Jump to content

Symphony (Webern)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Symphony, Op. 21
Symphony (or chamber or miniature symphony)[1] by Anton Webern
Opening with tone rows labeled by Dmitri Smirnov
Opus21[2]
Perioddie Neue Musik (20th-century music)
LanguageGerman
Composed1927–1928
DedicationWebern's youngest daughter Christine Mattl (née Webern)[3]
Duration10–20 minutes[4]
MovementsI. Ruhig schreitend
II. Variationen[5]
Scoring1 clarinet[5]
1 bass clarinet
2 horns
1 harp
strings senza bassi
Premiere
Date18 December 1929 (1929-12-18) (world premiere)[6]
LocationTown Hall, New York[6]
ConductorAlexander Smallens[6]
PerformersOrchestra of the League of Composers[6]

Anton Webern's Symphony, Op. 21 was his first twelve-tone orchestral work. Written between 1927 and 1928,[7] the work is noted for its intricate structure, abstraction,[8] and Alpine topics.[9] It is a two-movement chamber or miniature symphony of 10–20 minutes, and the influence of Gustav Mahler is audible from the very beginning. Alexander Smallens conducted the world premiere at New York's Town Hall on 18 December 1929.

Historical background

[edit]

Webern enjoyed escaping to the quiet otherworldliness of the high mountains as an alpinist, and he saw these landscapes in distinctly spiritual or utopian terms ("up there" near "the heavens").[10] Such topics are present in many of his works.[11] He drew on Mahler's prior representation of natural spaciousness and stillness in his own music.[12]

The years Webern wrote his symphony (1927–1928), he visited his childhood home and mountains with friends and family. In November 1927 he and Norbert Schwarzmann, a physician and patron,[13] attempted the Hochschwab starting at night, but weather turned them back. In May 1928, he and Rudolf Ploderer attempted the Schneealpe (his favorite mountain) in the snow. He revisited in July, reaching the summit with his wife Wilhelmine and their children. Then they celebrated his cousin Ernst Diez [de]'s birthday in Vordernberg and visited his sisters Maria and Rosa in Klagenfurt. He visited their former country estate, the Preglhof, and family grave sites in Schwabegg and Annabichl [de]. From the cemetery grounds he collected and kept flowers along with photos as souvenirs. In August he, his thirteen-year-old son Peter, and Ploderer climbed the Hochschwab; they overnighted in the Schiestlhaus [de] and saw many mountain goats.[14]

With his Symphony done, Webern wrote on 6 August 1928 to his friend, the poet Hildegard Jone,[15] who he had known for two years, and with whom he looked forward to collaborating, that he understood art to mean "bringing a thought into the clearest, simplest, i.e. 'most comprehensible' form."[16] He agreed with Jone that "progress is made ... inwards."[16] "I have never placed myself in opposition to ... masters ... [and] have always ... endeavored ... as they did: to represent ... [what] is given to me to say", he continued.[16] He criticized then neoclassicism as such, which he said mimicked styles without a proper understanding. Schoenberg's, Berg's, and his music was "most primary and personal", he emphasized. "[We] fulfill [what] remains ... the same through our means", he explained.[16]

Orchestration

[edit]

Webern's symphony was part of a turn to more economic orchestration compared to his early works. Its composition partly coincided with his August–September 1928 revision of his Op. 6 orchestral pieces (1909, arr. 1920), in which he substantially reduced the "extravagant" wind instrument section, hoping for performances.[17] The same summer, he also began to arrange his Five Movements for string quartet, Op. 5, for string orchestra (including double basses), using octave doublings in the upper strings.[18] Once Webern finished his Symphony, the League of Composers asked him for a chamber orchestra work. He wrote Claire Raphael Reis that the strings could be reduced to solo parts for them to give the world premiere of the symphony, but he wrote in his diary: "Better with multiple strings."[19] The published score indicates solo and tutti string parts.[5]

Among the winds, Webern used only clarinets and horns, both featuring relatively wide ranges and each with some folk, pastoral, or rustic topicality. Both instruments had long been associated with these topics and with one another in prior art and music.[20][a] The clarinet and its antecedents were used prominently to evoke these associations in Viennese classical or popular music, as in Schrammelmusik, the minuet of Mozart's Symphony No. 39, or Schubert's Hirtenmelodien and Hirtenchor from his incidental music to Rosamunde.[21] In depicting the "awakening of Nature" (as though from the furthest reaches of audibility), Mahler ultimately scored the faint opening hunting calls of his Symphony No. 1 for pianissimo clarinets (in their chalumeau register) instead of (possibly off-stage) horns.[22]

Julian Johnson, while cautioning against making too much of it, noted that the horns opening Webern's Symphony were "the archetypal musical symbol of distance and wide alpine spaces".[23] For Charles Rosen, horn calls were symbols of memory, distance, absence, or regret.[24] Brahms thus exploited them in the Alphorn calls of his Symphony No. 1 (at the Più andante) to summon the idea of nature and to express a sense of transcendence.[25] Mahler used them to open his Symphony No. 9, where (along with other instruments) they contribute to the sense of an alpine landscape.[26] He used them earlier to evoke distance.[27][b]

Form and tone row

[edit]

A. Peter Brown called Webern's the most formally unified symphony in the genre, alluding to its parsimonious treatment of musical elements or parameters.[31] Webern conceived of it as such, saying in his 1933 lecture series The Path to the New Music that "the same law applies to everything" and that variation was "the primeval form", resulting in "the most comprehensive unity".[32] "All the masters of the past", he said, felt this "urge to create unity".[32] For example, in a canon, he said, "everyone sings the same thing".[32] Some of the "old methods", like canon cancrizans (with retrograde motion) or mirror canon (with inverted motion), became development techniques in tonal music, he explained, leading to "refinement of the thematic network".[32]

He used the same tone row in both movements:[31]

       "P→" signifies the forwards direction to read the row's prime form.
       "←R" signifies the backwards direction to read the row's retrograde form.

