HOW TO APPLY THE SCHENKERIAN METHOD TO THE PERFORMANCE AND TEACHING OF CHOPIN’S AND MOZART’S PIANO MUSIC by YANJIE WANG A THESIS Presented to the School of Music and Dance and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts September 2018 ii THESIS APPROVAL PAGE Student: Yanjie Wang Title: How to Apply the Schenkerian Method to the Performance and Teaching of Chopin’s and Mozart’s Piano Music This thesis has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree in the School of Music and Dance by: Jack Boss Chairperson Tim S. Pack Member Alexandre Dossin Member and Janet Woodruff-Borden Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded September 2018 iii © 2018 Yanjie Wang iv THESIS ABSTRACT Yanjie Wang Master of Arts School of Music and Dance September 2018 Title: How to Apply the Schenkerian Method to the Performance and Teaching of Chopin’s and Mozart’s Piano Music This thesis focuses on the relationship between piano performance and Schenkerian analysis. Schenkerian analysis was designed initially as a practical guide for performers. In the different levels of a Schenkerian graph, we can see “musical forces” which lead the performer to deeply understand music itself. Using Schenkerian notation to highlight certain notes helps us to recognize lines behind the surface of the music that give certain passages coherence. This study concentrates on Chopin’s mastery of counterpoint and voice leading which leads me into the relationship of analysis and performance, typically by using the Schenkerian method. My examples will include a variety of pieces by both Chopin and Mozart, to show in what ways the Schenkerian analysis both highlights similarities and makes distinctions between composers and genres. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Yanjie Wang GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University of Oregon, Eugene DEGREES AWARDED: Master of Arts, Music Theory, 2018, University of Oregon Bachelor of Arts, Music, 2015, University of Oregon AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: Music Theory Schenkerian Analysis, Post-Tonal Theory, Analysis and Performance Piano Pedagogy Piano Performance PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Music Director, “When We Talk about the Past, What Do We Say,” Hollywood Fringe Festival, 2015 Private Piano Teacher, 2013 Editor, University of Oregon Chinese Flagship Program, 2010 Helped American students at UO edit their articles written in Chinese, and helped them with cultural background for articles in Chinese that they were reading GRANTS, AWARDS, AND HONORS: Finalist, Miss China Pageant, 2017 Winner, 2016 Miss California Angel Pageant, 2016 Silver Medal, Young Person’s Talent Competition for Beijing Olympics, 2008, for vocal performance vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am very thankful from the bottom of my heart to my dear professor Jack Boss for his patient teaching and encouragement. As an international student majoring in music theory, I encountered many different challenges: a high standard of English- language understanding, of clear analytical logic, and knowledge of the history of western music. My dear professor not only helped me explore the depths of the music field, but also edited my papers for many years. Thinking back to my childhood when I learned how to write in my native language, I never encountered a teacher who was willing to correct my papers in Chinese as carefully as my advisor does in English. It has been an unforgettable study experience in the United States for me to meet a great music theorist, Jack Boss, who also has so much experience and skill in editing—I am full of admiration for his rhetorical writing and editing skills. He taught me the Schenkerian method, post-tonal analysis, and other analytical courses. He always encourages me to have a broad horizon in my thinking about how Western music theory can influence Asian music. My experience as a pianist since I was 18 years old has been enhanced by my piano professor Alexandre Dossin, whom I met as an undergraduate, and have worked with through graduate study. Every week for an hour, my dear professor Alexandre Dossin gave me lessons on how to play the repertoire expressively, with humor, and fixed technical problems that carried over from my childhood piano experience. Alexandre Dossin has high standards as an artist in piano, striving for excellence in performance, and paid much attention to helping me catch hidden mistakes and fix problems which are not easy for a piano student to fix. He often stopped to explain the sentence structure and vii expressive qualities of a piece, sometimes using music theory. I am very thankful to my dear piano professor for encouraging me and supporting me, especially during my impasse. I thank him for trusting me, and his spiritual guidance will stay with me in my future career. There is another young pianist, Yashuangzi Xie, to whom I want to give special thanks. Even though I met her for the first time at 16 years old, she taught me for two years. I will never forget her, because she was the first person who inspired me to love the piano and its music. She introduced me to many different methods in piano pedagogy such as memorization, phrase structure, expressiveness, study of piano literature, etc. I will continue to be influenced by her as long as I play the piano. Both my piano professors used different types of rhythmic reduction to help demystify passages for me, as well as a variety of pedagogical methods to help me understand harmonization, memorization, formal structures, and the characteristics of different genres and different composers. They helped me to unlock the mysteries of the piano art and helped me to apply methodical concepts to my performance. All the details they taught me about methods and expressiveness will stay with me as I practice. Finally, I want to say to those who have accompanied me in the past and those I may meet in the future, “my love will be with you all, no matter where I am in another corner of the world.” I will miss you all. The experiences we encountered together, the difficulties through which you encouraged me, every moment, every memory, have been among the most important influences in my whole life. They will help me to become a much braver girl to face difficulties in my future career, and deal with different family issues. I will continue to pursue my goal to be a young musician with an international horizon, building a connection between western countries and China. viii For Zheng Zhang, My Family ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 II. ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN’S IMPROMPTU OP. 29, NO.1 .................................. 9 III. ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN’S ETUDE OP. 10, NO. 12 ........................................ 24 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 24 Comparison Between Schenker’s Graph and My Graph ..................................... 29 Chopin’s Etude Op. 10, No. 12 from the Piano Teacher’s Perspective ................ 47 IV. ANALYSIS OF MOZART’S PIANO SONATA K. 281 .................................... 54 V. EXPLORATION OF CHOPIN’S NOCTURNES OP. 9 ...................................... 72 Analysis of Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2 ...................................................... 72 Analysis of Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 3 ...................................................... 82 Intra-opus Connections in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3 ...................... 89 How to Fit Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 72 No. 1 into Sonata Form Type 1 ............... 95 VI. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 101 APPENDICES (SCHENKERIAN GRAPHS) .......................................................... 105 A. CHOPIN’S IMPROMPTU OP. 29, NO. 1 ..................................................... 105 B. CHOPIN’S ETUDE OP. 10, NO. 12 .............................................................. 110 C. MOZART’S PIANO SONATA, K. 281 ......................................................... 113 D. CHOPIN’S NOCTURNE OP. 9, NO. 2 ......................................................... 116 E. CHOPIN’S NOCTURNE OP. 9, NO. 3 ......................................................... 118 F. CHOPIN’S NOCTURNE OP. 72, NO. 1 ........................................................ 122 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................ 124 x LIST OF EXAMPLES Example Page 2.1. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No. 1 mm. 1-4 ..................................................... 10 2.2. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No. 1 mm. 1-2 ..................................................... 15 2.3. First Imaginary Continuo of Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29, No. 1 mm. 1-3 ....... 16 2.4. Second Imaginary Continuo of Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29, No. 1 mm. 1-3 ... 16 2.5. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 8-12 .................................................... 17 2.6. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 13-20 .................................................. 18 2.7. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 23-24 .................................................. 19 2.8. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 25-32 .................................................. 19 2.9. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 8-10 a ................................................. 21 2.10. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 8-10 b ................................................. 21 2.11. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 9, No.1 mm. 74-82 .................................................. 23 3.1. Schenker’s four Teilen in Chopin’s Etude Op. 10, No. 12 ............................... 29 3.2. Phlpps’s idea in Chopin’s Etude Op. 10, No. 12 mm. 1-3 ................................ 30 3.3. Phipps’s idea illustrated on the score ............................................................... 31 3.4. Neighboring motion represented in m. 1 .......................................................... 32 3.5. Graphic representation of level a activity in the Grundgestalt, mm. 1-2. .......... 33 3.6. The introduction’s sentence structure .............................................................. 34 3.7. Sequence of four-note patterns based on Phipps’s “antecedent” and “consequent” ................................................................................................................................ 35 3.8. Level b activity, mm. 10-12............................................................................. 35 xi Example Page 3.9. Expansion of the G-A flat-G motive in mm. 2-3 .............................................. 36 3.10. Melody line of mm. 10-15 with marked score ................................................. 36 3.11. Marked score of mm. 10-19 ............................................................................ 38 3.12. Phipps’s transposition of the “antecedent” in mm. 15-18 ................................. 39 3.13. Modulation to Bb major in mm. 23-28 ............................................................ 40 3.14. Voice leading underlying mm. 29-36 .............................................................. 41 3.15. Basic harmonic function in mm. 37-40 ............................................................ 41 3.16. Mm. 41-47, the ending of the B section connects with the introduction of A’ section .......................................................................................................................... 42 3.17. Connection through the common tone in mm.69-70 ........................................ 43 3.18. My Schenkerian overlay of mm. 55-56 ............................................................ 45 3.19. Modulation to E flat major and return through a common tone to V7 of C minor in mm. 64-70 ............................................................................................................... 46 3.20. Scale with neighbor motion in mm. 1-2 ........................................................... 47 3.21. Arpeggio in mm. 10-11 ................................................................................... 48 3.22. Chromatic scale in mm. 17-18 ......................................................................... 