Orchestration Markedness and Its Effect on Form

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF MUSIC

ORCHESTRATIONAL MARKEDNESS

AND ITS EFFECT ON FORM

By

KATHRYN E. STEETLE

A Thesis submitted to the College of Music

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Music

Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2007

Copyright 2007 Kathryn E. Steetle

All Rights Reserved

ii

The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Kathryn E. Steetle defended on

January 19, 2007.

______________________________ Matthew Shaftel Professor Directing Thesis ______________________________ Evan Jones Committee Member ______________________________ Clifton Callender Committee Member The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables......................................................................................................................iv List of Figures......................................................................................................................v Abstract...............................................................................................................................vi

1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1

2. METHODOLOGY..........................................................................................................6

Sound vs. Silence.....................................................................................................9 Haydn, Surprise Symphony, No. 94, movement 4.......................................9 Timbre and Extended Technique...........................................................................11 Penderecki, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima...................................12 Notes, Voices, and Lines.......................................................................................15 Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, movement 3.............................................16

3. BRAHMS’S VARIATIONS ON A THEME BY HAYDN FOR ORCHESTRA, OP. 56 A

AND VARIATIONS ON A THEME BY HAYDN FOR PIANO, OP. 56 B.........................20

Style, Topic, and Degree of Dignity......................................................................21 Brahms and the Division between High and Low Styles......................................24 The Blocked Orchestration of Measures 1-10...........................................31 The Mixed Orchestration of Measures 314-321........................................33 Orchestrational Influence on Overall Form...........................................................35 A Traditional Reading of Overall Arc Form..............................................35 An Alternate Reading of Overall Form.....................................................36

4. CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................47

BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................................50

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.............................................................................................52

iv

LIST OF TABLES

1. Form diagram of Surprise Symphony, No. 94, 4th movement, mm 1-111.......................9 2. Form diagram of Trenody..............................................................................................13 3. Form diagram of Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt 3...............................................16 4. Form diagram of Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt 3, Coda (mm 349-414).............17 5. Skeletal mapping of the Theme.....................................................................................25 6. Skeletal mapping of Variation 1....................................................................................25 7. Skeletal mapping of Variation 2....................................................................................26 8. Skeletal mapping of Variation 3....................................................................................26 9. Skeletal mapping of Variation 4....................................................................................27 10. Skeletal mapping of Variation 5..................................................................................28 11. Skeletal mapping of Variation 6..................................................................................28 12. Skeletal mapping of Variation 7..................................................................................29 13. Skeletal mapping of Variation 8..................................................................................29 14. Skeletal mapping of Finale..........................................................................................30 15. Table of Traditional Arc Form focusing on a traditional analysis of harmonic and thematic relationships........................................................................................................35 16. Table of Alternate Form focusing on an analysis with respect to orchestral techniques..........................................................................................................................36

v

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Egmont Overture, mm 1-17.............................................................................................3

2. Hatten’s Stylistic/Strategic Interaction Diagram.............................................................7

3. Haydn, Symphony No. 94, mvt. 4, mm 71-76................................................................10

4. Haydn, Symphony No. 94, mvt 4, mm 72-76, graph......................................................11

5. Sample of Extended Techniques used in Threnody.......................................................12

6. Sound Block Motives in Threnody................................................................................13

7. Penderecki, Threnody, mm 24-26..................................................................................14

8. Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt. 3, mm 125-140....................................................16

9. Theme, mm 1-10............................................................................................................32

10. Theme, mm 1-10, graph...............................................................................................33

11. Variation 3, mm 108-111.............................................................................................34

12. Variation 3, mm 108-111, graph..................................................................................34

13. Graph of Traditional Arc Form...................................................................................35

14. Graph of Alternate Form.............................................................................................36

15. Variation 1, mm 30-34.................................................................................................37

16. Variation 1, mm 30-34, graph......................................................................................38

17. Variation 3, mm 127-134.............................................................................................39


19. Variation 7, mm 314-321.............................................................................................41


21. Finale, mm 361-371.....................................................................................................43

22. Finale, mm 361-371, graph..........................................................................................43

23. Finale, mm 455-462.....................................................................................................44

24. Finale, mm 448-462.....................................................................................................45

vi

ABSTRACT

This study analyses the structural role of orchestration in small and large forms.

Orchestration’s influence is examined by applying Robert S. Hatten’s expressive genre

theory specifically in its use of marked and unmarked events signaling a change in

musical style and/or orchestrational norm and thereby influencing how one perceives

small and large forms.

In Chapter 2, examples are taken from Haydn’s Surprise Symphony, movement 4,

to illustrate a marked silence acting in lieu of a transition passage; Penderecki’s Threnody

to the Victims of Hiroshima, to illustrate a marked change in timbre as a section indicator;

and Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 4, movement 3, to show how subtle marked changes in

instrument family affect large and small forms.

In Chapter 3, two formal analyses of Brahms’s Variations on a Theme by Haydn

for Orchestra are given, one based on traditional analytical methods and the other using

expressive genre analytical model, historically documented degree of dignity, and the use

of voice lines/instrumental lines.

As evidenced in this paper, orchestrational techniques change with each piece, but

the process of orchestration is ubiquitous regardless of era, composer, or genre.

Expressive genre theory, because of its culturally derived basis, proves to be a viable

means to analyze the role of orchestration within the compositional process of composers

of many eras.

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Music analyses are more prone to examine abstract “tones” instead of concrete

orchestral “notes,” thereby overlooking subtle (and not so subtle) musical information

illustrated by orchestration.1 William Rothstein laments this dismissal of “notes,” the

“musical entities [that] represent specific pitches and durations, to be played on a specific

instrument,” in favor of the “tones,” “musical entities [that] are not what we ‘hear’ in the

literal sense of that word; rather, they are a way of representing to ourselves what we

have heard already.”2 Robert Hatten’s theory of expressive genre provides a possible

entry into a closer examination of Rothstein’s “notes.” 3 His work presents the notion of

markedness, the foregrounding of an event or idea against an unmarked background: the

unexpected versus the expected. My study will focus on orchestration and will establish

that a careful study of orchestration using expressive genre theory can present greater

insight on compositional form and structure.

Analyzing music through instrumentation is understandably problematic. Carl

Schachter groups orchestration, texture, and other musical elements as “secondary

qualities of the music.”4 Secondary musical parameters are not studied thoroughly,

mainly because of their resistance to codification and their reliance on other musical

parameters for definition. Robert Hopkins approaches this problem in his book, Closure

and Mahler’s Music: The Role of Secondary Parameters, giving several reasons for

secondary parameters’ unpopularity in the analytical literature: 1) the imprecise use of the

term parameter, 2) the ambiguous nature of some current terminology, 3) the lack of

accepted technical terms for some secondary parameters. 5 To clarify the term parameter,

Hopkins establishes dependent and independent variables in music with an example:

1 See William Rothstein, “On Implied Tones,” Music Analysis 10 (October 1991): 293-295. 2 Ibid., 293-294. 3 Robert S. Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994). 4 Carl Schachter, Unfoldings: Essays in Schenkerian Theory and Analysis, ed. Joseph N. Straus (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 8. 5 Robert G. Hopkins, Closure and Mahler’s Music: the Role of Secondary Parameters, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990), 29.

2

Dynamics and rhythm, for instance, are often called parameters since they are variables in music. Yet dynamics (the relative loudness of sounds) is a more or less independent variable, whereas rhythm (which has to do with grouping sounds into patterns where unaccented beats are related to accented ones) is a dependent variable determined by a number of interacting parameters such as harmony, pitch, duration, and dynamics.6

According to Hopkins, the term, “parameter,” should only refer to independent variables,

i.e. tonal pitch and harmony. He classifies meter, tempo, texture, registral pitch, duration,

and timbre as dependent variables. In the above example, rhythm is dependent upon

multiple variables and falls into a different category, “emergent property.”7 Orchestration

is itself an “emergent property;” any consideration of orchestration must also include an

examination of register, dynamic, duration, and timbre. Although this study will not

adopt Hopkins’s hierarchical system of dependent and independent variables, it does

employ the basic premise that some aspects of music can only be analyzed thoroughly

when taken into consideration with other parameters.

A study of orchestration without pairing it with other kinds of analytical

information would result in a vague and essentially descriptive narration. For example

one could imagine an analytical narrative that runs like this:

Beethoven begins his Egmont Overture with a forte tutti on an octave F in

a held fermata. After the orchestra diminuendo, the string section plays an

ominous 4-measure introduction. The oboe then begins a solo wistful motive to be

repeated by the clarinet and bassoons in the following measure. This motive is

then passed to the strings where it is repeated until the orchestra interrupts the

strings in measure 7 with another tutti forte on octave F. Next, the 4-measure

string introduction is repeated in the whole orchestra (without timpani) but this

time the phrase is shortened to 2 measures. The woodwinds’ wistful motive from

measures 5-7 returns in measures 12-15 using the same instrumentation with the

addition of the flute.