\new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" } \relative c'' { \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \time 12/2 a2^"P→" fis g gis e f \bar "!" b bes d cis c ees^"←R" }

       "I→" signifies the upside-down direction to read the row's inverted form.
       "RI→" signifies both the backwards and upside-down direction to read the row's retrograde inverted form.

\new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" } \relative c'' { \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \time 12/2 a2^"I→" c b bes d cis \bar "!" g gis e f fis ees^"←RI" }

This tone row comprises chromatic hexachords related by retrograde inversion at the tritone.[33] Since row is divided into two symmetrical parts, and the second half is a mirror image of the first half, it has only 24 permutations, not the usual maximum of 48.[31] Webern often used this derived row structure.[34]

It comprises the tetrachords [0,1,2,3] and [0,1,6,7]:

\new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c' { \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic <fis g gis a>1^\markup { \teeny [0,1,2,3] } <bes b f e>^\markup { \teeny [0,1,6,7] } <c cis d ees>^\markup { \teeny [0,1,2,3] } }

It comprises the trichords [0,1,3] and [0,1,4]:

\new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c' { \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic <fis g a>1^\markup { \teeny [0,1,3] } <e f gis>^\markup { \teeny [0,1,4] } <bes' b d>^\markup { \teeny [0,1,4] } <c cis ees>^\markup { \teeny [0,1,3] } }

Movements

[edit]

The symphony is in two movements. Webern initially outlined his plan:[35]

  1. Rondo: lively—sun
  2. Variations: moderately
  3. Free form: very calmly—moon

Then he considered:[35]

  1. Variations
  2. Rondo (Scherzo, march-like)
  3. Slowly

Webern's first sketch (for what he was then uncertain about calling a symphony) is dated November–December 1927, and he was initially considering including at least one double bass.[35] He finished the "variation movement" during or after March 1928.[35] In June or July 1928, he finished what he described to Berg as "an Adagio in canonic form throughout", deciding it would be the center movement (of what he had now decided to call a symphony).[36] Webern began an apparent third movement in August 1928 but decided against it, citing the example of Beethoven's two-movement piano sonatas and Bach's two-movement (overture–dance suite) orchestral suites.[37] Finally he decided to reverse the prior order of the movements; thus his final plan became:[38]

  1. "canonic Adagio"
  2. "variation movement"

In the final score, Universal Edition published Webern's Symphony as follows.[5]

I. Ruhig schreitend

[edit]

Demonstrating Webern's early music studies, the first movement consists of four lines in a double canon (by inversion) with frequent palindromes.[39][c] Anne C. Shreffler noted Webern's reliance on linear, song-like writing,[41] an observation sometimes made of Mahler.[42][d] One canon features Ländler-like lilting melodic repetition on legato strings and winds, representing an orderly pastoral topic.[43] The other canon is more percussive, even accompanimental in texture, qualities which Webern crafted after drafting the canon's melody. To this end, he used ornaments like acciaccature; articulations like staccati; instrumentation with the harp's plucked timbre; and musical techniques like double stops, mutes, pizzicati, string harmonics, and sul ponticello.[44]

Brown noted that this canonic structure may be difficult for most listeners to perceive.[31] Michael Spitzer emphasized Webern's treatment of the second canon as contributory.[43] Webern's orchestration and interlacing of the voices, as well as his use of rests and fixed (or "frozen") register, Friedhelm Döhl considered, are the factors that make the canonic writing difficult to hear, particularly after the opening.[45] The register of each pitch is fixed in the exposition and recapitulation.[46]

The first movement is arguably in a concise, quasi-sonata form with superimposed elements[47][e] and a rounded binary appearance.[49][f] In the traditional Classical manner, its exposition (mm. 1–26) is repeated, as is the combined whole of both the development (mm. 25–44b) and recapitulation (mm. 42–66b), before ending in what Kathryn Bailey Puffett called a stretto and what Wolfgang Martin Stroh called a stretto coda (mm. 61–66).[52][g] Webern articulated each of these sonata-form functions and some of their subsections with a brief ritardando (deceleration) or calando (deceleration and quieting).[31]

§1. Exposition, or 𝄆 A 𝄇

[edit]

Brown described the opening as "almost strictly Klangfarbenmelodie ... pitch and color".[31] Webern sketched the first several bars painstakingly through many successive iterations,[54] and the opening has been compared to that of Mahler's Symphony No. 9. Though Webern had been unable to attend the Ninth's 1912 premiere, he played through it with Alban Berg and Heinrich Jalowetz, and he wrote Arnold Schoenberg that it was "inexpressibly beautiful".[55] Spitzer noted similarities of timbre and rhythm, describing the music of each, for horn duet, harp, and "rumbling" lower strings, as "evocative of natural expanse".[43] Julian Johnson agreed with Spitzer, noting their similar tempo indications—Webern's Ruhig schreitend (Calmly paced) and Mahler's Andante comodo—as well as the allusion to walking.[23][h] Though Webern often used the indication ruhig (or its variants), he frequently did so in music he associated with personal loss and landscapes.[56]

In terms of motives, Stroh argued that the opening horn fanfare undergoes diminution (partly by acciaccature), transposition, and further transformation:[57]