48 3.23. Chromatic motion in melody part and accompaniment in mm. 23-28 .............. 49 3.24. Chords in right hands and voice leading .......................................................... 50 3.25. Melodic Sequences in mm. 29-36 .................................................................... 51 3.26. Melodic differences between A and A’ in mm. 48-53 ...................................... 52 3.27. Motivic expansion within a linear intervallic pattern in mm. 51-56 .................. 52 4.1. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, First Movement, mm. 24-29 .............................. 58 xii Example Page 4.2. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, First Movement, mm. 52-62............................... 60 4.3. Mozart’s Piano Mozart K. 281, mm. 5-6 and mm. 9-12 ..................................... 63 4.4. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, the First Movement, mm. 1-2 ............................. 66 4.5. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, the First Movement, mm. 9-15 .......................... 67 4.6. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, the First Movement, mm. 20-23 ........................ 67 4.7. Mozart’s Piano Sonata k.281, the First Movement mm. 30-32 ........................... 68 4.8. Schenkerian Analysis of Op. 9 No. 2, from John Rink, “Structural Momentum and Closure in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2”.................................................... 70 4.9. Voice leading graph of Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, First Movement ............. 70 5.1. Schenkerian Analysis of Op.9 No.2, from John Rink, “Structural Momentum” and closure in Chopin’s Nocturn Op.9, No.2 .................................................................. 74 5.2. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, mm. 3-8 .......................................................... 77 5.3. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 9-10 ........................................................ 78 5.4. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 16-18 ....................................................... 78 5.5. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 a) mm. 16-18 and b) mm. 23-24 ....................... 79 5.6. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 25-34 ....................................................... 81 5.7. Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 mm. 1-20 ............................................................ 83 5.8. Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 a) Measure 1, b) Measure 9, c) Measures 28-31 .. 85 5.9. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3: a) mm. 43- 47 and b) mm. 69-72 ..................... 87 5.10. Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3: a) mm. 53-56 and b) mm. 79-82....................... 88 5.11. Comparision between a) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 33-34 and b) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No.3 mm. 1-4 ................................................................... 92 5.12. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, coda section .................................................. 94 xiii Example Page 5.13. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3, coda section .................................................. 95 xiv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 4.1. Phrase structure in Mozart’s Piano Sonata VIII K. 281, First Movement ........... 55 5.1. A rounded binary form in Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9, No.2.................................. 73 5.2 Formal structure in the A section mm. 1-87 ....................................................... 82 5.3. Form in the B section in Chopin Nocturne Op. 9, No. 3 ..................................... 88 5.4. Comparative outlines of Nocturnes Op. 9, Nos. 2 and 3 ..................................... 91 5.5. Comparison of the forms of Op. 72, No. 1 and Op. 55, No.1 with Type 1 sonata form .......................................................................................................................... 98 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This thesis focuses on how Schenkerian analysis can help the pianist to deeply understand phenomena under the surface of the music such as linear intervallic patterns and the tonal direction of phrases, which helps the performer to create coherence. Schenkerian analysis was designed initially by its founder as a practical guide for performers, but only a few scholarly studies apply Schenkerian analysis to piano pedagogy. Alison Hood believes that “music analysis could aid a performer in the preparation of an interpretation.”1 In Interpreting Chopin: Analysis and Performance, she provides an analytically complicated and pedagogically comprehensive way of understanding Chopin’s subtle structures of harmony and rhythmic patterns through Schenkerian analysis. However, in many cases music analysis does not apply to piano pedagogy directly, because it does not by itself provide the kind of intuitive decision making about performance that would be useful in pedagogy. Wallace Berry tells us, “conclusions drawn from the analytical undertaking do not lead directly and unequivocally to particular interpretive decisions; rather, the performer must often—perhaps usually— make difficult judgements within a range of plausible solutions.”2 And, in their review of Berry’s book, Steve Larson and Cynthia Folio remind us that the analytical undertaking, like performance, also depends on intuition.3 Obviously the relationship between 1 Alison Hood, Interpreting Chopin: Analysis and Performance (New York: Ashgate Publishing, 2014), 1. 2 Wallace Berry, Structural Functions in Music (New York: Dover Publications, 1987), 3. 3 Steve Larson and Cynthia Folio, “Review of Musical Structure and Performance by Wallace Berry,” Journal of Music Theory 35, (1991): 301. 