delineated binary units. Similarly, the third and fourth waves perform a retransitional function not only because they seemingly reassemble the thematic content of the first subject, but also because they set about reconstmcting the binary wave form associated with the first subject. Segmentation into harmonic fields exactly follows the composition of the wave formations. The first field thus corresponds to the initial transitional wave:

245

Ex.3Q

Further segmentation reveals two subsidiary fields, bars 253 to 264 and 265 to 284. The first segment employs a- mixture of' the second and third categories of progression. The internal relationship between first and last chord in each phrase involves the reinterpretation,of diatonic-progressions to produce non-diatonic largescale relationships, and the connection between the second and third phrases involves transposition operations by the major third and the semitone respectively. The material of the second segment is strictly diatonic as far as bar 271, and displays a single instance of the control of the fourth category of progression between 272 and 284, via the employment of a half-diminished seventh. second resolution is really the first in reverse;*

The

the intervening dominant seventh

results simply from the semitonal elaboration of the enclosing Tristan chord resolution. The subsequent harmony then reinterprets this chord as ii7, and the progression leading to the next field asserts a ii7 - V -1 cadence in e-flat. Internal chromaticism notwithstanding, the basic outline of the field establishes a motion from E-flat major to E-flat minor via G-flat. In the segmentation of the second wave a discrepancy arises between the general determination of the wave form and the segmentation according to harmonic structure. The principal difference concerns the distinction between second and third *’®Fdr the classification of this progression, see chapter 2. example 11, resolution 4.

V

246 waves. Harmonically, it proves more sensible to group the second apex, connective progression and final apex as a single segment, since this material as a whole comprises one single progression. The second segment will thus be considered as the material between bars 309 and 322, and the first wave will remain unchanged. The obvious division into ascent and apex which might be brought to bear on the first segment masks a unifying harmonic characteristic: Ex.31 ^__________ ________________ _____________ Otatonlcismlsecond category

>t-—y. f)S'. . ---------- 0 -"f ^

i

^ !>*-

f___ ? »

l._

L 1 i"i"t"H rnTP f'll 11 rnffTo' ^ ^^ ' ' cresc. ' ^ r .......t.:r ->f ■■ / ■ ■r..-^-........ tnfDretr f', F T:fr-^fEEW=^- "T* crese. ~ ^ ■mfbriU------ ^--1 -J--- cresc, >■1 i. L g ;:::|=^^=z4::.:.„; tnr eresCi

292

Controversy over the inclusion of this passage and the two similarly extended passages in the finale turns on the interpfetation of a letter from Bruckner to Felix •Weingartner, dated January 27th, 1891. See Auer, M. ('ed.VAnton, Bruckner: Gesammelte Briefe (Regensburg 1924), pp.237-238. 22. Bars 233-234 (Haas), 223-224 (Nowak) - oboes divided 1,2 on E-flat2 and 3 on E-flatl in Nowak and 1 on E-flat2 and 2,3 on E-flatl in Haas. Also oboe parts removed on final quaver of 224 in Nowak but present throughout in Haas. 23. Bars 235-236 (Haas), 225-226 (Nowak) - oboes 2 and 3 doubling lower E-flat in Haas, 1 and 2 doubling upper E-flat in Nowak. 24. Bars 245-246 (Haas), 235-236 (Nowak) - alto trombone held over the barline in Nowak, restricted to the last quaver of 245 in Haas. 25. Bar 253 (Haas), 243 (Nowak) - first and second violins released with the rest of the orchestra in'Haas, sustained for two further quavers in Nowak. 26. Bars 260-261 (Haas), 250-251 (Nowak) - trombones removed after first beat of 250 in Nowak, continued to end of phrase in Haas. Horn parts thus in Haas: Bx.4

and thus in Nowak: Ex.5

27. Bars 283-285 (Haas), 273-275 (Nowak) - second tuba doubling omitted on second chord of 273 and 275 in NoWak. 28. Bars 290-291 (Haas), 280-281 (Nowak) - held chord in horns connecting bars omitted in Nowak. Fourth Movement 1. Bars 210-230 (Haas) - passage inserted from 1887 version as follows: ■

I \

294

truncated in Nowak to the passage in bars 210-214 thus: Ex.7

TVomp.