6 Ibid., 29-30. 7 Ibid.

3

Figure 1. Egmont Overture, mm 1-17

4

Although the above analysis appears correct, the “blow-by-blow account” of the piece’s

orchestration without the inclusion of other analytical information, adds little to a

thorough understanding of the process within the piece.

Hilarie Clark Moore’s 1991 dissertation, “The Structural Role of Orchestration in

Brahms’s Music,” uses orchestration as a foil for musical structure.8 Moore pairs

Schenkerian analyses with computerized graphic representations of the score to explore

Brahms’s orchestrational methods on the foreground and background levels of the piano

and orchestral versions of his 3rd Symphony. She establishes that varying timbres of the

orchestral sonority can either articulate voice-leading lines by their difference or conceal

voice-leading effects by their similarities, demonstrating that Brahms’s orchestral

technique is a contributing factor to Brahms’s form and structure both in phrases and

thematic divisions.9

Another dissertation exploring orchestration and its effect on Schenkerian

analysis is Timothy Spence Cutler’s 2000 dissertation, “Orchestration and the Analysis of

Tonal Music: Interaction between Orchestration and Other Musical Parameters, c. 1785-

1835.”10 Cutler surveys the majority of scholarly writings on orchestration, giving special

attention to Schenker’s writings and analytical method. Linear analysis is used to

demonstrate how orchestration can distract the listener from the Urlinie and/or

Hauptstimme. Cutler also defends his premise: Schenkerian analysis was not created to

ignore orchestrational nuances; Schenker placed great importance on pitches, the

instruments being used, and the orchestrational affect particular to each piece.11 As both

of these dissertations have already illustrated, Schenkerian analysis can be used in

tandem with orchestration to gain a richer understanding of the piece in question.

In contrast to strictly utilizing Schenkerian analysis to examine orchestration, this

study explores the links between orchestration and the study of form and by utilizing

8 Hilarie Clark Moore, “The Structural Role of Orchestration in Brahms’s Music: A Study of the Third Symphony” (PhD. diss., Yale University, 1991). 9 Ibid., 8. 10 Timothy Spence Cutler, “Orchestration and the Analysis of Tonal Music: Interaction between Orchestration and Other Musical Parameters in Selected Symphonic Compositions, c. 1785-1835” (PhD. diss., Yale University, 2000). 11 Ibid., 84-5.

5

Robert Hatten’s theory of expressive genre.12 Expressive genre theory relies

essentially on the idea that there is significance and hierarchy in difference. This theory

will better illustrate how orchestration can be condensed into a conformational model

within each piece and provide a method to measure how each small deviation from the

established background of orchestral style contributes to the whole in regards to form and

intra-opus established norms. Expressive genre theory differs from Moore’s and Cutler’s

analytical methods because it demonstrates, at least in part, a strong correlation between

marked and unmarked events (as reflected in orchestration techniques) and formal

structure.

This paper will focus on Brahms’s Variations on a Theme by Haydn for

Orchestra, Op. 56 A, and Variations on a Theme by Haydn for Two Pianos, Op. 56 B.

These pieces include a chorale theme with eight sectional variations and a finale

comprised of eighteen continuous variations with a coda. It is significant that the piano

version pre-dates the orchestral version and that both were completed by the composer;

indicating that the piano version was not a mere transcription, but a complete work in and

of itself. This will be explored in greater depth in Chapter 3.

12 Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven.

6

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

Robert Hatten’s expressive genre theory was originally created to discuss “how

music has expressive meaning and not merely... what that meaning might be.”13 His

theory is based on the understanding that music is a sonic reflection of human emotions

that can be categorized and codified; with this insight music can be synthesized in terms

of both its structural properties and meaning. Expressive genre theory incorporates more

traditional analytical methods as well as style and linguistic-based approaches from

Edwin Battistella, Leonard Meyer, Leonard Ratner and others.14 Hatten moves from

individual analyses to a general framework for further exploration into ambiguously

expressive musical works. At the very foundation of his “expressive interpretations” is

the notion of cultural dependency. This follows the logic that the listener can only

synthesize musical stimuli that can be compared to past experiences (i.e. it would be

considerably more difficult for an 18th century listener to quickly grasp an electronic

piece or conversely, it is much more difficult for today’s listener to quickly grasp

Haydn’s “musical jokes”). To quote Leonard Meyer, “Because expectation is largely a

product of stylistic experience, music in a style with which we are totally unfamiliar is

meaningless.”15

Hatten illustrates the dialectic of stylistic correlations with strategic

interpretations in Figure 2.16

13 Robert S. Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994) 1. 14 Edwin Battistella, The Logic of Markedness (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996). Leonard B. Meyer, Emotion and Meaning in Music (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1956). Leonard Ratner, Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style (New York: Schirmer Books, 1980). 15 Leonard B. Meyer, Emotion and Meaning in Music, 35. 16

Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven, 30.

7

Figure 2. Hatten’s Stylistic/Strategic Interaction Diagram

Stylistic correlations are derived from:

Cultural units or expressive states defined by basic semantic oppositions in a culture (sad vs. happy; tragic vs. nontragic). These cultural units are mapped onto general stylistic types, as oppositionally defined by traditional or other theories (minor vs. major). Interpretations, on the other hand, further specify or contextualize expressive states as they relate to entities – structures or processes – actually manifested in musical works (i.e. tokens of their stylistic types).17

Cultural expectations (and the undercutting of these expectations) as combined with

traditional analytic approaches provide the backbone for Hatten’s analytical method.18

This system should be applicable to any situation where the analytical criteria are

culturally derived hierarchies that oppose traditional interpretations. Orchestration, which

is driven by stylistic considerations, has long been resistant to traditional analytical

approaches (with the exception of the recent Schenkerian-based dissertations cited

above). Hatten’s culturally contingent system, however, can be fruitfully applied to

orchestrational techniques in all musical genres and time periods.

Expressive genre theory is based on the concepts of markedness, type, and token.

The term, markedness, is taken from linguistics and is, most simply put, “valuation given

to difference.”19 A marked term is something that has a greater specificity than its

unmarked counterpart. One example Hatten gives are the terms “cow” and “bull.” “Cow”

17 Ibid. 18 See Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven, “A Hermeneutic Reading of the Slow Movement of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata in B-flat, Op. 106 (Hammerklavier),” 11-28 19 Ibid., 34.

8

would be considered an unmarked term because one would use this term when the gender

is not important. On the other hand, the term, “bull,” would be marked because of its

greater gender specificity. For example, in music, the home key could be considered

unmarked and any modulation could be considered marked.20

Hatten’s theory establishes musical styles by grouping a hierarchy of types and

tokens. The term, type, is “an ideal or conceptual category defined by features or a range

of qualities that are essential to its identity.”21 A token is the specific “perceptible entity

that embodies or manifests the features or qualities of the type.”22 Using these definitions,

a type can only be defined by its tokens, but a type is not required to account for every

detail of its tokens. One example Hatten uses to illustrate this is the tonic triad.23 In the

key of C Major, C-E-G is considered the tonic triad (the type), but not every C-E-G

sonority is a functional tonic triad, and inversely, not every tonic triad needs a fifth or

even a third to be identified (the tokens).

In my adaptation of Hatten’s expressive genre theory, the terms marked and

unmarked will play a central role. Meyer claims that, “the customary or expected

progression of sounds can be considered as a norm ... and alterations in the expected

progression can be considered as a deviation.”24 My study of orchestration illustrates that

works and sections within works establish their own orchestrational hierarchy; any

deviations from this hierarchy would be considered significant. The established intra-

opus orchestrational hierarchy would be considered an unmarked orchestral norm while

the deviations become marked events that inform our understanding of the work.

It may be useful to equate the orchestral norm to Hatten’s type. In this study

orchestral techniques will be placed in two categories: blocked style (unmarked) vs.

mixed style (marked). These classifications are based on the accepted practices of 18th

century music as described in Ratner’s Classic Music: Expression, Form and Style and

Hatten’s Musical Meaning in Beethoven. Blocked style vs. mixed style orchestrational

type will be discussed further in Chapter 3.

20 Ibid., 44. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid., 45. 23 Ibid. 24 Leonard B. Meyer, Emotion and Meaning in Music, 32.