Opening fanfare, mm. 1–4, horn II only[58]
\relative c' { \clef bass \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "French horn" r4 a2_\markup { \tiny (hn. II) }\p r4 | fis'2-- r4 fis4-- | g,,1( | aes'1) | }
First variant, mm. 6–8, clarinet only[59]
\relative c'' { \clef treble \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "clarinet" e2_\markup { \tiny (cl.) }\mp-- r4 f,,\p-- | b'1( | bes,) \> | \! }
Figure with acciaccatura, mm. 14–15, violin I only[60]
\relative c' { \clef treble \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "pizzicato strings" r4 a4^"pizz."_\markup { \tiny (vln. I) }\p-. r4 \set Staff.midiInstrument = #"string ensemble 1" \acciaccatura bes8 e'4^"arco"\mp--| r4 ees,\p-- r2 | }

Dora A. Hanninen noted Webern's fairly plain realization of tone-row structure here in tetrachords.[61] She wagered that these tetrachords would be heard, at least in the main (melodic) canon, by almost anyone listening for them (notwithstanding Webern's pitch inversions, timbral changes, and repeated rhythms and articulations, she noted).[62] For Brown, Webern's tetrachordal writing here seemed "almost ... to contradict the row's underlying [trichordal] structure".[31]

Döhl (1967) followed Wallace C. McKenzie (1960) in noting that the pitch space of Webern's entire exposition has fixed register.[63] The twelve pitch classes are fixed on thirteen pitches with an axis of symmetry at A♮3, the first pitch of the symphony.[63] As the tritone of A♮, pitch class E♭ appears as E♭4 or E♭3, revolving symmetrically around A♮3.[63] (In the music, Webern does not double E♭ at the octave.)[45] The intervals generally narrow in the middle register of this space.[63] In this sense, Webern's use of fixed register departs from the convention of voicing tones high above the bass (like overtones above the fundamental tone in the harmonic series, from which Döhl held such conventional voicing derives).[63] Döhl mused that Webern's concentrically fixed pitches formed something of a "constellation" with its own internal relations, thus configured, whereas previously a given tonic would have exerted "gravitational" pull.[45]

Concentric conception of pitches fixed in register around A♮3 in mixed intervals, mm. 1–25[64]
\new StaffGroup << \new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c'' { \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 1 = 100 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "piano" e1^" P4" b1^" P4" ges1^" m3" ees1^" M2" des1^" m3" bes1^" m2" a1 } \new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c, { \clef bass \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "piano" d1_" P4" g1_" P4" c1_" m3" ees1_" M2" f1_" m3" aes1_" m2" } >>

Siegfried Borris (1966) conceived of this as "two symmetrically interlocking columns of sound" in fourths around A♮3:[65]

Symmetric conception of pitches fixed in register around A♮3 in fourths, mm. 1–25[65]
\layout { \context { \PianoStaff \consists "Span_stem_engraver" } } \new StaffGroup << \new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c { \set PianoStaff.connectArpeggios = ##t \clef treble \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \set PianoStaff.connectArpeggios = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "piano" ees'1 s1 <cis fis b e>1 } \new Staff \with { \remove "Time_signature_engraver" \remove "Bar_engraver" } \relative c, { \clef bass \override Stem #'transparent = ##t \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "piano" <d g c f bes>1 a''1 <dis, gis>1 } >>

Borris emphasized that this rotation was audible in that A♮3 and F♯4, the first two pitches of the opening horn fanfare,[58] are subsequently related to D major via recurring pitches D♮2, G♮2, and C♮3 as fixed in the bass.[66] The repetition of the exposition in fixed register throughout only amplifies this, he continued.[66] He argued that this "rotating sound space", i.e., the fixed rotation of pitches within a relatively narrow register (from D♮2 to E♮5), contributed to the sense of calm and stability in the exposition.[66]

In m. 13, Oliver Fürbeth[i] heard a D-major sonority in the compound major third between the cellos' D♮2 and the violas' F♯4[71] (confirmed by the E♮4 harp harmonic and the second horn's and cellos' iterations of C♯4).[72] The major third stands out relative to its surrounding sevenths and ninths, Fürbeth wrote,[73] and is further emphasized given the two-part texture and the higher position of the F♯ relative to low position of the D♮.[71] Moreover, he argued, the F♯ on the downbeat of m. 13 is the last of three notes assigned to the violas in the longest phrase in the exposition (m. 11–13):[74] after a crescendo on E♮, it is approached by an F♮ on the preceding upbeat.[74][j]

§2. Development – Recapitulation, or 𝄆 B A' 𝄇

[edit]
Development, or 𝄆 B –
[edit]

In the development, the registral range is expanded from three octaves and two semitones to four and a half octaves in the development, and the horns play only four notes.[78] Brown noted that the melodic lines begin to arc more sharply and that dynamic markings increase.[31] Bailey Puffett held that the development related less musically than conceptually to the exposition.[78] But Stroh heard the transformation of an additional variant from the exposition in the clarinet figure opening the development, and held that passages mm. 9–13 and mm. 25b–28 were motivically linked:[79]

Additional variant, mm. 9–10, cello only[80]
\relative c, { \clef bass \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Score.currentBarNumber = #9 \bar "" \set Staff.midiInstrument = "string ensemble 1" r4 d2._\markup { \tiny (vlc.) }\pp~ | d2. cis''4\p( | c,2.) r4 | }
Development figure, mm. 25b–28, clarinet and cello only[81][k]
\new StaffGroup << \new Staff \relative c'' { \clef treble \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "clarinet" r4 e2._\markup { \tiny (cl.) }\pp~ | e2. g8( fis,8-.) | r4 e'2.\pp~ | e2. cis8( d'8-.) | } \new Staff \relative c { \clef bass \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "string ensemble 1" r1 | r4 c2.^"Alle (m. Dpf.)"_\markup { \tiny (vlc.) }\pp~ | c2. ees8( d'8-.) | r1 } >>