295

2. Bars 253-258 (Haas) - cadence prolonged, corresponding to truncated vefsion of the same in bars 237-238 (Nowak). 3. Bars 399-406 (Haas), 379-386 (Nowak) - accompanying woodwind triplets omitted in Nowak apart from bars 385-386. 4. Bars 584-598 (Haas) - passage inserted from 1887 version with slight alterations to the scoring, thus: Ex.8

pp

297

replaced in Nowak with the following two-bar phrase (bars 564-566): Ex.9

UL

til

298

‘Oo’ now occurs at bar 567. 5. Bars 609-616 (Haas) - transition modulating to V of C corresponds to 580-582 in •Nowak; modulation is absent, and the augmentation at the cadence remains in E. 6. Bars 671-674 (Haas) - cadence extended thus: Ex.lO

truncated in. Nowak (bars 636-637) thus: Ex. 11 1.^

■

•a,,

'

.. 4—J1 r—=1

''.....

■

Ain

—i -4------------ —,j.. . ------------r-i------------i—1 . j 1— T—^ /

n

y I

n

V

n

y IV.1.-1-------- ^—1

T -

'

''—^

V

...........

.

'r'

^ ^

(/)

7. Bar 708 (Haas), 670 (Nowak) - octave minim in viola part in Haas in first half of bar becomes B-flat - D-flat crotchets in Nowak. 8. Bars 711-712 (Haas), 673-674 (Nowak) - viola part; sustained octave semibreve in Haas (711) becomes octave minim A-minim fifth D-A in Nowak (673). Octave A semibreve in Haas (712) becomes unison A semibreve in Nowak (674).

299

Selective

Bibliography

A: Books Abbate, C. and Parker, R.-Analyzing Opera: Verdi and Wagner (Berkeley 1989). Adorno, T.W.-Aesthetische Theorie (Frankfurt 1970); English Aesthetic Theon> tr. Lenhardt, C. (London 1984). -Philosophie der neuen Musik; English Philosophy of New Music tr. Mitchell,A.G. and Bloomster.V.W. (London 1973). -Mahler: Eine musikalische Phvsiognomik: English Mahler: A Musical Physiognomy tr. Jephcott, E. (Chicago 1992). -Versuch iiber Wagner (Frankfurt 1952); English In Search of Wagner tr. Livingstone, R. (London 1981). Bailey, R.(ed.) -Tristan und Isolde: Prelude and Transfiguration (New York 1985). Barford, P.-Bruckner Symphonies (London 1978). Beach, D. (ed.) -Aspects of Schenkerian Theory (New Haven 1983)^ Bent, I. (ed.) -Music Analysis - in the Nineteenth-Century vol.2 (Cambridge 1994). Boulez, P--Points de repere: English Orientations tr. Cooper, M. (London 1986). -Re.leves d'apprenti: English Stocktakings from an Apprenticeship tr. Walsh, S. (Oxford 1991). . . Dahlhaus, C.-Gmndlagen der Musikgeschichte: English Foundations of Music History tr. Robinson, J.B. (Cambridge 1983). -Der Idee der Absoluten Musik: English The Idea of Absolute Music tr. Lustig, R. (Chicago 1989). -Die Musik des 19.Jahrhunderts: English Nineteenth-Century Music tr. Robinson, J.B. (Berkeley 1989). -Schoenberg and the Ne\y Music tr.Puffett,lD . and Clayton, A. (Cambridge 1987). -Untersuchungen in die Entstehung der Harmonischen Tonalitat; English Studies ih the Origins of Harmonic Tonality tr. Gjerdingen,R,0. (Princeton 1990).