9

Tokens will include all other parameters (Hopkins’s dependent and independent

variables) that influence the type. These parameters include: silence vs. sound, texture

and density, voice and instrumental line, doubling (including variational and acoustical

doubling), voice spacing, and registral isolation. The following two sections will explore

these tokens as representations of orchestral extremes in order to illustrate how the notion

of markedness can be the driving force behind large formal structure.

Sound vs. Silence

Cutler proposes that, “The mechanics of the human voice are responsible for the

most fundamental of all textural contrasts – sound and silence.... A single melodic line

sung by the human voice is conditioned by the need to take breaths in order to replenish

one’s supply of air.”25 Thus, pauses in a melodic line can certainly be expected.

Unexpected silence, on the other hand, most likely signals a marked event.

Haydn, Surprise Symphony, No. 94, movement 4

Most readers will be familiar with the following example from Haydn’s Surprise

Symphony, No. 94, movement 4.

Table 1. Form diagram of Surprise Symphony, No. 94, mvt. 4, mm 1-111

Exposition Primary Theme

Episode 1 Grand Pause

Secondary Theme

Episode 2 Transition Primary Theme

GM GM DM DM Cn GM 1-37 38-73 74 75-86 87-99 100-103 104-111

The marked silence of measure 74 plays an essential role in the formal process of the last

movement, allowing a sudden modulation between the tonic key of the main theme and

the dominant key of the second theme. During the preceding three movements, short

25 Cutler, Orchestration and the Analysis of Tonal Music, 256.

10

silences indicate ends of phrases or emphasize cadences and codas. None of these

previous rests are longer than a beat and all fall on weak beats.26 The marked silence in

the fourth movement consists of a complete measure; the length of silence alone in

measure 74 signals markedness to the listener.

Figure 3. Haydn, Symphony No. 94, mvt. 4, mm 71-76

26 There is a rest on beat 1 in m 39, first movement, but it only serves to emphasize the pick-up into a repeat of the main theme.

11

Adding to the listener’s discomfort, the silence interrupts the resolution of the

dominant-A chord to the expected D-major chord. These two chords are stated several

times, changing an otherwise unmarked chord progression to an unmarked 2-beat

dominant/resolution figure. The combination of an extended silence – 2 beats – placed

within the 2-beat dominant/resolution figure undercuts the logical expectation of the DM

resolution chord on beat one, thus becoming a marked occurrence and adding tension to

this passage.

The piece begins again having changed the instrumentation, dynamics, playing

technique, style, and key. Measure 75 includes violins, cello and bass instead of tutti

strings, flute, oboe, bassoon and horn; piano instead of forte; cello and bass using

pizzicato instead of arco, and singing style instead of the more stately marcato style from

measure 73 (see Figure 4). The expected 1-beat D major resolution chord instantly

becomes the new key of the following secondary theme bypassing the expected transition

passage. The marked silence clears the aural palette, allowing one to accept the sudden

transition and all of its changes in measure 75.

Figure 4. Haydn, Symphony No. 94, mvt. 4, mm 72-76, graph

Timbre and Extended Technique

Timbres play a prominent role in the study of orchestration techniques. Extended

techniques are any techniques that produce sounds by using an instrument in any way

other than what may be “typical” according to cultural practice, therefore providing new

timbres for musical expression. This would include: plucking the strings on a piano;

using a power tool as a percussion instrument; multiphonics on a woodwind or brass

72 73 74 75 76fl 1/2ob 1/2bsn 1/2hrn 1/2tpt 1/2timpvln 1vln 2vlacello/bass

12

(playing multiple notes using odd key combinations, playing while humming or other

methods), and so forth. Extended techniques sometimes appear as a melodic line (i.e.

whisper tones on the flute), but are usually used as percussive accents. For example,

measure 437 in “Dream of a Witches’ Sabbath” from Berlioz’s Symphony Fantastique,

uses col legno (hitting the string with the wooden part of the bow) to emulate skeletons

dancing. This study will examine the interplay of homogeneous (timbres/voices moving

together) and heterogeneous (timbres/voices moving separately) sonorities with respect to

extended techniques as they relate to form and structure. The following piece uses

extended techniques for strings as its primary orchestrational method, and, ultimately, as

the strongest arbiter of formal structure.

Penderecki, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima

In Penderecki’s familiar work, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima, timbre as

expressed in extended techniques, is the primary indicator of form. Some of the extended

techniques used in this piece include:27

Figure 5. Sample of extended techniques used in Threnody

Because of the lack of traditional playing techniques along with the absence of an

established melody or harmony, extended techniques themselves become unmarked.

Instead, changes in the extended techniques signal changes between sections, as

27 Krzysztof Penderecki, Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima (Krakow: Polskie Wydawnictwo Muzyczne Edition, 1960) 3.

13

summarized in Figure 6 and Table 2. This analysis will focus on the markedness of

measure 26, the beginning of section 2.

Sound block 1 (mm 1-2)

Sound block 2 (m 6) Sound block 3 (m 10)

Figure 6. Sound block motives in Threnody

Table 2. Form diagram of Threnody

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Exposition

Subsection 1 Sound block 1



Subsection 4 Transition (blending of sound blocks 1 & 3)

Development (blending and development of sound blocks 1,2, & 3)

Recapitulation (return of sound block 1)

mm 1-5 mm 6-9 mm 10-17 mm 18-25 mm 26-62 mm 62 – 70

The manner in which the extended techniques are used in this work can be

grouped into three motive-like entities that I will call sound blocks (see Figure 6). In the

first section each sound block is introduced separately, corresponding to the divisions

provided in Table 2. These sound blocks may dovetail to provide smooth transitions, but

14

each sound block contrasts with those on either side, establishing each sound block as a

separate entity. 28 The expository nature of section 1 establishes the orchestral norm for

the entire piece, albeit an orchestral norm comprised exclusively of extended techniques.

The slow progression of musical ideas is disrupted with the entrance of section

two, beginning in m 26.

Figure 7. Penderecki, To the Victims of Hiroshima, mm 24-26

Measure 26 is a marked occurrence for three reasons: it is prefaced by silence, the shift

from homogeneous (few voices/timbres) to heterogeneous (many voices/timbres)

sonorities, and the activity change between m 24 and 26 (activity change is used in lieu of

tempo change, section 1 is considered “low activity” [slow tempo – held pitches] while

section 2 is considered “high activity” [fast tempo – many short percussive pitches]).

Silence in this piece is used similarly to silence in Haydn’s 96th Symphony: as an

expedient bridge between sections. The five seconds of silence indicated in the score

prepare the listener for the new section while adding contrast to the piece. Even though

15

the timbres used in this piece differ from the usual melody/harmony hierarchy, extended

orchestrational techniques function as the primary method of establishing form.

Notes, Voices and Lines

A study of orchestration techniques is dependent upon the idea that there is

significance in the written notes in addition to the theoretical tones.29 Moore concludes

that theorists’ neglect of a thorough study of orchestration “is not indicative of any doubt

concerning its importance but, rather, results from the absence of an appropriate

analytical method.”30 Moore offers her remedy in a study focusing on orchestration as

illustrated in voice leading, claiming that, “In fact, the orchestrational method,

specifically the doubling techniques, create a hypothetical voice hierarchy, in which the

outer voices are of highest importance.”31

In Moore’s analysis, she creates her own terminology in order to establish a

“hypothetical voice hierarchy.” Voice line is used in the same manner as in four-part

SATB harmony. Instrumental line is limited to the actual notated line of the orchestral

score played by one instrument. Doubling refers to any grouping of vocal and

instrumental lines. Variational doublings are usually in the inner voices and preserve the

individuality of each instrumental line while forming the composite of the inner harmonic

voice leading lines. Acoustical doublings are most often in the outer voices and are pitch-

class/octave equivalent doublings at the unison or octave. Voice spacing is significant in

that distance between voices can signal markedness and in extreme cases can result in

registral isolation. The number of voices versus the number of instrumental lines will

comprise the density. Texture constitutes the fusion between the density and timbre

sonorities mentioned in the section above. This study will incorporate Moore’s

terminology as representatives of Hatten’s tokens as indicated on page 8.

29 Rothstein, “On Implied Tones.” See page 1 for an explanation of this dichotomy. 30 Moore, “The Structural Role of Orchestration in Brahms’s Music,” 2. 31 Ibid., 8.

16

Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, movement 3

In Tchaikovsky’s well-known 4th Symphony, the 3rd movement emphasizes

changes in instrumentation as indicators of form. In this work, instrumentation plays a

larger role than in the previous two examples, interacting with harmony, key areas, and

thematic material similarly to the orchestral technique found in Brahms’s Variations

(Table 3).