Like Fürbeth, Stroh noticed "tonale Einschläge" ("tonal effects"), but only in the development (C-major sonority, mm. 27 ff).[83][l] Though the end of a development was traditionally climactic in many nineteenth-century symphonies, Webern's ends merely with one eighth note (m. 45) scored for the harp at ppp on the highest pitch of the entire movement.[31][m]

Recapitulation, or – A' 𝄇
[edit]

Relative to that of the exposition, the music of the recapitulation is generally louder, quicker, and higher in pitch.[85] It is more melodically fragmented, ornamented (with acciaccature), registrally expansive (by a tritone), rhythmically erratic, and timbrally varied (with harmonics and mutes) despite sharing the same tone-row structure.[85] Webern's use of arching lines and more frequent dynamic markings in the development intensifies in the recapitulation, heightening the expressivity of the music.[31] Stroh heard the recapitulation as thematically linked to the opening:[86]

Reprise theme, mm. 42b–45, viola only[87]
\relative c'''' { \clef treble \override Staff.TimeSignature.style = #'numbered \time 2/2 \set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t \tempo 2 = 50 \accidentalStyle dodecaphonic \set Staff.midiInstrument = "string ensemble 1" r2 r4 r8 a8^"m. Dpf."^\flageolet_\markup { \tiny (vla.) }\fp~( | a2.^\flageolet fis,,4) \set Staff.midiInstrument = #"viola" | r8 fis8^"Solo"\pp( g'2.)^\flageolet | r8 g8^\flageolet(\> gis,8) \! r8 r2 | }

In the stretto coda, the texture becomes leaner.[31] There are quick, shifting figures of five to three eighth notes (not including acciaccature), mostly in the violins and violas.[88] The horns play one note each.[88] The motivic material is reduced to a wisp of two notes and finally one muted tone marked with a diminuendo, like the morendo ending of many nineteenth-century slow movements.[31]

II. Variationen

[edit]

The second movement comprises nine small, continuous sections replete with palindromes:[89][n]

  1. Thema, Sehr ruhig —
  2. Variation 1, lebhafter —
  3. Variation 2, sehr lebhaft —
  4. Variation 3, wieder mäßiger —
  5. Variation 4, äußert ruhig —
  6. Variation 5, sehr lebhaft —
  7. Variation 6, marschmäßig, nicht eilen —
  8. Variation 7, etwas breiter —
  9. Coda

Each of these is eleven measures long, for a total of 99 measures.[51] The theme is fragmented into motives and the variation developmental. Bailey Puffett noted not only the use of dynamics, register, rhythm, tempi, texture, and timbre for Classical forms of surface-level variation, but also the use of more developmental devices like inversion and retrograde, augmentation and diminution, imitation, and some octave displacement.[o] All of the variations are canons.

Danielle Hood described the fourth variation, identified by Webern as the midpoint, as a "waltz/Ländler double".[92] In the fifth variation's cowbell-like harp octaves and close, stomping string dissonances, Theodor W. Adorno heard the "soulful sound" of the Almabtrieb, delighting Webern.[93][p] Fürbeth found Webern's solo violin melody and its retrograde response at the end of the symphony (mm. 91–97) not unlike Mahler's solo violin melody and its retrograde motion at the end of the Ninth's first movement (zögernd, mm. 444–446).[95] Neither are merely palindromes, Fürbeth wrote, but gestures of interiority and closure, in that both melodies are texturally exposed by sparse accompaniment and foregrounded by pauses.[95]

Tempo and total duration

[edit]

The reported duration of Webern's Symphony varies substantially from approximately ten to perhaps as many as twenty minutes.[4] The published score gives a duration of ten minutes.[96] Webern wrote Schoenberg in September 1928 estimating "almost a quarter of an hour" for the first movement and "about six minutes" for the second, or "about twenty minutes of music" in total.[96] Conductors' approaches have varied significantly, but Webern's ideas about his music having a longer duration or slower tempi have generally not been realized in practice.[96] This problem is not exclusive to the Symphony, as Webern gave conductor Edward Clark estimates of seventeen minutes for the Op. 5 arrangement and ten minutes for the Op. 10 orchestral pieces, total durations nearly twice as long as what is the case in most performances.[96]

Reception

[edit]

Premieres

[edit]

Alexander Smallens and the Orchestra of the League of Composers gave the world premiere at New York's Town Hall on 18 December 1929, meeting jeers.[97] The same month, Webern wrote to Schoenberg that Otto Klemperer, Hermann Scherchen, and Leopold Stokowski had all expressed interest.[98]

At the Vienna Konzerthaus (1930), Webern himself conducted an ensemble including the Kolisch Quartet and members of the Wiener Staatsoper, flanking his Symphony with Brahms's Piano Quartet No. 2 (Eduard Steuermann, piano) and Beethoven's Septet. Josef Reitler [de] wrote in the Neue Freie Presse that "barbaric ... soullessness is foreign [to Webern]", contrasting him with Béla Bartók, Igor Stravinsky, and the Ernst Krenek of Jonny spielt auf.[99]

Listeners laughed in Berlin (April 1931), where Klemperer conducted.[100] He had only two weeks to prepare.[101] Heinz Tietjen was defunding the Krolloper ostensibly for its poorly attended modernist repertoire.[102][q]