-Zwischen__Romantik und Moderne: Vier Stndi^n zur Musikgeschichte des Spateren 19.Jahrhunderts:! English Betwep.n Rnmantir.ism anrf Modernism tr. Whittall, M. (Berkeley 1980). Doemberg, E.-The Life and Symphonies of Anton Bruckner (London 1960). Dunsby, J.-Structural Ambiguity in Brahms: Analytical Approaches tn Ennr Works (Ann Arbor 1981)' f ' Dunsby, J. and Whittall, A.-Musical Analysis in Theory and Practice (London 1988). Forte. A.-The Structure of Atonal Music (New Haven 1973). Forte, A. and Gilbert.S.-Introduction to Schenkerian Analysis (New Haven 1982)[ George, G.-Tonalitv and Musical Structure (London 1970). Grout, D.J.-A History of Western Music (London 1968, reprinted 1988). Halm, A.-Die Symphonic Anton Bmcknens (Munich 1923). Harrison. D.-Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music (Chicago 1994). Katz. A.-Challenge to Musical Tradition (New York 1945). Kinderman, W. and Krebs, H (eds.) -The Second Practice of Nineteenth-Centurv Tonality (Lincoln 1996). Kostke, S. and Pavne.D.-Tonal- Harmony (New York 1984). Kurth. E.-Romantische Harmonik und ihre Krise in Wagners ‘Tristan’’ (Berlin 1922, reprinted Hildeshiem 1975). -Bruckner (Berlin 1925, reprinted Hildesheim 1971). -Ernst Kurth: Selected Writings tr. Rothfarb, L.A. (Cambridge 1991). Leibowitz, R.-Schoenberg et son Bcole: English Schoenberg and His School tr. Newlin, R. (New York 1970). Lester. J.-Analvtical Approaches to Twentieth-Centurv Music (New York 1989). -Compositional Theory in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass. 1993),. Lewis, C.-Tonal Coherence in Mahler’s Ninth Symphony (Ann Arbor 1984). McClary, S.-Feminine Endings: Music. Gender and Sexuality (Minneapolis 1991)’,. Meyer, L.-Emotion and Meaning in Music (Chicago 1956). Mickelson, W.C.-Hugo Riemann’s Theory of Harmony: a Study 1977).

(Lincoln

Narmour, E.-Bevond Schenkerism (Chicago 1977). Nattiez. J.-J.-Fondements d’une Sdmiologie de la Musique (Paris 1975). -Music Generate est Semiologie: English Music and Discourse tr. Abbate, C. (Princeton 1990). Newlin, D .-Bruckner. Mahler. Schoenberg (New York 1947).

301

Nowak,T.-Antnn Bruckner. Musik und Leben (Linz 1973). -fJhRr Anton Bruckner (Vienna 1985). PaHdisnn. M.-Adorno’s Aesthetics of Music (Cambridge 1993). -Adorno. Modernism and Mass Culture (London 1996). Parlfg P -Thp. Music of Claude Debussy (New Haven 1989))

Pople, A. (ed.) -nrbeorv. Analysis and Meaning in Music (Cambridge 1994). Pit-ft T.-Peetboven. Sibelius and the Profound Logic (London 1978). ppHlinh. H.-Rnickner and Mahler (London 1955).

P -Tonality - Atonalitv - Pantonality (London 1958).Rosen, C -The Classical Style (London 1971). -IThe Romantic Generation (London 1995). -SnriRta Forms (New York 1980). Rothfarb, t . A -F.msf TCurth as Theorist and Analyst (Philadelphia 1988). Rufer, T -Die. Komposition mit Zwolf Tonen (Berlin 1952); English Composition with Twelve Tones tr. Searle, H. (New York 1954). Pnghtnn T-The. Mu.sical Language of Berlioz (Cambridge 1983).

Sadai, V -Tnnal Harmony in its Systematic and Phenomenological Aspects - (Jerusalem 1980). Salyp.r, F.-Structural Hearing (London 1962). .qflmgnn T -Mnsic in Transition (London 1977). -Thft rambridge Companion to Chopin (Cambridge 1992) as p.d -The Music of Chopin (Oxford 1985). Schenker, TT -Per freie Satz: English Free Composition tr. Oster,E. (New York 1979).