Table 3. Form diagram of Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt. 3

Section 1, A Section 2, B Section 3, A Section 4, C Principle Theme

Trio Tempo 1 Transition Principle Theme

Coda

Theme 1 Theme 2 Theme 3 Themes 1&3 Theme 1 Themes 1,2&3

Strings Winds Brass + Winds

Brass/Winds + Strings

Strings Winds/Strings + Brass

F Major A Major Df Major Df Major → F Major

F Major F Major

mm 1-136 mm 136-169 mm 170-203 mm 204-217 mm 218-348 mm 349-414

Throughout this movement the instruments are grouped in choirs, roughly replicating

SATB voices. These choirs have close voice spacing and consistent doublings throughout

the movement. This stability in orchestration allows for the change in instrument choir

coupled closely with thematic shifts to move into prominence as an indicator of form.

This can be heard most clearly at the meno mosso section (m 133) and the coda (m 349).

The change in theme/section and instrument family is particularly salient when

the oboe enters at the meno mosso passage (m 133).

Figure 8. Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt. 3, mm 125-140

17

Figure 8 - continued.

Until measure 130, the strings have been playing a consistent pizzicato with close voice

spacing. The length of this string passage gives the listener the false sense that the strings

will continue uninterrupted for the entire movement. The oboe’s entrance is particularly

jarring in that, besides being a new timbre, the oboe plays forte on a single held note

instead of pianissimo and the staccato that would reflect the strings’ pizzicato. This held

note acts in a similar manner as the silence in the Haydn example above. The length of

the held A allows the listener to quickly adjust to the new theme, new key of A major,

and the woodwind choir in the Trio section.

By the end of section 2 (see Table 3), instrument families are closely associated

with specific themes. In the Coda, however, Tchaikovsky plays with the expectations

thus created.

Table 4. Form diagram of Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 4, mvt 3, Coda, mm 349-414

Measures Key Comments 349-350 FM Winds, theme 1 351-352 DfM Strings, theme1 353-354 FM Winds, theme 1 355-356 DfM Strings, theme 1 357-358 Fm Winds, theme 1 359-360 FM Strings, theme 1 361-362 Fm Winds, theme 1 363-354 FM Strings, theme1 365-372 FM Winds (+horn)/strings, theme 2 split antiphonally between families 373-378 FM Winds (+horn)/strings, theme 2 diminished (first 2 beat motive)

18

Table 4 - continued.

379-386 FM Winds (+horn)/strings, theme 2 diminished (first 2 eighth-note motive) 387-394 FM Winds, theme 2 (first 2 beats repeated) with string accompaniment taken

from brass’s theme 3 395-398 FM Blending of first 2 eighth-note motive of theme 2 and first bar of theme

1(winds), accompaniment figure still suggestive of theme 3 (strings + horn)

399-410 DfM→ FM

Theme 3 passed between brass, winds and strings

411-414 FM Strings, taken from theme 1, mm 57-59

The Coda derives its interest not from developing themes, but by segmenting and then

splicing the themes together. In the opening of the coda section the string’s theme 1 (mm

1-2) is repeated once in the wind choir (mm 349-350) and then by the string choir (mm

351-352) (Table 4). In all three occurrences, the harmony, melody, and rhythms are the

same (with voicing adjusted for the different choirs) differing only in key and instrument

family. Because of each instrument choirs’ marriage to a respective theme, the change

from the expected string choir to wind choir in measure 349 is marked and is the first

indication to the listener that this is a new section and not a repeat of section 3 (Table 3).

This shifting of instrument choirs in measures 349-364 greatly assists the listener in

following the rapidly changing tonicizations and also prepares the listener for the hocket-

like technique in measures 365-386 wherein a 2-beat motive is repeated by toggling

between instrument families (Table 4). As illustrated above, the technique of exploiting

instrument choirs and their themes provides exciting contrast while greatly (and quickly)

clarifying form in this movement.

The art of orchestration is the realization and undercutting of cultural

expectations. Orchestrational techniques evolve their own rules with respect to era,

composer, and genre, and settle into orchestral norms specific to each work. These

orchestrational norms are formed early in each work and create the guidelines for marked

and unmarked events which can either clarify or muddle small and large formal structure.

Marked events can provide extreme contrasts such as the silence in Haydn’s Surprise

Symphony and the change in extended technique in Penderecki’s Threnody to the Victims

19

of Hiroshima, or more subtle (but equally significant) instrument family changes such as

in Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 4, movement 3. This application of marked and

unmarked orchestral events can create a significantly different interpretation of form as

will be evidenced in Chapter 3, “Brahms’s Variations on a Theme by Haydn for

Orchestra, Op. 56 A and Variations on a Theme by Haydn for Piano, Op. 56 B.”

20

CHAPTER 3

BRAHMS’S VARIATIONS ON A THEME BY HAYDN FOR ORCHESTRA, OP. 56 A

AND VARIATIONS ON A THEME BY HAYDN FOR PIANO, OP. 56 B

Brahms most likely conceived of writing his Variations on a Theme by Haydn

Opp. 56A and 56B as two independent works with the same donnée (original musical

concept) rather than an orchestral version and piano transcription. This can be seen in

correspondence from around the time the piano version was completed. Clara Schumann

wrote in her diary on August 20, 1873, “...In the morning I tried out with Johannes [his]

new variations for two claviers on the ?-theme (sic), which are entirely wonderful...”32

Apparently around this time she had told Fritz Simrock, Brahms’s publisher, about the

piece because he sent Brahms an irritated letter over a misunderstanding. A week later

(September 4) Brahms responded:

I did not write you about the variations for two reasons. In the first place, I thought of Rieter [-Biedermann, his other publisher], and in the second place, they are actually variations for orchestra. More about it shortly, when I have made up my mind.

Simrock responded (September 6):

The variations for orchestra? So much the better – [in French:] that won’t hinder the two pieces – send them to me soon and do not think so much about Rieter but about the other “honest man” [pun on the name Biefermann]!! You probably have the score already finished and are having it played in Munich? I am very glad of it...

In Donald M. McCorkle’s investigation of these passages he suggests that Brahms may

not have thought of re-writing the piece for orchestra until he played it through

(completed) with Clara Schumann; there is no mention of orchestrating the piece before

September 4th.

32

Donald M. McCorkle, “The Variations within the 1873 Portfolio.” Variations on a Theme of Haydn, Opp. 56A and 56B (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1976) 19-21.

21

Understanding the two versions of Variations on a Theme by Haydn as “fraternal

twins” allows one to view the two pieces’ differences with greater meticulousness. One’s

perception of the two works, and hence one’s understanding of them, is significantly

influenced by the application of orchestration to the donnée, leading to essential

differences between versions. Because of this, Variations on a Theme by Haydn Opp.

56A and 56B, will prove a worthy example of how orchestration can effect the perception

of form.

Style, Topic, and Degree of Dignity

Music has a lengthy history of characteristic figures that help define styles and

connote various affects to the listener. In Leonard Ratner’s book, Classic Music;

Expression, Form and Style, he catalogs these figures as topics and clarifies their

constituent musical features through historic sources.33 Topics (and the more

comprehensive style) have long been useful in differentiating between pieces with the

same formal structure (e.g., binary) in a set of works (e.g., dances in a Baroque suite).

Topics and styles are most typically applied with respect to tempo, meter, and

characteristic rhythmic figures (although musical gestures and contours can also play a

role as in the horn call), but as demonstrated in Musical Meaning in Beethoven by Hatten

(see pp 6-9), Playing with Signs by V. Kofi Agawu, and Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart by

Wye Jamison Allanbrook, the expressive content of topics and styles adds another

dimension to the understanding of style and, therefore, can lead to a greater

understanding of form.34

As discussed earlier, Hatten’s expressive genre theory is based on the idea that

there is significance in difference. Orchestral technique is established early in each piece

becoming the unmarked orchestral norm. The length of time devoted to establishing the

orchestrational norm would depend upon instrumentation, composer, genre, era, and

33 Leonard Ratner, Classic Music; Expression, Form and Style (New York: Schirmer Books, 1980), 3-27. 34 Agawu, V. Kofi, Playing with Signs: A Semiotic Interpretation of Classic Music (Princeton: Princeton University Press) 1991. Allanbrook, Wye Jamison, Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart; Le Nozze di Figaro and Don Giovanni (Chicago: University of Chicago Press) 1984. Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven.

22

overall length of each piece. It may be easier to establish the orchestral norm after it has

been deviated from, such as the marked silence in Haydn’s Surprise Symphony, 4th

movement. The piece can either return to its original unmarked state, such as in the

Haydn, or remain in its new marked state, such as the new extended technique in

Penderecki’s Threnody eventually becoming the new unmarked orchestral norm.