Scherchen conducted the London premiere at the summer 1931 International Society for Contemporary Music Festival. Prompted by Schoenberg, Edward Clark had invited Webern to conduct. Webern declined, citing travel fatigue and his desire to focus on composition. There was also low remuneration, recent bad press, and as noted in his diary earlier that year: "Need for quiet and reflection."[110]

Klemperer programmed the Symphony again in 1936 Vienna, likely on Schoenberg's advice, but did not adhere to Webern's desired performance practice.[111]

Composers

[edit]

Luigi Dallapiccola studied Schoenberg's and Webern's music especially after World War II.[112] He carefully read and published a review of René Leibowitz's Schoenberg et son école, which described Webern's techniques in the Symphony, like its double-inverted canons and palindromes.[113] Dallapiccola's subsequent music featured axial symmetry, canons, and four-part tone-row writing likely modeled in part on Webern's Symphony.[114] The Goethe-Lieder (1953) have palindromes.[115] An Mathilde (1954) features a tone-row form in each of four voices.[116] Parole di San Paolo (1964) and the second movement of Webern's Symphony both deploy a rest or fermata at their center (m. 50 in both cases).[117]

Karel Goeyvaerts noted proto-serial schemes of articulations, dynamics, and register, but not time (meter, rhythm, or tempo) in Webern's Symphony.[118] George Rochberg noted the "objectified, mensural" relation of pitch and time in Webern's later instrumental œuvre as a whole.[119] Karlheinz Stockhausen applied the Symphony's specific row in Klavierstücke VII (1954–1955),[120] IX (1954, rev. 1961), and X (1954, rev. 1961).[121]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ They had been recommended for doubling or combination since at least the time of Rameau's use of them in Zoroastre (1749), Acante et Céphise (1751), and Les Boréades (1764), including by Ancelet in his Observations sur la music ... (1757) and François Alexandre Pierre de Garsault in his Notionaire, ou mémorial raisonné (1761).[20]
  2. ^ In the original 1880 version of Das klagende Lied, the opening horns are marked "wie aus der Ferne" ("as if from the distance").[28] The post horn episodes of Mahler's Symphony No. 3 episodes are also marked to evoke distance.[29] Thomas Peattie noted that Mahler, as an opera conductor, was drawing on operatic and theatrical conventions in his use of distance, both real (via off-stage or antiphonal parts) and imagined (via expressive markings).[30]
  3. ^ There are also, Bailey Puffett noted, prominent common-practice examples of canon, like Beethoven's Hammerklavier Sonata. In most such cases, she observed, the use of canon was limited to a developmental rather than an expository context, and it was more common in the Romantic than the Classical period.[40]
  4. ^ Leonard Bernstein argued for Mahler's connection to the modernist classical music in a talk at a New York Philharmonic preview in 1962. He cited Howard Shanet as to Mahler's "wide melodic leaps; themes made up of short-motifs; chamber-music subtleties; kaleidoscopic orchestration; inner emotionality; and morbid preoccupation with death and tragic matters". He emphasized Mahler's "linear writing—style of such economy, transparency, and reliance upon horizontal writing, or counterpoint [...]."[42]
  5. ^ The most notable of these superimposed elements are the two themes of the exposition in canons at the opening.[48]
  6. ^ There has been some debate, mostly due to Webern's innovations with respect to historical forms. Leopold Spinner said it was in ternary form. Friedhelm Döhl argued it was better described as a "structural variation", lacking in the discursive and hierarchical features required of a sonata. The absence of a modulation or transition analogue in the exposition particularly troubled him. Wolfgang Martin Stroh concluded that it was merely very much like a sonata and admitted that it might be analyzed as such. Kathryn Bailey Puffett noted that Arnold Schoenberg wrote in Fundamentals of Musical Composition that the sonata was more of a process than a form, that Webern was experimenting with sonata form, and that both saw it as a genre.[50] Hans and Rosaleen Moldenhauer wrote that it "consist[ed] of two sections, each repeated, and structurally resembl[ed] the earlier type of sonata form".[51]
  7. ^ Scholars differ slightly on the precise demarcations of the sonata-form functions. According to Bailey Puffett, they are somewhat superimposed.[53] Brown gives the exposition as mm. 1–26, the development at mm. 27–45, and the recapitulation from m. 46.[31]
  8. ^ However, Johnson also noted, Webern's music may impart a sense of floating.[23]