, -Harmonielehre: English Harmony trans. Jonas,0. (Chicago 1954) -Per Meisterwerk in der Musik: Enghsh The Masterwork in Music

vols. 1 and 2, ed. Drabkin.W. (Cambridge 1994 and 1996). Schoenberg, A-Style and Idea: Selected Writings ed, Stein,L. (Berkeley 1975). -Harmonielehre: English Theory of_Harmony tr. Carter,R. (London 1978). Schonzeler, H.H.-Bruckner (London 1970). Seehter S.-Pie Grundsatze det musikalischen Komposition (Leipzig 1834-1835). Siegel. H.-Schenker Studies (Cambridge 1990). Simpson, R -The Essence of Bruckner (London 1967, reprinted 1992). -The Symphony (as ed.) (New York 1972). Stein. P..T -Hngo Wolfs Lieder and Exten.sions of Tonality (Ann Arbor 1985),|

302

Snhntnilf R-R .-Developing Variations (Mimeapolis 1991),. Thomson^ W.-Schoenberg’s Errof (Philadelphia 1991). Tovey, n F-Rssav.s in Musical Analvshs. Volume Two:^ Symphonies ..(.IlL Variations and Orchestral Polyphony (London 1935). Tutin, C.-Bruckner (Sevenoaks 1982). Van deri Tnnm. P.-The Music of Stravinsky (New Haven 1983)J Wagner, M.-Bruckner (Mainz 1983). Wason, R -Vlp.nnp.se Harmonic Theory from Albrechsberser to Schenker and Schoenberg (Atm Arbor 1985). , Watson, D.-Bruckner (Oxford 1975, second editidn 1996). Webern. A .-The Path to New Music (Philadelphia 1965). B: Articles Bailey, R.-'The Structure of the Ring and. its Evolution' in Nineteenth-Century Music vol.l (1977), pp.48-61. Baker, J.-'Scriabin’s Implicit Tonality’ in Music Theory Spectnim vol.2 (1980), pp.1-18. Boretz, B.-'Meta-Variations, Part IV; Analytical Fallout (1)' in Perspectives on New Music vol.ll (1973), pp.146-223. Brown, M.-'The Diatonic and the Chromatic in Schenker’s Theory of Harmonic Relations’in Journal of Music Theory, vol.30 (1986), pp. 1-34. Cohn, R.-‘Maximally Smooth Cycles, Hexatonic Systems, and the Analysis of Late-Romantic Triadic Progressions’ in Music Analysis vol.l5 (1996), pp.9-40. Cooke, D.-'Bruckner, Anton' in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians ed. Sadie, S. (London 1980), vol.3, pp.352-366. Dawson-Bowling, P.-'Thematic and Tonal Unity in Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony' in Music Review vol.30 (1969), pp.225-236. Forte, A.-‘Debussy and the Octatonic’ in Music Analysis vol.lO (1991), pp.l25170.

-‘Liszt’s Experimental Idiom and the Music of the Early Twentieth

Century’ in Nineteenth-Centurv Music vol.lO (1987), pp.209-228. -'New Approaches to the Linear Analysis of Music' in Journal of th,e American Musicological Society vol.41 (1988), pp.315-348. Friedheim, P.-'The Relationship Between Tonality and Musical Structure' in Music Review vol.27 (1966), pp.44-53.

303

. -'A Problem in Nineteenth-Century Musical Form; the i^iproach to the Tonic' in Music Review vol. 33 (1972), pp.81-92. Gilliam, B.-'The Two Versions of Bruckner's

Eighth

Syipphony'

in

Nineteenth-Century Music vol.l6 (1992), pp.59-69. Hawkshaw, P.-'The Date of Bruckner’s Nullified Symphony in D minor' in Nineteenth-Century Music yoL6 (1983), pp.252-2i53. Hsu, D.-'Ernst Kurth and liis Concept of Music as Motion' in Journal Of Music Theory yol.lO (1966), pp.2-17. Jackson, T.L.-'Bruckner’s Metrical Numbers' in Nineteenth-Century

Music

yoU4 (1990). pp.101-131. -'Sexuality and Structure in the Later Symphonies of Tchaikoysky' in Music Analysis yol.l4 (1995), pp.3-26. Kinderman, W.-'Directional Tonality in Chopin' in Chopin Studies ed. Samson, J. (Cambridge 1984), pp.59-76. -'Dramatic Recapitulation in Wagner’s Gotterdammerung’ in Nineteenth-Century Music yol.4 (1980), pp.101-112.