Agawu approaches a semiotic theory of classical music by applying his theory of

topic (T) and essence of topic (E) within the confines of plot (P) or structural rhythm

(SR) to a Beginning-Middle-End (BME) paradigm as established by Schenkerian

analysis. Agawu believes that this BME paradigm provides the “much needed” syntax

that leads to the formation of a topical hierarchy. Agawu continues that these topics (T)

can be either examined in two ways. Topics (T) can be examined with respect to other

“extra-musical” events (i.e. a confrontation between high and low styles, an episode from

a commedia dell’arte, a critique of an Enlightenment world view) resulting in a plot (P)

reading. Topics (T) can also be examined by stripping them of their referentiality and

using just the pure “essence” (E) (rhythm, a procedure, a melodic progression, a cadence)

of each topic (T) and applying it to the BME paradigm resulting in a structural reading

(SR). Agawu believes both of these methods have merit, but by stripping topics to their

“essence” it is easier to validate topics’ influence on overall structure thereby producing a

more persuasive argument. 35

This is in stark contrast to Allanbrook’s application of topic as a significant

thematic element in Le nozze di Figaro and Don Giovanni. In Allanbrook’s analysis, he

uses the low/middle/high styles (degree of dignity) implied within dances to further

character development in these operas. The given style provides the character more

meaning; much like meter and word choice enhances characters in Shakespearian plays.

The degree of dignity inherently implied in styles was considered an important

element in eighteenth-century music. Ratner claims that, “In vocal music, the connection

between feeling and figure was explicit. In instrumental music – which imitated opera,

church music, and ballet – this connection could only be implied, but it was

35 Agawu, Playing with Signs, 128-130.

23

unquestionably present.”36 Ratner establishes the prevalent opinion of a style’s degree of

dignity during the eighteenth century:

Degrees of dignity are described by Johann Adolph Scheibe in Der critische Musikus, 1745. He distinguishes between the high, middle and low styles. He says that the high style must be stately and emphatic; the harmony must be full, the ideas fully carried through, the melody rich in invention, fresh, lively, and elevated. It should be used only for heroes, kings, and other great men and noble spirits; magnanimity, majesty, love of power, magnificence, pride, astonishment, anger, fear, madness, revenge, doubt, and other similar qualities and passions can only be expressed in the high style. The middle style, according to Scheibe, is ingenious, pleasant, and flowing; it must please the listener rather than excite him or lead him to reflection. The melody must be clear, lively, flowing, and well turned; harmony must serve only to make the melody clearer and must never dominate (this refers to texture, rather than chord progression). Joy, delight, love, devotion, modesty, and patience are the best imitated in this style. The low style avoids all clever elaborations; it permits no extensions and should be used in short pieces. It represents nature in its simplest form, and is used for low-born persons and for objects and situations associated with them. Its characteristic embodiment is the shepherd; some others are beggars, slaves, poor prisoners, and farmers.37

This paper is based on the idea that during the eighteenth century the cultural norm in art

music (including Brahms’s Variations) is this high style. In the above quote, Ratner

establishes that high-style music would include a stately, unambiguously rhythmic and

powerful/authoritative melody, and perhaps reference to the learned style (canon, fugue,

fugato) or historical styles (styles associated with the church e.g. chorale, stile antico, and

oratorio.)38 High-style music could then be paired with the appropriate/predictable

instrumentation techniques. A high style of instrumentation would include fanfares

played by brass choirs, a fugue played by organ, or oratorios performed by strings and

solo voice. The combination of high style music and a high style of instrumentation

would thus produce blocked orchestration such as predictable (unmarked) tessituras,

36 Ratner, Classic Music, 8. 37 Ratner, Classic Music, 7-8. 38 Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven, 75, and Ratner, Classic Music, 23.

24

predictable (unmarked) voice hierarchies, (unmarked) clear and full harmonization with

clear voice leading, and ideas carried through without shifting of voice lines.

Mixed orchestration should be considered as an antithesis of blocked

orchestration rather than high style music (much like Hatten’s regulation of unmarked –

comic vs. marked – tragic.)39 Therefore, in opposition, mixed orchestration would use

marked orchestration, marked tessituras, ambiguous voice hierarchies with ambiguous

voice leading and shifting of voice lines mid-phrase – but perhaps with the high-style

music of a chorale or fugue. The grouping of mixed orchestration with low-style music

would be seen to strengthen both (e.g. musical saw used in disjoined melody in a Classic

era work), but is not necessary to establish its existence or significance to the given work.

According to this theory, mixed (marked) orchestration is dependent upon the existence

and prevalence to blocked (unmarked) orchestration to establish its influence on the

passage/work in question. The occurrence of mixed orchestration can further support

smaller-scale structural divisions that were already present allowing for larger-scale

structural divisions to emerge from orchestral/stylistic pairings. This grants for the

seemingly small difference in medium between Variations on a Theme by Haydn for

Orchestra, Op 56 A and Variations on a Theme by Haydn for Piano, Op 56 B to provide

each with a significantly different interpretation of overall form as will be presented in

“Orchestrational Influence on Overall Form.”

Brahms and the Division between High and Low Styles

In the Variations for Orchestra, Brahms contrasts musical styles and levels of

orchestration to create inter- and intra-variation formal coherence. The following tables

are a skeletal mapping of the piece’s form and style:

39 Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven, 76.

25

Table 5. Skeletal mapping of the Theme

Measures Structural Division

Thematic Style (B f) Tonal Structure

1-10 (repeated) A Chorale in high march style, ecclesiastical high style

I-V (1-5), I-I (6-10)

11-29 (repeated) B Re-emphasis of high march style, ecclesiastical high style

V-V (11-18), I-I (19-22), I6

4 –I (23-29)

The theme (Table 5) uses duple meter with equal stress on both beats. It has crisp,

repeated dotted-eighth-sixteenth-note patterns with a clear representation of the tonic.

The orchestral version uses double reed choir with horns to suggest royalty (this will be

discussed further on page 30). Voice lines are retained throughout the theme and the

theme ends in a full tonic chord with open spacing over the full range of the orchestra, yet

each instrument stays in a comfortable tessitura.

Table 6. Skeletal mapping of Variation 1



30-39 (repeated) A Blending of march melody/accompaniment with pastoral countermelody (The drone accompaniment figure in mm 30-32 and 35-37 is a pastoral quality, but because of its proximity to the same figure [and same note] in an established march style segment, this drone figure takes on both qualities: march and pastoral.) middle/high style

I-V (30-34), I-I (35-39)

40-58 (repeated) B Continuation of drone and pastoral, middle/high style

i-I (40-43), IV-I (44-48), I-I (48-58)

Variation 1 (Table 6) begins in duple meter with a drone accompaniment. An eighth-note

melody and pastoral triplet countermelody figure overlay each other – both are flowing,

diatonic, rhythmically simple, repetitious, and highly arpeggiated. The drone

accompaniment begins with low reeds (+ horn) producing a warm bridge connecting the

26

brilliant-style end of the theme and the calmer pastoral countermelody in variation 1. This

timbral choice is more pronounced after the high winds enter in m 35 with the same tone

and rhythm but a pronounced “color change.” The drone continues in part B and the

string’s triplet countermelody comes into prominence becoming the main melodic motive

by m 44. This will be discussed further in “An Alternate Reading of Overall Form.”




59-68 (repeated) A Gavotte, high dance style i-V (59-63), i-i (64-68)

69-87 (repeated) B Continuation of gavotte, high dance style V-V (69-76), i-V7 (77-80), I-I (81-87)

Variation 2 (Table 7) uses duple meter, a dotted-eighth–sixteenth note repeated march

rhythm in the melody and a “running eighth-note accompaniment” suggesting the gavotte

style. The triplet pastoral motive from variation 1 returns in mm 62-63 and 67-68 in

violin 1. The eighth-note march motive from variation 1 returns as “running eighth-note

accompaniment.” The eighth-note accompaniment figure emerges as the melodic figure

in mm 82, 84-86. The dotted-eighth-note-sixteenth-note pattern never deviates from the

woodwinds/brass suggesting a rigidly formal blocked orchestration. Voice lines are

retained throughout this variation.