2 analysis and performance is a complex one; preparing a performance involves a variety of activities, of which analysis is only one. Listening to other good performances and working out your own interpretation at the piano also play important roles. However, I want to show the benefits of Schenkerian analysis for helping the performer understand the forces that give music coherence which are reinforced by other parameters such as dynamics and phrasing. In the different levels of a Schenkerian graph, we can see “musical forces” that lead the performer to deeply understand the music’s direction and shape. This kind of understanding improves piano technique and helps with memorization. With respect to rhythm, harmony, phrase structure, and form, the foreground and middleground levels give the performer different kinds of rhythmic and harmonic information. Using Schenkerian notation to highlight certain notes helps us to recognize lines behind the surface of the music that give certain passages coherence. This is the main reason that the Schenkerian method is very important to piano pedagogy and piano performance. Additionally, Schenkerian graphing is an effective pedagogical tool for teaching Schenkerian analysis. A Schenkerian graph in “strict use,” which was devised by Steve Larson, shows at its lowest level each chord on each beat without simple suffix repetitions and the most obvious ornaments. “At each level from the surface to the background, certain notes are chosen as structural (for various reasons) and stemmed, while other notes are slurred to and from them as diminutions. Then, at the next higher level, the diminutions from the previous level student of music into the infinite world of fundamental analytic questions.” 3 This study will concentrate first on Chopin’s mastery of counterpoint and voice leading, which will lead me to my discussion of the relationship between analysis and performance. I will consider these issues by using the Schenkerian method. My examples will include a variety of pieces by Chopin but also by Mozart, for comparison’s sake, to show in what ways the Schenkerian analysis both highlights similarities and makes distinctions between composers and genres. There are several reasons to explain why I chose Chopin’s piano music. Chopin’s music features interesting harmony, metric ambiguity and varieties of formal structure which are not initially apparent. In addition to deeply understanding Chopin’s music through the usual learning processes (listening, practicing, and music understanding), a Schenkerian approach is a useful tool to solve many of the enigmas in Chopin’s music. The Schenkerian approach can help the pianist to understand music correctly without traditional teaching, making her sensitive to topics such as expressive meaning, phrase structure, building a stronger sense of line and direction, etc. As Alison Hood writes, “it also enabled me to go beyond a mere imitation of performance tradition and arrive at a deeper personal understanding of Chopin’s music.” Additionally, Chopin was influenced by Mozart and Beethoven. Through the Schenkerian method, it is easier to compare formal structure in different genres. In Chapter IV, I will discuss Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, first movement, considering the stylistic differences and similarities between Chopin’s work and Mozart’s work. Finally, this thesis’s ultimate purpose is to demonstrate how a Schenkerian analysis can be applied to teaching a piano student how to master a piece, and each of my analyses through the course of the thesis will include some commentary on applications to performance and performance pedagogy. 4 Heinrich Schenker (1868—1935) was a music theorist, pianist and pedagogue, most famous for developing a method for reductive analysis. He was born in Galicia in 1868, and was deeply interested in piano study. Schenker believed that if the performer wanted to create a significant performance of a masterwork, it was necessary for her to understand the hidden meanings of the music. Heinrich Schenker and Heribert Esser wrote “The Art of Performance” which discusses composers’ styles of notation and various score markings indicating desired effects, a book which is full of useful practical and imaginative suggestions established on Schenker’s own experience as performing pianist and composer.4 This book summarizes different pianistic techniques including hand motions, legato and non-legato touch, pedal, fingering and articulation. In practicing, the pianist usually needs to articulate the structurally meaningful notes in some way, and “The Art of Performance” is useful in showing the performer ways to do that. In late 1880, Schenker went to the Conservatory in Vienna and finished a doctoral degree in jurisprudence at the university.5 His music attracted Brahms’ and Busoni’s attention. Additionally, he wrote articles in musical criticism in different periods of his life. He focused on the music of the common-practice era, and mostly on Austro- Germanic music. His theories only really caught on in the 1960s in the United States; by the 1980s Schenkerian analysis was the predominant method of tonal analysis used by theorists in North America, and it is still influential today. Musicians like to apply the Schenkerian method to works of tonal music from Schubert, Chopin, Mozart, Beethoven, 4 Heinrich Schenker and Heribert Esser, The Art of Performance (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), i. 5 Allen Cadwallader and David Gagne, Analysis of Tonal Music A Schenkerian Approach (Oxford University Press, 2011), xi. 5 and Haydn, because such works are governed by underlying contrapuntal structures that are transformed via diminutions into the complex surface of a work. These levels of diminution fall into three main categories: background, middleground, and foreground. Schenkerian theory is an approach to tonal music, and its main purpose is to understand how the surface level relates to the underlying structure. In a Schenkerian analysis we see the hierarchical layers among notes, and it also gives conclusions about the structure of the piece. A Schenkerian graph usually highlights the structural notes, the line behind the music, and omits decorative elements. It gives us information about prolongation, linear progression, and organic coherence. As a pianist, I always think about how to directly apply the analytical method to