  9. ^ For Oliver Fürbeth, Webern's music (especially his mature, non-vocal music) elided structure and expression like no other.[67] Döhl proposed achieving a better understanding of any expression mostly by engaging with the structure.[68] But after exhaustive engagement with Webern's music from this formalist (and often exclusively dodecaphonic) perspective, Fürbeth argued against its exclusive validity, given that Webern himself related his experiences to his music.[69] Fürbeth searched Webern's Symphony for "intendierte Ausdrucksmomente" ("intended moments of expression"), which he said survived the "Extremismus" ("extremism") of Webern's mature music.[70]
  10. ^ Bailey Puffett avoided exploring this topic, partly because she viewed most of Webern's music as essentially linear—not merely in presentation.[75] Her view was partly informed by her study of some sketches.[75] However, she acknowledged Webern's interest in "two-dimensional [horizontal and vertical, or melodic and harmonic] synthesis"[76] and referred to Graham H. Phipps proposed "quasi-tonal explanations" for some Op. 29 simultaneities.[77]
  11. ^ In mm. 25b–28 of the sheet music, there are messa di voce hairpins across the whole of each measure with three pitches.[82]
  12. ^ Fürbeth was surprised Stroh did not mention such effects in m. 13, which struck Fürbeth as more salient.[83]
  13. ^ Webern similarly concludes his Fünf Geistliche Lieder with a single, high, quiet harp harmonic.[84]
  14. ^ Bailey Puffett described these as all nine variations, noting the motivization of the traditional theme.[90] Robert Craft described them as eight, including the coda but not the theme.[citation needed]
  15. ^ She emphasized the latter strategy after Op. 21.[91]
  16. ^ Webern's Op. 6/iv and Op. 10/iii feature cowbells, marked "in der Ferne aufgestellt" ("placed in the distance") in the unrevised Op. 6/iv, after Mahler's practice of using sleigh bells in his Symphony No. 4 and cowbells in his Symphony No. 6 and Symphony No. 7.[94] Julian Johnson noted that "Mahler urges his performers to attempt a realistic imitation of the tinkling bells of distant Alpine herds, while at the same time denying any programmatic intention. What seems like realism is ... deconstructive."[28]
  17. ^ Officially the Staatsoper am Platz der Republik, the Kroll was also called "Klemperer's Ensemble",[103] "Klemperer's Kroll" (though Alexander Zemlinsky et al. were engaged),[104] or the "Republikoper" and was an institution borne partly of the socialist Volksbühne.[105] Politics affected programming (e.g., the 1930 German premiere of Leoš Janáček's 1927–1928 Z mrtvého domu was canceled amid talkie-inspired anti-German social unrest in Prague).[106] Klemperer barely escaped an attack by Nazis celebrating the Krolloper's 1931 closure.[104] The Reichstag convened at the Kroll after the February 1933 fire.[107] In March 1933, Klemperer prepared his son: "We are Catholics who think in a German-National way ... . ... [T]imes are ... turbulent ... . ... Never talk ... politics, ... quietly ... work ... live privately", Klemperer emphasized.[108] He fled to Switzerland for safety in April 1933.[109]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Service 2013.
  2. ^ Webern 1929, 1.
  3. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 480; Webern 1929, 2.
  4. ^ a b Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 326; Näf 2019, 180–194; Webern 1929, 16.
  5. ^ a b c d Webern 1929.
  6. ^ a b c d Miller 2022b, "The rule".
  7. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 2; Johnson 1999, 200.
  8. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 154, 197, 202.
  9. ^ Johnson 1999, 74 106, 205; Morris 2016, 74–81, 119–120, 170–174.
  10. ^ Peattie 2015, 102n64, quoting Julian Johnson's Webern and the Transformation of Nature, 33.
  11. ^ Peattie 2015, 103.
  12. ^ Peattie 2015, 102, quoting Julian Johnson's Webern and the Transformation of Nature, 30.
  13. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 257.
  14. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 301–302.
  15. ^ Kolneder 1968, 113.
  16. ^ a b c d Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 342.
  17. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 128–129, 325.
  18. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 124–125, 325.
  19. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 326–327, 344.
  20. ^ a b Hoeprich 2021, 12–16.
  21. ^ Hoeprich 2021, 42, 67–68; Rice 2021, 75–76; Ellsworth 2021, 115–118; Rushton 2021, 255–259; Starr 2021.
  22. ^ Peattie 2015, 22, 29–30 (partly quoting Theodor W. Adorno), 50n2.
  23. ^ a b c Johnson 1999, 205.
  24. ^ Peattie 2015, 63–64, quoting Rosen's The Romantic Generation.
  25. ^ Fink 1993, 93.
  26. ^ Spitzer 2020, 350.
  27. ^ Peattie 2015, 71–73, 110.
  28. ^ a b Peattie 2015, 110.
  29. ^ Peattie 2015, 71–73.
  30. ^ Peattie 2015, 9, 12, 21–23.
  31. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Brown 2003, 876.
  32. ^ a b c d Brown 2003, 875.
  33. ^ Maconie 2016, 195.
  34. ^ Babbitt 1987, 48.
  35. ^ a b c d Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 324.
  36. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 324–325.
  37. ^ Brown 2003, 875; Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 325–326.