88-107 A Singing style - duple meter, middle style

I-I (88-93) (elision), iii°

6-I (93-97),

I-I (98-103) (elision), I-I (103-107)

108-145 B Singing style/singing allegro - duple meter, middle style

V7-V (108-115), I-I (116-120) (elision), V7/IV -I (120-126), V-I (127-135), I-vi (135-139) (elision), vi-I (139-145)

27

In variation 3, measures 88-97 (Table 8), the oboe and bassoon melody and

countermelody are orchestrated similar to Part A of the theme. Viola, cello and double

bass are acoustical doublings of the “walking bass line” (similar to the gavotte’s “running

eighth-note accompaniment” from variation 2). Horn emphasizes the chromatic

ascending line in mm 90-92 and 95-97. In measures 98-107 the melody, countermelody

and “walking bass line” are repeated verbatim in strings. The oboe joins the horn in a

repeat of the chromatic ascending line and the flutes and bassoons introduce a new

sixteenth-note accompaniment, prominent specifically because of timbre. Voice lines are

clearly established and retained throughout (again reminiscent of the voice structure of

the theme). This is the first time the repeats are written out in both the piano and

orchestra versions. Variation 3 has a marked change in the number of voices and mixed

orchestration, particularly beginning in m 108. This will be discussed further in “An

Alternate Reading of Overall Form.”




146-165 A Singing style - triple meter, middle style

i-i (146-155), i-i (156-165)

166-205 B Continuation of singing style - triple meter, middle style

V-V (166-173), i-i (174-185), V7-V (186-193), i-i (194-205)

Variation 4 (Table 9) is the only variation entirely in minor mode. The melody is

stepwise with a “walking bass line.” The primary melody (eighth notes) and secondary

melody (sixteenth notes) toggle back and forth in prominence and instrument families,

but voices/instrument families do not change mid-phrase. Voice lines remain extremely

stable once they are established.

28




206-225 A Tarantella, low dance style IV6

4-V (206-210),

IV6

4-I (211-215),

IV-I (216-225) 226-263 B Continuation of tarantella, low dance

style I6

4-V7 (226-233),

vi-I (234-244), i6

4-I (245-263)

Variation 5 (Table 10) begins with the melody/harmony split between winds and strings.

Sudden changes in dynamics as presented in variations 2 and 4 are used throughout

variation 5 as a significant motive. Musical ideas stay consistent within instrumental

voices, but because of tempo, changes in dynamic, and the antiphonal nature of this

section, the melody line shifts between instruments and instrument families within the

phrases.




264-273 A Galant style military march, middle/low style

I-vi (264-273)

274-292 B Continuation of galant style military march, middle/low style

V-V (274-282), I-I (282-292)

Variation 6 (Table 11) begins with the return of the instrumentation from m 30 (variation

1), but this time the melody is in the low winds/horns and accompaniment is in the

strings. In this variation the standard phrase structure from the theme returns. The brass

are prominent throughout this variation, significant because until this variation they were

primarily supporting. Instruments are now treated as one entity orchestrated by range

instead of by family.

29




293-302 (repeated)

A Siciliano, low dance style I-V7 (293-297), I-I (298-302)

303-321 (repeated)

B Continuation of siciliano, low dance style

V7-V7 (303-310), I-I (311-321)

In variation 7 (Table 12) the orchestra version leaves out the 2 opening gracenotes found

in the piano version. The register change between first (mm 293-297) and second (mm

298-302) phrases from the piano version is now emphasized by a change in

instrumentation: first phrase - flute with viola to cello and bass, second phrase - violin

with bassoon to flute, oboe, and clarinet. Even with the piano dynamic marking, the high

tessitura of the flute/viola entrance gives the beginning a marked strength. This variation

continues the use of orchestra as one entity from variation 6. This is prevalent in mm

314-321 wherein 2 groups of 3 descending eighth notes pass between brass, winds and

strings. This is the first appearance of a seamless melding of melodic elements between

instrument families as differentiated from the rhythmic driven elements in variations 5

and 6.


Measures Structural Division Thematic Style (B f) Tonal Structure

322-341 A Storm and stress, fantasia style

i-V7 (322-326), i-i (327-331), VI-i (332-341)

342- 360 (repeated)

B (This section can be interpreted as a development of part A instead of a new part B.)

Continuation of storm and stress, fantasia style

V-I (342-346), I-V (346-349), I-I (350-360)

Variation 8 (Table 13) uses minor mode throughout this variation and the grand

chromatic passages typical of storm and stress. Orchestration is set up in that the melodic

figure "sweeps across” the orchestra, linking the strings (m 322) to the winds (m 327) to

30

the horns (m 334). This orchestrational technique can be interpreted as a development of

mm 314-321 in variation 7 and a continuation of the “melding of instrument families”

climaxing in mm 354-360. During these measures winds (piccolo, flute, clarinet,

bassoon), brass (horn 1/2), strings, and timpani blend together creating one sound with

the oboe/horn 3 figure acting as a stabilizing foundation (oboe/horn 3 figure does not

appear in the piano version).

Table 14. Skeletal mapping of Finale

Section Measures Continuous Variation


361-365 1 Fugato I-V7

366-370 2 Continuation of fugato I-V7

Intr

o

371-375 3 Continuation of fugato, high style I-V7 376-380 4 Marcato, high style I-V7 381-385 5 Continuation of marcato, high style I-V7 386-390 6 Continuation of marcato, high style I-V7 391-395 7 Marcato, fugato, high style I-V7

Se

ctio

n 1

396-400 8 Continuation of marcato, fugato, high style

fIV64 (vii of

V)-V7

401-405 9 Singing style, middle style I-V7 406-410 10 Continuation of singing style, middle

style I-V7

411-415 11 Singing style, but becoming marcato with pizzicato cello and staccato (with slurs) winds, middle style

I-V7 Se

ctio

n 2

416-420 12 Continuation of singing style with marcato tendencies, middle style

I-V7

421-425 13 Continuation of singing style with marcato tendencies, high style

I-V7

426-430 14 Marcato, high style i-v 431-435 15 Continuation of marcato, high style I-V 436-440 16 Continuation of marcato, high style i-V7

441-445 17 Continuation of marcato, high style I-V7 446-462 18 Maestoso, high style I-I, reprise of

mm 1-9, 23-29 (448-462)

Se

ctio

n 3

463-471 Coda Coda, high style I-I The finale differs from earlier variations in that it is comprised of 18 continuous

variations built on a repeating 5-bar ostinato-like bass line. This is the only variation that

31

contains the original theme (mm 448-462) creating a circular relationship while elevating

the meaning of the theme. This will be discussed further in “An Alternate Reading of

Overall Form.”

The Blocked Orchestration of Measures 1-10

As discussed above, Brahms’s Variations establishes the blocked orchestral norm

in the theme. In Brahms’s Variations, a double reed choir introduces the theme. This is

significant since it is reminiscent of the typically formal “Trio” sections and double reed

consorts in larger works by Handel or J.S. Bach.40 The solemnity inherent in the double

reed choir with horns upgrades the simple (yet stately) chorale in the piano version

(indicative of a country church service) into a high march style suggesting regality and

divine right.41 The thicker instrumentation and louder dynamic in measures 11-29 further

suggests this style.

The accompanying voicing supports the blocked orchestration of the theme. The

orchestration is predictable and voice lines and instrumental lines remain consistent,

resulting in a very controlled homogeneous texture. The following two figures are the

score and voicing graph of the first 10 measures of the theme, illustrating the static

orchestrational character of this passage (Figures 9 and 10).

40 A partial list includes: J.S. Bach, Orchestral Suite No. 1: Overture m 29 (marked “Trio”) and m 56 (marked “Trio”), Bourée II, 2 oboes with bassoon; Orchestral Suite No. 4: Overture m 49 (not marked “Trio”), Bourée II, 3 oboes with bassoon; Brandenburg Concerto No. 1, 4th mvt, 1st Trio, 2 oboes with bassoon; St. Matthew’s Passion: “Wiewohl mein Herze in Tränen schwimmt,” 2 oboe d’amores, continuo and soprano; “Ich will dir mein Herze schenken,” 2 oboe d’amores, continuo and soprano; “Mein Jesus schweigt zu falschen Lügen stille,” 2 oboes, continuo and tenor; “Sehet, Jesus hat die Hand,” 2 oboe da caccias, continuo and alto; B minor Mass: “Et in Spiritum Sanctum Dominium,” 2 oboe d’amores, continuo and bass. G.F. Handel, prominent sections in Water Music, 2 oboes with bassoon; and Music for the Royal Fireworks, 3 oboes with bassoon. 41 Allanbrook, Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart, 66-67.