performance, even though intuition is an important ability for the performer. A more advanced sense of musical intuition can be developed through understanding the piano literature, especially through understanding the hidden structure of the piece. Based on understanding compositional laws, Schenker said a performance generates an authentic “re-creation.” Because a superficial acquaintance with the piece of music is not enough for an authentic rendition, the performer not only needs to master all laws of composition (to understand the piece in terms of a Schenkerian structure), but also needs to be able to recreate the composition. The performer should play a passage “freely” but musically at the same time, which means they have to study it very carefully and understand all the details of dynamics, articulation and tone color. Wallace Berry believes the systematic exploration of the basics of structure and their considerable interrelations, including tonality, melody, harmony, texture, and 6 rhythm, is a complicated process, which can motivate interpretive decisions.6 He writes: “surely it is clear that any serious investigation of structure and effect, to the extent of of its validity, must significantly inform the critical evaluation, stylistic understanding, and interpretation of music, while laying important bases for decisions in musical creativity.”7 My personal experience has proved the importance of analysis: before I play a piano piece, it is essential for me to analyze it with Roman numerals first and then provide T- PD-D-T functions. Later, I will draw a Schenkerian graph to better understand the structure of the piece. Generally, the different levels of the Schenkerian graph helps me to understand the music in different ways. For example, a 3-line background graph, which is the simplest contrapuntal skeleton, gives a blueprint for the piece. It helps me as pianist create a picture for the whole piece, which makes it easier to memorize. In the middleground and foreground where many diminutions appear, we begin to hear those details that are more immediately perceptible, and relate to issues (such as rhythmic issues) that the pianist needs to consider when practicing. The middleground and foreground levels also provide underlying scale and chord progression patterns which a pianist will probably have practiced in their basic forms, and understanding the role they play in a piece can help the pianist learn it more quickly (especially pieces in more remote keys). In these ways, Schenkerian analysis gives us hints about strategies for practicing the piano. When I play a passage, it enables me to focus on the power and tension of the scale degrees and express them using dynamics as well as other methods. 6 Berry, 3. 7 Ibid. 7 Charles Burkhart points out that understanding the background plays a significant role in piano performance. An awareness of the ‘main tones’ can lead a performer to play the surface accurately by understanding its relationship to what lies below.8 As Burkhart explains: Only when he is aware of the ‘main’ tones can he perceive the diminutions and perform them in the light of the main tones. When he does so, the surface will benefit, but not only the surface, because proportioning the small with respect to the large has a way of projecting an impression of the large as well. In this sense the background also is ‘performed’-the ‘long line’ conveyed. ......A responsible theory does not seek to substitute principle for intuition, but to confirm intuition with the help of principle- to ‘improve opinion with knowledge,’ in Samuel Johnson’s phrase. But some principles can take us further: they can make the mind aware of dimensions that have not hitherto been perceived-not even intuitively. Such is Schenker’s theory. It can provide the performer with insights not available by other means. It offers no magic formulas, but it can help a good performer become even better.9 The surface level gives information about the next direction the music will turn, and the background conveys the long line connections. The background and its dimensions are easily ignored by the performer, because this way of listening does not occur intuitively, without analytic effort. However, Schenker wrote that “it is improper to expressly pursue the Urlinie in performance and to single out its tones…for the purpose of communicating the Urlinie to the listener.” A performer should always treat the Urlinie as a direction. Piano performers should focus on the architectural levels, with different layers presenting distinctive expression, different dynamics, different texture. Each detailed insight can lead to different piano techniques depending on the repertory. 8 Charles Burkhart, “Schenker’s Theory of Levels and Musical Performance,” in Aspects of Schenkerian Theory, ed. David Beach (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 107. 9 Ibid., 112. 8 In short, concentrating on architectural levels and examining analytical levels can give considerable interpretive information. This thesis will consider the various ways Schenkerian analysis can aid the pianist and piano teacher in preparing a performance. My thesis has begun with an introduction that discusses Schenker’s own background as a pianist and piano teacher, and the connections he himself drew between analysis and piano pedagogy. It gave an example of the way Schenkerian analysis can help us understand similarities and differences between musical forms within a single genre (Chopin Nocturne), and also presented the opinions of other performer-scholars, as well as some of my own opinions, about how a Schenkerian analysis might aid the performer. Chapter Two will discuss Chopin’s Impromptus Op. 29 No. 1. Chapter Three will focus on how the piano teacher might make use of Schenkerian analysis in creating exercises for students preparing to play the “Revolutionary” Etude. I also want to discuss how Schenkerian analysis can inform practice techniques in other piano genres such as etudes, preludes and impromptus. Chapter Four will discuss Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, focusing on the relationship between dynamics and the Schenkerian graph, as well as discussing how to play it expressively, aided by the Schenkerian method. Finally, in Chapter Five, I will show how a Schenkerian approach can help us understand intra-opus connections in Chopin’s Nocturnes Op.9 and how a performer might make use of that understanding to grasp the unique style of Chopin’s nocturnes. 