Saturday,
1:30–3:45 p.m.
Room 2330
Unity Revisited: Another Look at Schubert’s Moment Musical, op. 94, no. 2
The sudden harmonic shifts, remote tonal regions, and discontinuity of gestures in Schubert’s works have often posed interpretive challenges for music scholars. In an effort to rationalize these idiosyncrasies by relating them to a unified whole, some scholars have retooled pre-existing analytical systems by extending concepts of diatony; others have sought to devise new systems altogether, or have turned to hermeneutic models. What seems to fuel this drive toward integrating disparate musical events is an aesthetic of unity. This paper asks what other options might be available to us, and how pursuing alternatives to an aesthetic of unity can affect our understanding of Schubert's music.
Using the Moment Musical, op. 94, no. 2, as a case in point, this paper will suggest that certain pieces can be thought of in terms of romantic irony, because they seem to interrupt or undo conceived notions of tonality and form, engaging in a dialogic relationship with harmonic and formal structures from the past. The paper will (1) provide an alternative to perceiving Schubert’s music as modeled on a monologic, unified consciousness, a view that resists the pressure to explain idiosyncratic musical events as contributing to a greater whole; (2) show how Schubert’s use of tonality and large scale organization can coexist with notions of conventional diatony and form, and need not be understood as either a derivative of these customary procedures or as independent from them, inviting us to reflect on and rethink larger issues of historical continuity with regard to tonal and formal practice.
Progressive Trends in Variation Form: Robert Schumann’s Piano Sonata in F minor, op. 14, Quasi Variazioni
Entitled Quasi Variazioni, the third movement of Robert Schumann’s Piano Sonata in F minor, op. 14, displays features that are not usually associated with variation form. In a typical eighteenth- and nineteenth-century variation set, the theme is often a self-contained unit, whose form and voice leading are often preserved throughout the set. But in the case of Schumann’s op. 14, the theme presents an unusual tripartite ABC form, its half cadence ending evoking the tradition of continuous variation. Along with the theme’s peculiar formal plan, the variations also exhibit marked differences from the theme in form and middleground structure. The factor that contributes to these differences is the manner in which Schumann treats the theme. Instead of regarding the theme as an entity to be varied as a whole, Schumann treats the theme’s voice-leading and harmonic elements as discrete components that are developed independently of one another. By reworking and combining these elements, Schumann progressively transforms the form and middleground of the theme. Significantly, these changes serve a global purpose. Variations 1 and 2 complement and provide harmonic and melodic closure to the theme. Variations 3 and 4 are structurally more remote from the theme than Variations 1 and 2. They rework the signature motivic, harmonic, and voice-leading elements from the theme and Variations 1 and 2. Variations 3 and 4 are therefore related to the theme only indirectly, via Variations 1 and 2.
Reconstructing Hugo Riemann’s Theory of Harmonic Functions
To judge from its reception by subsequent theorists, Hugo Riemann’s theory of harmonic functions was probably his single most important contribution to the study of music theory. Unfortunately, however, secondary accounts have greatly simplified Riemann’s ideas through the elimination of two crucial components: hierarchy and musical context.
The present study reincorporates hierarchy into Riemann’s theory through his concept of feigning consonance and demonstrates the theory’s dependence upon musical context. This shows the true level of sophistication in Riemann’s theory and its value as an interpretive analytical tool. The paper also critically engages the secondary accounts of his theory as well as many of the criticisms leveled against it. In particular, the paper addresses the interpretations of Riemann in the work of David Lewin and Brian Hyer, as well as criticisms in the writings of Carl Dahlhaus.
The paper also demonstrates similarities between Riemann and Daniel Harrison’s theory of scale-degree functions, and between Riemann and Eytan Agmon’s prototype-theoretical approach to harmonic function. In addition, the paper examines the implications of Riemann’s reconstructed theory for neo-Riemannian analysis, and outlines some important similarities and differences between these two approaches.