32

Figure 9. Theme, mm 1-10

33

Figure 10. Variations for Orchestra, mm 1-10, graph

The Mixed Orchestration of Measures 108-111

Measures 108-111 illustrate mixed orchestration. In these measures the quarter-

two-eighth-note melody in horn 1 (m 108), and the bassoon’s four-eighth-note

countermelody (m 108), shift between clarinet, horn 3 and strings. This passage is

intensified by the proximity to the high style double reed choir in mm 88-97. These

changes in voice line and instrumental line result in a sudden switch to a mixed-

orchestration heterogeneous texture. This is illustrated in Figures 11 and 12.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vlacellobass

sopranoaltobass

34

Figure 11. Variation 3, mm 108-111

Figure 12. Variation 3, mm 108-111, graph

108 109 110 111piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vln 2 div.vla vla div.cellobass

(acting) soprano inner-voice 3inner-voice 1 inner-voice 4inner-voice 2 (acting) bass

35

Orchestrational Influence on Overall Form

As with many theme-and-variations movements, Brahms’s Variations can be

organized into an intra-variation schematic order. But unlike most theme and variations,

this piece can be viewed in two distinct ways, one taking into account a strict formal

reading and the other placing emphasis on orchestrational type.

A Traditional Reading of Overall Arc Form

This piece can be organized in a largely symmetrical arc form:

Theme 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Finale

Figure 13. Graph of Traditional Arc Form

Table 15. Table of Traditional Arc Form focusing on a traditional analysis of harmonic and thematic relationships Sections Relationship Theme & Finale

High style Theme is “high march style” as explained above; finale begins with a fugato and ends in a triumphant expression of the theme in full orchestra.

1 & 8 Both center on the eighth-note pulse, 1st as eighth-note triplet in a smooth pastoral style, the latter in a smooth storm and stress.

2 & 7 Both are the only two dance forms, 2nd is a gavotte, the 7th is in the siciliano style. Both dances focus on dotted-eighth-note-sixteenth-note pattern elsewhere found only in the theme.

3 & 6 Similar in their use of running eighth notes and are the only two variations that stay in the major key for the entirety of the variation.

4 & 5 Both deviate from the strict 48-measure length of the theme, but are similar to each other (60 and 58 measures respectively). Their proximity causes them to be more complimentary rather than compliant: variation 4 is in a smooth, singing style and minor, variation 5 is in a staccato, tarantella-like style and major.

As shown in Figure 13 and Table 15 above, Brahms’s Variations can be arranged

in a largely symmetrical arc form pivoted around variations 4 and 5. This arc form is only

dependent upon the presence of motive, harmony, and thematic style and can be applied

36

to both the orchestral and piano versions. The following section will illustrate that an

analysis with respect to orchestrational technique places the orchestrational version into

another form distinguishing it from the original piano version.

An Alternate Reading of Overall Form

The orchestrational choices set forth in this piece not only establish formal

divisions within variations, but through their strategic placement in many variations, they

create their own formal hierarchy. Brahms’s Variations on a Theme by Haydn for

Orchestra, Op. 56 A can be split into 4 sections each using a greater complexity of

orchestration techniques reflecting the thematic development of each section (Figure 14

and Table 16).

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4

Theme 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Finale

Figure 14. Graph of Alternate Form

Table 16. Table of Alternate Form focusing on an analysis with respect to orchestrational techniques Section Relationship Theme, 1 & 2

a) Straightforward doublings with clear establishment of consorts by families

b) Marriage of motives to specific consorts c) Lack of shifting voice lines mid-phrase (lack of dialog between

consorts) 3, 4 & 5 a) Passing melody/countermelody between consorts between phrases

b) Uses instrumentation to clarify changing a motive from melody to countermelody and vice versa

c) Dialog by use of dynamic contrast while keeping motives consistent to consorts during phrases

6, 7 & 8 a) Consorts grouped by range rather than family b) Dialog by shifting voice lines mid-phrase d) More use of full orchestra

37

Table 16 - continued. Finale a) Uses full orchestra over full range

b) Groups consorts by family, range, or other c) Dialog within and between families e) Shifting/joining voice lines mid-phrase

These section groupings illustrate the significance of orchestration as a means of

measurable change. The orchestrational norm is presented in the theme and reinforced in

variations 1 and 2. Orchestrational technique is developed alongside the thematic

development in sections 2 and 3. In section 4, orchestrational techniques suddenly shift in

complexity reflecting the higher level of thematic sophistication in the finale. This is in

sharp contrast from the finale’s equivalence to the theme as presented earlier in the

Traditional Arc Form (Figure 13 and Table 6).

The orchestration in section1. In addition to the thematic development between

the theme and variation 1, the choices in orchestration give more meaning (extra-musical

information, that is, style implications) and greater continuity within this section. This is

reflected in the opening of variation 1, mm 30-34 (Figures 15 and 16).


38


These opening 5 measures are comprised of 3 parts: the Bf drone

accompaniment, the quarter-note melody, and the triplet countermelody. The Bf bass

drone in variation 1 is taken directly from the theme’s cadential BfM chords in mm 27-

29. The drone uses the wind sonority from the theme, but limits it to the low winds,

adding the high winds in measure 35 as their own consort. The small change from both

high and low winds (+ horn) to low winds (+ horn) allows the string melody and

countermelody to be heard unobstructed by the higher timbres while linking the theme

and first variation together.

As mentioned above in Table 6, this variation contrasts the higher march style

influence from the theme retained in the drone, with the low style pastoral triplet

countermelody. This pastoral triplet motive remains in the strings throughout variation 1

(and variation 2) contrasting the now low style strings from the high style double reeds in

30 31 32 33 34piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vlacellobass

sopranoaltobass

39

the theme (see page 30). Neither the double reeds nor the strings retain this style

designation for the entire piece, but the close proximity of contrasting degrees of dignity

so early in the piece suggests the importance of musical styles as another form of musical

expression in this work.

The orchestration in section 2. In variation 3 the development of the sixteenth-

note countermelody is supported by instrumentation. This variation begins with 3 parts:

melody (oboe 1 and bassoon 1, m 88), harmony (oboe 2 and bassoon 2, m 88), and eighth

note “walking bass line” (viola, cello, bass, m 88). The string family then repeats this

phrase with a new sixteenth-note accompaniment figure in the flute and bassoon (mm 98-

107). Beginning in m 108, the “walking bass line” and opening motive of the melody

pass between instruments in a “playful argument” to decide which will be the new

prominent melody (see page 32). This “argument” is settled in measure 112, with the

oboe playing the new transitional melody (a development of the “walking bass line”)

over the horn’s new transitional harmony (a development of the original melody from m

88) until the reprise of the original melody and harmony in measure 116. In measure 127

the “playful argument” returns, this time with the melody motive from measures 88 and

108 and a harmony developed from the blending of the “walking bass line” from measure

88 and sixteenth-note accompaniment from measure 98 (Figures 17 and 18).


40


This new “playful argument” is settled again by the oboe’s conformational return in

measure 131. The prominence provided in instrument choice of the new sixteenth-note

melody shifts the melody/harmony hierarchy to a new madrigal-like equivalency.

The orchestration in section 3. In measures 314-321 of variation 7, the

orchestration shifts from being primarily melody and accompaniment, to a new orchestra

timbre comprised of multiple music ideas moving through the wind, brass, and string

families and high and low ranges (Figures 19 and 20). This passage contains 3 motives:

descending eighth-note motive (horn, m 314), dotted-eighth-sixteenth-note motive

(clarinet, m 314), and quarter-eighth pulse (violin, m 314). These motives ebb and flow

into one another (partly due to a shifting of dynamic levels) creating a new full orchestra

timbre before variation 8 develops this concept into a full variation.

This passage can be heard as a development of mm 127-134 in variation 3 not

only for its use of passing motives between families, but by the reprisal of oboe and horn

as the main melodic instruments (see Figure 17).

127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vln 2 div.vla vla div.cellobass

(acting) soprano inner-voice 3inner-voice 1 inner-voice 4inner-voice 2 (acting) bass

41


314

42


The orchestration in section 4. In Brahms’s Variations the finale is different

from the other variations in many respects including basic formal structure (continuous

variations and a coda instead of sectional variations), reprisal of the original theme (mm

448-462, Table 14), and orchestration techniques. Although the Traditional Arc Form

groups this section with the theme, an analysis using orchestrational styles along with

thematic development places the finale into its own section.

This variation begins with a gradual introduction of instruments using the high

fugato style (see Table 14). This sudden shift from storm and stress style in variation 8 to

the antiquated fugato in the finale is emphasized by the change of the quick pulsing full

orchestra to the held notes in the cello and bass. Even though the finale’s first note is only

3 beats, the length acts similarly to the marked silence in Haydn’s Surprise Symphony, 4th

movement (p 9) and the oboe’s held A in Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 4, 3rd movement

(p 16) in that it allows the listener to “cleanse the aural pallet” and signals to the listener

that this is a new section (Figures 21 and 22).