9 CHAPTER II ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN’S IMPROMPTU OP. 29, NO.1 When one listens or reads Chopin’s Impromptu Op.29 No.1 for the first time, it is obvious that Chopin writes both voices in triplet notes against each other in the A section (mm. 1-33). The most effective contribution to a wonderful performance is a clear expression of the bass line. However, sometimes a performer de-emphasizes the left hand notes, which prevents the listener’s awareness of the harmonic and contrapuntal relationship. Heinrich Schenker writes: “The performer must understand that the bass of the piano should receive as varied a treatment of dynamic nuances as the bass line of the orchestra, which has to follow its own specially described shading.”10 For all the reasons given above, the pianist should pay careful attention to the hierarchy in the bass part in Chopin’s Impromptus Op.29 No.1 section A. The fundamental tones of the bass in Example 2.1 should be performed with differences rather than monotonous similarity. This chapter focuses on how to understand the piece’s homophonic texture in the A section through the Schenkerian method and how to expressively play the slow movement (in the B section?) through understanding the relationship between the Schenkerian structure and the dynamics. Also it discusses some matters that do not have to do with the Schenkerian graph, such as metric displacement and surface ornamentations. 10 Heinrich Schenker and Heribert Esser, The Art of Performance (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 16. 10 Example 2.1. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 1-4 The A section is divided into two smaller sections (A1: mm. 1-18 and A2: mm. 19-34). Measures 1-8 create two 1 + 1 + 2 sentences and end on V in A flat major. The first sentence starts with a basic idea and its repetition (mm. 1-2) and moves on in the continuation (mm. 3-4) to the harmonic progression I-V/V-ii-V7 of A flat major, which emphasizes the dominant. Measures 5-8 are similar to mm. 1-4, but the continuation in m. 7 begins with a dissonant chord, an enharmonic German sixth, which later resolves to Bb under the dominant E flat major 6/4 chord with the highest pitch G6 above. The double sentence of mm. 1-8 then ends on a stronger sounding dominant chord at the end of m. 8. Because this sentence introduces a main section of the piece, it needs to generate a more creatively-structured passage later on. From mm. 9 to 18, we hear a 2+2+6 sentence, ending the A1 section on a half cadence. In mm. 9-10 and mm. 11-12 we hear parallel phrases in different keys, even though mm. 9-10 sound somewhat ambiguous. They seem to point toward B flat minor, because m. 10 states the V7 chord of B flat for two beats, and then resolves to B flat minor tonic on beat three. However, measures 11-12 point 11 back to A flat major strongly, arriving at the tonic, followed by an A flat augmented chord, a passing chord, in m. 12. The 6-measure continuation of this sentence includes the dominant function going back to the tonic function in Ab on the downbeats of measures 14 and 15. The sentence ends by driving toward a strong half cadence in m. 18 with 3 varied chromatic patterns. The varied section A2 also consists mostly of sentences. Firstly, measures 19-27 restate the basic ideas and continuations from section A with a few small changes. One of them is a shift to B flat major for three chords in mm. 20-21. Then, in the continuation of the second 1 + 1 + 2 sentence, it repeats the predominant function b flat minor chord at mm. 25-26 to arrive at the imperfect authentic cadence on I 6/4 in m. 27. The final phrases of section A stay on the A flat 6/4 function, driving to a big V7 – I cadence in mm. 30-31. It is interesting that before this authentic cadence, there is a signal “fermata”. After this cadence, there is a short codetta on the A flat sonority. In section B, the music modulates suddenly to the key of f minor, which is the relative key of A flat major. The first 16 measures of the B section form a parallel period. However, in the 8-measure antecedent, it passes through several different key areas: F minor, A flat major, C minor, Bb minor, and back to F minor (mm. 35-42). It sounds like it is predicting what will happen in the following passage. The 8-measure phrase from mm. 43-50 starts by repeating the first phrase of the B section, but adds ornamentations to create a more interesting melodic line. It begins with f minor, but modulates to the C major key in mm. 48-49 using the A flat major chord in measure 46 as a pivot. After the pivot chord, the music goes to the g sharp diminished chord (the vii of a minor), and moves on to the V/vi in the key of C major, followed by the vi chord. The vi chord then 12 leads on to ii, V and I. The harmonic function in this 8-measure phrase is very logical and clear. Then, mm.51-58, a 2+2+4 sentence, starts in f minor and modulates to the home key A flat major, through a Bb minor chord which serves as iv in the old key and ii in the new key). The next two sentences recreate mm.51-58, they all start in f minor, but the first ends in f minor and the second in Ab major. Finally section B ends with a third 2+2+4 sentence in mm. 75-82, leading to a half cadence in f minor at m. 82, before A returns in Ab major at m. 83. In Chopin’s Impromptu Op.29, No.1, there is an important characteristic through the whole piece, the half-step upper or lower neighbor. Looking at the piano score, the typical pattern is to lead from triplets on the first 3 beats through a descending or ascending semitone to a quarter note (or eighth-note triplet) on the fourth beat. (m.1: E- Eb; m.4: Ab-G; m.7: D-Eb; m.8: C#-D; m.12: Db-C etc.). Chopin’s compositional technique here is to emphasize the fourth beat (which is often the primary tone ^5) in these measures. Measures 1-8 mostly change harmony every two chords. But on the third beat, the melody line does not present chord