  38. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 325–326.
  39. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 163–165.
  40. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 164.
  41. ^ Shreffler 1994, 18.
  42. ^ a b Seldes 2009, 104–105.
  43. ^ a b c Spitzer 2020, 350–351.
  44. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 166; Spitzer 2020, 350–351.
  45. ^ a b c Döhl 1976, 247.
  46. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 167; Döhl 1976, 247.
  47. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 153–154, 163–164; Brown 2003, 876; Shreffler 1994, 241–242.
  48. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 153–154.
  49. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 163; Hiller and Fuller 1967, 61.
  50. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 163, 166–167, citing or quoting all.
  51. ^ a b Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 325.
  52. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 163–169, 434n30.
  53. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 163–169.
  54. ^ Shreffler 1994, 42.
  55. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 160.
  56. ^ Johnson 1999, 205, Appendix II.
  57. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 165–166, 432–433n25, 433n29, quoting Wolfgang Martin Stroh.
  58. ^ a b Bailey Puffett 1991, 166, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 1–4.
  59. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 166, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 6–8.
  60. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 166, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 14–15.
  61. ^ Hanninen 2012, 81.
  62. ^ Hanninen 2012, 82.
  63. ^ a b c d e Döhl 1976, 247, quoting Wallace C. McKenzie's "The Music of Anton Webern".
  64. ^ Döhl 1976, 247, quoting McKenzie, cf. Wilbur Ogden's "Series and Structure" in re: Op. 27/iii.
  65. ^ a b Borris 1966, 236; Schulenberg 1985, 236.
  66. ^ a b c Borris 1966, 236.
  67. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 580–581, 585.
  68. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 580, 580n6, quoting Döhl.
  69. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 580–582.
  70. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 582, 585.
  71. ^ a b Fürbeth 1998, 582–583.
  72. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 583; Webern 1929, 2, mm. 9–13.
  73. ^ Fürbeth 1998, 582.
  74. ^ a b Fürbeth 1998, 582–583; Webern 1929, 2, mm. 9–13.
  75. ^ a b Bailey Puffett 1991, 334.
  76. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 10, 334.
  77. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 334, 443n10, 443–444n16, 448n9, referring to Phipps's "Tonality in Webern's Cantata I".
  78. ^ a b Bailey Puffett 1991, 167.
  79. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 167, 432–433n25, quoting Stroh.
  80. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 432–433n25, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 9–10.
  81. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 432–433n25, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 25b–28.
  82. ^ Webern 1929, I, mm. 25b–28.
  83. ^ a b Fürbeth 1998, 583, 583n19.
  84. ^ Johnson 1999, 156–157.
  85. ^ a b Bailey Puffett 1991, 164, 168–169.
  86. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 165–166, 432–433n25, 433n29, quoting Stroh.
  87. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 433n29, quoting Stroh; Webern 1929, I, mm. 42b–45.
  88. ^ a b Borris 1966, 237.
  89. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 200–201.
  90. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 98–99.
  91. ^ Bailey Puffett 1991, 196–197.
  92. ^ Hood 2022, 172.
  93. ^ Johnson 1999, 7.
  94. ^ Peattie 2015, 10, 19–20, 65–66, 102–103, 110–111, 113n110.
  95. ^ a b Fürbeth 1998, 584.
  96. ^ a b c d Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 326.
  97. ^ Miller 2022b, "The rule"; Morgan 1993, 416.
  98. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 305.
  99. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 344.
  100. ^ Heyworth 1983, 246.
  101. ^ Heyworth 1983, 362; Moskovitz 2010, 256.
  102. ^ Moskovitz 2010, 249-251.
  103. ^ Moskovitz 2010, 241.
  104. ^ a b Moskovitz 2010, 256.
  105. ^ Heyworth 1983, 246, 368–369.
  106. ^ Moskovitz 2010, 255; Wingfield 1998, 113–115.
  107. ^ Moskovitz 2010, 262–264.
  108. ^ Heyworth 1983, 407.
  109. ^ Heyworth 1983, 410.
  110. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 362–364.
  111. ^ Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer 1978, 470–471, 679–680.
  112. ^ Alegant 2010, 29.
  113. ^ Alegant 2010, 29–30.
  114. ^ Alegant 2010, 30, 48, 162, 193, 293n20.
  115. ^ Alegant 2010, 293n20, 302n34.
  116. ^ Alegant 2010, 4, 162, 193.
  117. ^ Alegant 2010, 5, 307n7.
  118. ^ Maconie 2016, 38.
  119. ^ Rochberg 2004, 15.
  120. ^ Maconie 2016, 127.
  121. ^ Maconie 2016, 195–196.