Korstyedt, B.-'The Third Version of Bruckner's Fourth Symphony' in Nineteenth-Century Music yol.20 (1996), pp.3-26. Kramer, L.-'The Shape of Post-Classical Music' in Critical Inquiry yol.6 (1979); pp. 144-153. -'The Mirror of Tonahty: Transitional Features of Nineteenth-Century Harmony'in Nineteenth-Century Music vol.4 (1981), pp. 191-208. Krebs, H.-‘Altematiyes to Monotonality in Early .Nineteenth-Century Music’ in Journal of Music Theory yol.25 (1981), pp.1-16. Lewin, D.-‘Amfortas’ Prayer to Titurel and the R61e of D in Parsifal: The Tonal Spaces of the Drama and the Enharmonic C-flat/B’ in Nineteenth-Century Music yol.7 (1984), pp.336-349. Lewis, C.-'Mirrors and Metaphors: Reflections on Schoenberg and NineteenthCentury Tonality' in Nineteenth-Century Music yol.ll (1987), pp.26-42. McCreless, P.-'Emst Kurth and the Analysis of the Chromatic Music of the Late Nineteenth-Century' in Music Theory Spectrum vol.5 (1983), pp.56-75. Mitchell, W.-'The Study of Chromaticism' in Journal of Music Theory vol.6 (1962). pp.2-31. Morgah, J.P.-'Dissonant

Prolongation:

Theoretical

and

Precedents' in Journal of Music Theory yol.20 (1976), pp.49-92.

Compositional

304

Parkany, S.-!Kurth’s Bruckner and the Adagio of the Seventh Symphony'm Nineteenth-rienturv Music vol.ll (1988), pp.262-281. Salzer,

F.-'Chopin’s op.25,no.3; The Scope of Tonality' in Music Forum voi.3

(1973), pp.281-290. Simpson, R.-'Bruckner and the Symphony' in Music Review vol.7 (1946), pp.35-40.

-'The Seventh Symphony of Bruckner' in Music Review vol.8

(1947), pp. 178-187. Smith, CJ.-'The Functional Extravagence of Chromatic Chords' in Music Theory Spectrum vol.8 (1986), pp.94-139. Stein, D.-'The Expansion of the Subdominant in the Late Nineteenth-Century' in -Tournal of Music Theory voL27 (1983), pp. 153-180. Subotnik, R.-R.- ‘The Message of Musical Semiology’ in Criticd Inquiry vol.4 (1977-1978), ppr741-768. Swift, R.-‘l-Xn-99: Tonal Relations in Schoefiberg’s Verkldrte Nacht ‘ in Nineteenth-Ceriturv Music vol.l (1977), pp.3-14. Thomson, W.- ‘A Functional Ambiguity in Musical Structure

in Music

Perception vol.l (1983), pp.3-27. Travis, R.-‘Tonal Coherence in the First Movement of Bartok’s Fourth String Quartet’ in The Music Foruba voL2 (1970), pp.298-372. -‘Towards a New Concept of Tonality’ in Journal of Music TheoiY vol.3 (1959), pp.257-284. Wintle, C.-‘The “Sceptred Pall”: Brahms’ Progressive Harmony’ in Brahms..^ Eiopraphical. Documentary and Analytical Studies ed. Musgrave, M. (Cambridge 1987), pp. 197-222. r.r Additional Materials Proctor, n-The Technical Basis of Nineteenth-Century Chromatic Tonality Ph.D. Thesis (Princeton 1978).

5 uNiVERsrrv

; URRARY i GAWBRIOQE