tones directly until the first note of the fourth beat (Figure 1). It sounds like the chord tone on the fourth beat is sustained to emphasize the dominant chord and the primary tone (mm.1-8). The first two phrases both consist of four measures, and both phrases have similar harmonic functions. In the Schenkerian graph, the bass line patterns are similar in that they both move in half notes and lead to the dominant, Eb (mm.3-4: C-Db-Db-Eb; mm.7-8: Cb-Bb-Bb-Eb). It is interesting that measure 12 in the Schenkerian graph shows the inversion of the second motive Db-Eb- Eb-C in the soprano line, decorating ^4-^3 with an upper neighbor. These three similar 13 motives occurs in different layers of music, but they all have the same purpose, to drive to the cadence. Additionally, in the Schenkerian graph, measures 1-8 feature bass notes on first and third beats that create neighbor and passing motions by whole step, pointing clearly toward the dominant at the end of the phrase (Appendix A). In this piece, neighbor motions by half step and whole step are the most important characteristics throughout. They create a connection between section A and section B; note the upper neighbor Ab3- Bb3-Bb3 in the tenor voice at the beginning of the B section, mm. 35-36, followed immediately by a lower neighbor in the soprano at m. 37. In the B section, there is a totally different style from the A section. The A section is homophonic with an underlying middleground line, and the rhythmic pattern in the foreground is monotonous. In contrast, the B section sounds like a dance motion with a steady accompaniment. The Schenkerian analysis clearly shows the formal structure and the harmonic function. The dynamic signs, harmonic function, and formal structure, these three elements interact with each other. Looking at the Schenkerian graph (mm. 35- 50), it clear shows the form structure. Firstly, this parallel period is divided into two parts which are antecedent (mm. 35-42) and consequent (mm. 43-50). The antecedent starts on the key of f minor and ends on a half cadence in f minor (m.42). However, it modulates to c minor briefly in mm. 39-40 through the A flat major key area (mm. 37-38), both key areas prolonging C5 as ^5 of f minor. The first phrase begins with a tonic prolongation i- V7-i in f minor progressing to V-I in A flat major key. In the Schenkerian graph, measures 35-38 not only provide the tonic prolongation (i-V7-i in f minor and V-I in A flat major), but also shows the different modulation parts (the key of f minor in mm. 35- 14 36; A flat major in mm. 37-38; c minor in mm. 38-40). In the consequent part (mm. 43- 50), it begins in the key of f minor, but ends with a modulation to C major which then returns to f minor as its V. In the middle of the consequent, it modulates to A flat major again (mm. 45-46), but shifts into the key of C major through its V/vi and vi chords in measure 47. Looking at the Schenkerian graph, it clearly shows the parallel motion in the phrase structure, and the similar harmonic functions, even though the first leads to a half cadence in f minor and the second to an authentic cadence in C major, then i in f minor. The dynamics also support the phrase structure. In general, the phrase begins with a crescendo and ends on a diminuendo. But the color of the chord can sometimes elicit a different dynamic mark or expressive meaning. For example, in the third beat of measure 46 there is an accent on the note d-natural in the RN vii/vi in c major, which sets off the modulation from Ab major to C major. In short, the Schenkerian graph lines up well with the formal structure and the dynamic motion. In mm. 1-2, the Impromptu presents its basic idea, with the triplet rhythmic pattern followed by one quarter note (Example 2.2). Its harmony consists of a back-and- forth motion between the tonic chord (A-flat major) on the downbeat and the dominant seventh chord (E-flat) on the third beat. The bass line can be verticalized to create four chords. The functional chords occur on the downbeat and third beat, and the repeated note D, which creates a dissonant sound in the vertical reduction (Example 2.2), occurs on second and fourth beats. 15 Example 2.2. Chopin Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 1-2 Looking at Example 2.3 provides an imaginary continuo. This imaginary continuo is a little different from Steve Larson’s original concept in that it contains non-chord tones as parts of the chords. In the bass line, each chord harmonizes the triplet melodic pattern above it. Creating an imaginary continuo is a really good method for a pianist to memorize the harmonic structure. But it is also important for pianists to notice the conflicts in the vertical reduction, which is why I added non-chord tones to my imaginary continuo. I would like to keep the non-harmonic notes in my imaginary continuo for pedagogical reasons in this case, because the melody line and the middleground line (Eb- D-Eb-D) in the accompaniment part are two of the important elements for creating the blueprint of this piece. Additionally, there is another type of imaginary continuo that could be used for piano practice (Example 2.4); consisting of duple eighth notes which go against the grain of triple meter. A variety of methods of practicing will help the pianist to increase his or her interest, and is also a good way to help the pianist grasp the underlying structure better. Compared to these two imaginary continuos, the arpeggios on the surface of the music give the pianist the necessary hand motion: a repeated rotation. 16 But the imaginary continuo addresses the harmonic function, the multiple layers between melodic intervals and harmonic functions, and the important gestures of the passage. Example 2.3. First Imaginary Continuo of Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29, No. 1 mm. 1-3 Example 2.4. Second Imaginary Continuo of Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29, No. 1 mm. 1-3 A Schenkerian graph will always show similar vertical and horizontal structures in similar passages of music. In mm. 5-6, it restates the main fragments from mm. 1-2, leading up to the primary tone ^5. In mm. 7-8, in the bass line the first note of each half- note beat can be grouped together, Cb-Bb-Bb-Eb, leading to a half cadence in Ab under ^2, and then the bass speeds up, changing on each beat in mm. 9-12. The melodic line in these same measures consists of two groups (a, a2) which produce a sequence with several suspensions in mm. 9-12 (Example 2.5). However, the bass lines in group a and group a2 are not sequences of one another; group a circles around Bb, while group a2 creates a descending line by chromatic motion until the sentence reaches its cadence, V and I under ^4 and ^3, in measure 12. 