Bibliography

[edit]
  • Alegant, Brian. 2010. The Twelve-tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola. Vol. 76, Eastman Studies in Music, sen. ed. Ralph P. Locke. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-58046-325-6 (hbk).
  • Babbitt, Milton. 1987. Words about Music: The Madison Lectures, eds. Stephen Dembski and Joseph N. Straus. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-10790-1 (hbk).
  • Bailey Puffett, Kathryn. 1991. The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern: Old Forms in a New Language. Music in the Twentieth Century, gen. ed. Arnold Whittall. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-39088-0 (hbk). ISBN 978-0-521-54796-3 (pbk).
  • Borris, Siegfried. 1966. "Structural Analysis of Webern's Symphony Op. 21", trans. Ursula Klein. In Paul A. Pisk: Essays in his Honor, ed. John M. Glowacki, fwd. E. W. Doty. Austin: The University of Texas Press.
  • Brown, A. Peter. 2003. The Second Golden Age of the Viennese Symphony: Brahms, Bruckner, Dvořák, Mahler, and Selected Contemporaries. Vol. 4, The Symphonic Repertoire. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-33488-6 (hbk).
  • Döhl, Friedhelm. 1976. Weberns Beitrag zur Stilwende der Neuen Musik: Studien über Voraussetzungen, Technik und Ästhetik der "Komposition mit 12 nur aufeinander bezogenen Tönen". Vol. 12, Berliner Musikwissenschaftliche Arbeiten, gen. eds. Carl Dahlhaus and Rudolf Stephan. Munich and Salzburg: Emil Katzbichler. ISBN 978-3-87-397042-7 (pbk).
  • Ellsworth, Jane. 2021. "From 'Little Trumpet' to Unique Voice: The Clarinet in the Concert Orchestra". The Clarinet, ed. Jane Ellsworth. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-80010-350-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-64825-017-0 (hbk).
  • Fink, Robert. 1993. "Desire, Repression & Brahms’s First Symphony". repercussions. 2(1):75–103.
  • Fürbeth, Oliver. 1998, 29 September–4 October. "Die Frage nach dem 'Ausdruck' im Spätwerk Anton Weberns". [Conference presentation]. Internationalen Kongreß der Gesellschaft für Musikforschung Halle (Saale). Musikkonzepte — Konzepte der Musikwissenschaft 2, 580–585, eds. Kathrin Eberl and Wolfgang Ruf. Kassel: Bärenreiter. ISBN 978-3-76-181536-6 (pbk). Republished 1999. Musik & Ästhetik [de]. 3(11):43–50. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Digitally published 2019. Dresden: Qucosa.
  • Hanninen, Dora A. 2012. A Theory of Music Analysis: On Segmentation and Associative Organization. Vol. 92, Eastman Studies in Music, sen. ed. Ralph P. Locke. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-58046-194-8 (hbk).
  • Heyworth, Peter. 1983. Otto Klemperer: His Life and Times, Vol. I: 1885–1933. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Reissued with corrections, 1996. ISBN 978-0-521-49509-7 (ebk). ISBN 978-0-521-39088-0 (hbk).
  • Hiller, Lejaren, and Ramon Fuller. "Structure and Information in Webern’s Symphonie, Op. 21". Journal of Music Theory. 11(1):60–115. Duke University Press. doi:10.2307/842949.
  • Hoeprich, Eric [fr]. 2021. "Clarinet Iconography". The Clarinet, ed. Jane Ellsworth. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-80010-350-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-64825-017-0 (hbk).
  • Hood, Danielle. 2022. The Viennese Waltz: Decadence and the Decline of Austria’s Unconscious. Lanham: Lexington Books. ISBN 978-1-79-365393-2 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-79-365392-5 (hbk).
  • Johnson, Julian. 1999. Webern and the Transformation of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66149-2.
  • Kolneder, Walter. 1968. Anton Webern: An Introduction to His Works. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Trans. Humphrey Searle. (Translation of Anton Webern, Einführung in Werk und Stil. Rodenkirchen: P. J. Tonger, 1961.) ISBN 978-0-520-34715-1.
  • Maconie, Robin. 2016. Other Planets: The Complete Works of Karlheinz Stockhausen, 1950–2007. Updated edition. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1-44-227268-2 (electronic).
  • Miller, David H. 2022. "Shadows, wraiths, and amoebas: the distinctive flops of Anton Webern in the United States". Transposition. 10. École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS) and the Cité de la musique-Philharmonie de Paris. (30 May, accessed 19 Jan. 2024)
  • Moldenhauer, Hans, and Rosaleen Moldenhauer. 1978. Anton von Webern: A Chronicle of His Life and Work. London: Victor Gollancz Ltd. ISBN 978-0-394-47237-9.
  • Morgan, Robert P. 1993. Modern Times: From World War I to the Present. Man & Music Series; Vol. 8. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-349-11291-3 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-349-11293-7 (hbk).
  • Morris, Christopher. 2016. Modernism and the Cult of Mountains: Music, Opera, Cinema. Ashgate Interdisciplinary Studies in Opera. Oxford and New York: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-75466-970-8 (hbk). Reprint from original in 2012 by Ashgate Publishing.
  • Moskovitz, Marc. 2010. Alexander Zemlinsky: A Lyric Symphony. Woodbridge, UK: Boydell. ISBN 978-1-84383-578-3.
  • Näf, Lukas. 2019. "Tempogestaltung in Weberns Sinfonie op. 21." In Rund um Beethoven: Interpretationsforschung heute, eds. Thomas Gartmann and Daniel Allenbach, 180–194. Musikforschung der Hochschule der Künste Bern, Vol. 14. Schliengen: Edition Argus. ISBN 978-3-931264-94-9. doi:10.26045/kp64-6178.
  • Peattie, Thomas. 2015. Gustav Mahler's Symphonic Landscapes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-02708-4 (hbk).
  • Rice, Albert R. 2021. "The Chalumeau and Clarinet before Mozart". The Clarinet, ed. Jane Ellsworth. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-80010-350-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-64825-017-0 (hbk).
  • Rushton, Julian. 2021. "The Clarinet in Nineteenth-Century Opera". The Clarinet, ed. Jane Ellsworth. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-80010-350-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-64825-017-0 (hbk).
  • Rochberg, George. 2004. The Aesthetics of Survival: A Composer's View of Twentieth-Century Music. Revised, expanded, and reprinted from original in 1984. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-02511-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-0-472-03026-2 (pbk).
  • Seldes, Barry. 2009. Leonard Bernstein: The Political Life of an American Musician. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-94307-0.
  • Service, Tom. 2013. "Symphony Guide: Webern's Op 21". Tom Service on Classical Blog. The Guardian.com (17 Dec., accessed 19 Jan. 2024).
  • Shreffler, Anne C. 1994. Webern and the Lyric Impulse: Songs and Fragments on Poems of Georg Trakl, ed. and preface by Lewis Lockwood. Studies in Musical Genesis and Structure Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-816224-7.
  • Schulenberg, David. 1985. "Modes, Prolongations, and Analysis". Journal of Musicology. 4(3):303–329. University of California Press. doi:10.2307/763760.
  • Spitzer, Michael. 2020. A History of Emotion in Western Music: A Thousand Years from Chant to Pop. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-006176-0.
  • Starr, S. Frederick. 2021. "The Clarinet in Vernacular Music". The Clarinet, ed. Jane Ellsworth. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. ISBN 978-1-80010-350-4 (ebk). ISBN 978-1-64825-017-0 (hbk).
  • Webern, Anton. 1929. Symphonie. Reprinted 1956. Vienna: Universal Edition.
  • Wingfield, Nancy Meriwether. "When Film Became National: 'Talkies' and the Anti-German Demonstrations of 1930 in Prague". Austrian History Yearbook. 29(1):113–138. Center for Austrian Studies, University of Minnesota. Published online in 2015 by Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/S006723780001482X.

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Symphony_(Webern)&oldid=1242068063"