314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321

piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vln 2 div.vla vla div.cellobass

(acting) soprano inner-voice 5inner-voice 1 inner-voice 6inner-voice 2 inner-voice 7inner-voice 3 inner-voice 8inner-voice 4 (acting) bass

43

Figure 21. Finale, mm 361-371

Figure 22. Finale, mm 361-371, graph

361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371

piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vln 2 div.vla vla div.cellocello div.bass

(acting) soprano inner-voice 2 inner-voice 5 inner-voice 7 inner-voice 11inner-voice 1 inner-voice 4 inner-voice 6 inner-voice 10 (acting) bass

44

The finale also presents the only return of the original theme in full orchestra over

the full range with consorts grouped by range instead of family. This reprisal begins in

measure 448, climaxing in mm 457-460 with a tutti fortissimo prevailed by the horn choir

(Figures 23 and 24). Significantly, mm 448-456 use mixed orchestration suddenly

switching to blocked orchestration in mm 457-471, further emphasizing the new

triumphant maestoso style of the fanfare-like theme. The marked return to blocked

orchestration can be understood to be a recapitulation of the theme while elevating the

meaning of the theme. The presentation of the “high march style” has transfigured into a

high exultant style procession. This passage places the finale higher in regard to an

orchestrational style hierarchy directly opposing the Traditional Arc Form’s theme and

finale equivalence.

Figure 23.Finale, mm 455-462

45

Figure 23 – continued.

46

Figure 24. Finale, mm 448-462, graph

The application of style’s expressive content to how that content is presented

orchestrationally adds another dimension to the understanding of other styles and a

greater understanding of form. In Variations on a Theme by Haydn for Orchestra, the

contrasting of orchestrational types alongside the development of themes strengthens the

effects of other musical parameters: register, dynamic, duration and timbre creating inter-

and intra-variation formal coherence significantly different than its companion work,

Variations on a Theme by Haydn for Piano.

piccfl 1fl 2ob1ob 2cl 1cl 2bsn 1bsn 2cbsnhrn 1hrn 2hrn 3hrn 4tpt 1tpt 2timptrianglevln 1vln 2vln 2 div.vla vla div.cellocello div.bass

(acting) soprano inner-voice 4 inner-voice 8 (acting) bassinner-voice 1 inner-voice 5 inner-voice 9inner-voice 2 inner-voice 6 inner-voice 10inner-voice 3 inner-voice 7 inner-voice 11

448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462

47

CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION

Orchestration has a significant impact on the form and structure of music

affecting both small and large formal structures. The shift in attention away from the

theoretical “tones” to the more inclusive “notes” can add greater depth into the

exploration of the total work. In this paper I have examined orchestration’s influence on

small and large forms by applying the style-driven analytical model of expressive genre

theory specifically in its use of marked and unmarked events signaling a change in

musical style and/or orchestrational norm. 42

Expressive genre theory proves to be an appropriate analytical method to the art

of orchestration because of its reliance on the realization and undercutting of cultural

expectations. Orchestrational norms are subject to the era, composer, and genre and are

formed early in the work providing an unmarked background for the upcoming marked

events. Using this theory, marked and unmarked events offer subtle and not subtle

changes in orchestration that constitute measurable change in small and large forms. This

is evidenced by a marked silence acting in lieu of a transition passage in Haydn’s

Surprise Symphony, and a marked change in timbre as section indicator in Penderecki’s

Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima. Also, the more subtle marked changes in

instrument family provide small and large sectional divisions in Tchaikovsky’s

Symphony No. 4, 3rd movement.

Topics and styles have long been applied to differentiate between pieces of the

same formal structure (e.g., binary) in a set of works (e.g., dances in a baroque suite).

These topics and styles are usually applied with respect to tempo, rhythm, and meter, but

their expressive content, along with degree of dignity, uncovers another dimension to the

understanding of style and, therefore, can lead to a greater understanding of form.

Using this analytical method, orchestration techniques can be divided into two

contrasting entities: blocked orchestration (unmarked), which uses clear and full

harmonization with clear voice leading, and mixed orchestration (marked), which uses

ambiguous voice leading and shifting of voices mid-phrase. Marked events of mixed

42

Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven.

48

orchestration support smaller-scale structural divisions allowing for larger-scale structural

divisions to emerge from orchestral/stylistic pairings. These pairings can lead to a

significantly different interpretation of overall form as evidenced in Brahms’s Variations

on a Theme by Haydn for Orchestra.

In Chapter 3, two formal analyses of Brahms’s Variations were given, one based

on traditional analytical methods and the other using the expressive genre analytical

model, historically documented degree of dignity, and the use of voice lines/instrumental

lines. By applying the orchestrationally influenced expressive genre analytical model, the

contrasting of musical styles, and orchestration techniques uncovers inter- and intra-

variation formal coherence. This leads to an alternate overall form consisting of 4

sections each with an increase of orchestration complexity reflecting the thematic

development of this work.

This paper is premised on the idea that orchestrational technique is in fact a

definable, culturally derived style. As Leonard B. Meyer states,

Style constitutes the universe of discourse within which musical means arise. There are many musical styles. They vary from culture to culture, from epoch to epoch within the same culture, and even within the same epoch and culture. This plurality of musical styles results because styles exist not as unchanging physical processes in the world of nature, but as psychological processes ingrained as habits in the perceptions, dispositions, and responses of those who have learned through practice and experience to understand a particular style. What remains constant from style to style are not scales, modes, harmonies, or manner of performance, but the psychology of human mental processes – the ways in which the mind, operating within the context of culturally established norms, selects and organizes the stimuli that are presented to it.43

As illustrated in this paper, orchestrational techniques change with each piece, but

the process of orchestration is ubiquitous regardless of era, composer, or genre.

Expressive genre theory, because of its culturally derived basis, proves to be a viable

means to analyze the role of orchestration within the compositional process of composers

of many eras. Finally, it is hoped that a closer examination of orchestrational techniques

as a codifiable entity can provide greater insight to the complete finished work.

43 Leonard B. Meyer, Music, the Arts, and Ideas: Patterns and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Culture. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967) 7.

49

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allanbrook, Wye Jamison. Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart; Le Nozze di Figaro and Don Giovanni. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.

Battistella, Edwin. The Logic of Markedness. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Cutler, Timothy Spence. “Orchestration and the Analysis of Tonal Music: Interaction between Orchestration and Other Musical Parameters in Selected Symphonic Compositions, c. 1785-1835.” PhD. diss., Yale University, 2000.

Hatten, Robert S. Musical Meaning in Beethoven. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.

Hopkins, Robert G. Closure and Mahler’s Music: the Role of Secondary Parameters. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990.

Kofi, Agawu, V. Playing with Signs: A Semiotic Interpretation of Classic Music. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991.

McCorkle, Donald M. “The Variations within the 1873 Portfolio.” Variations on a Theme of Haydn, Opp. 56A and 56B. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1976.

Meyer, Leonard B. Music, the Arts, and Ideas: Patterns and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967.

Meyer, Leonard B. Emotion and Meaning in Music. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1956.

Moore, Hilarie Clark. “The Structural Role of Orchestration in Brahms’s Music: A Study of the Third Symphony.” PhD. diss., Yale University, 1991.

Penderecki, Krzysztof. To the Victims of Hiroshima. Krakow: Polskie Wydawnictwo Muzyczne Edition, 1960.

Ratner, Leonard. Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style. New York: Schirmer Books, 1980.

Rothstein, William. “On Implied Tones,” Music Analysis 10 (October 1991): 289-328.

50

Schachter, Carl. Unfoldings: Essays in Schenkerian Theory and Analysis. Edited by Joseph N. Straus. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

51

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Kathryn E. Steetle was born in Massachusetts to southern parents resulting in a

childhood rich with sweet tea, grits, and Red Sox games. At the age of 7 she started piano

lessons ending them abruptly 6 months later because of the realization that she would

have to practice to get any better. When she was 9, she tried again with the clarinet

playing in the school band. The following year she switched to the oboe just to “be

different.” This one stuck.

Her family moved to Jacksonville, FL the summer before high school. Here she

attended Douglas Anderson School of the Arts High School where she studied oboe and

English horn with Claudia Minch and Eric Olson of the Jacksonville Symphony. This led

to Florida State University where she studied with Eric Ohlsson and became more

interested in Music Theory. After graduating with a BM in Music Theory in 2001, she

began her Master’s degree in Music Theory at Florida State University completing it in

2007.

Orchestration Markedness and Its Effect on Form

Documents

music degree

thesis of kathryn

form diagra

degree of master

evan jones committee

degree of dignity

orchestrational influence

brahmss variations