17 Example 2.5. Chopin Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 8-12 Additionally, in mm. 15-18, Example 2.6 shows three groups which are transposed by half steps within each group (Right hand: Group B: F flat, E flat, E double flat, D flat. Group B2: E double flat, D flat, C, B. Group B3: C, C flat, B flat; the left hand also descends chromatically). These chromatic sequences have the function of pulling the top line down from ^5 through ^4 and ^3 to ^2 in m. 17, whereupon Chopin jumps back up to ^4 in m. 18 to initiate the half cadence. The score overlay shows us multiple layers in this passage; at the middleground, the first note of each group is the same pitch as the third beat of the previous group. The imaginary continuo in mm. 15-18 shows us that all voices, top, bottom and inner, move by half steps (Appendix A). 18 Example 2.6. Chopin Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 13-20 It is worth noting the metric shifting in mm. 23-24, causing the upper voice to sound like a duple meter against the Impromptu’s basic triple meter (Example 2.7). Most importantly, the pianist should bring out the 6/4 hypermeter created by the descending stepwise lines (C-B flat-A flat; G-F-E; A flat-G-F; E flat-D flat-C). Chopin also places accents on these successive descending notes. Moreover, Chopin’s work often has a dramatic harmonic function, or a complicated musical motive in a fast tempo. In such passages, it is important to find the similarities between motives, and the connections between each fragment. For example, in mm. 27-29, both hands repeat in each measure, 19 and the Schenkerian graph can help us see how many repeated fragments there are, and their function within the whole piece: to ornament the dominant pedal before the cadence that ends the A section (with ^4 in the top voice). (Example 2.8). Example 2.7. Chopin Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 23-24 Example 2.8. Chopin Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 25-32 20 Even though my Schenkerian graph shows lots of hidden repetition under the surface layers, there are some things that are not shown on the graph, such as metric displacement. Among the dimensions of musical structure, metric structure is especially reliant on performance, especially in ambiguous contexts. Many empirical studies have proven that slight performance differences can be decisive from the listener’s point of view; besides, a deadpan performance of the score depends on a reasonable metrical interpretation.11 In other words, performance shows how the performer cognizes the metrical structure, instead of it simply being determined via the metrical structure conveyed in notation. Measures 8 ½-12 clearly show that before getting into metric dissonance, the phrase starts with a syncopated chromatic scale from Bb, B, C, C#, D at the dominant chord in original Ab key, then it continues with a c diminished chord which is the vii diminished of IV in the key of Ab (also serving as the ii diminished chord in Bb minor key). Measures 9-10 is in Bb minor and, typically, it uses the predominant- dominant-tonic function (ii-iv-V7-iio4/2- V-V- i- iii) to express the sequential patterns of dissonance resolution (Example 2.9). However, measures 8-12 not only create harmonic ambiguity to increase tension, but also use metric dissonance to illustrate the harmonic resolution. Example 2.9b shows that the melody line starts one eighth note later than the accompaniment. The pattern a2 b2 c2 can be heard as a triple meter against the accompaniment’s duple meter (left hand middleground patterns shown in Example 2.10: C-Bb-Ab-Bb; Ab-F-Bb-Ab). The pianist should be able to perform the metric dissonance, by bringing out the longer notes which occupy beat 2 and beat 3 in triple meter. 11 Justin London, Hearing in Time: Psychological Aspects of Musical Meter. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 79-81. 21 Example 2.9. Chopin Impromptus Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 8-10 Example 2.10. Chopin Impromptus Op. 29, No. 1 mm. 8-10 In Chopin’s repertoire, grace notes and trills which are used often, do not directly apply to the Schenkerian graph. John Petrie Dunn said “ embellishments, originally 22 almost a spontaneous product of the short-lived tone of instruments whose strings are struck or plucked, and a veritable necessity to the composer who essayed to “set” for the pianoforte the long-drawn, emotional note of the human voice, gradually laid aside their makeshift, fortuitous character, and became the means whereby the composer could modify at will the expression and accentuation of his melodies, ranging, through many intermediate gradations, from outspoken bluntness to gentlest insinuation.”12 In Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1, the grace note usually occurs above a functional chord, and sometimes more than one kind of expressive note uses a similar motivic pattern. For example, in measure 10 a grace note Ab decorates Gb, and in measure 41 Eb decorates Db. However, these two grace notes play different roles in the two passages: Ab is scale degree ^1 in Ab major above an F dominant ninth chord (V9/ii) and Eb is scale degree ^b7 in f minor which leads us to iv and eventually to i, helping the V7/iv resolve to iv. In measures 45 and 48, the grace notes Bb and G respectively lead to grace-note double neighbor figures prolonging Bb and G. The somewhat limited grace note figure in m. 45 leads to a longer flourish in m. 48. That longer flourish, together with the one in m. 81, both signal the pianist to play expressively and drive toward the cadence. Grace notes can also occur before the next section as a connection. Moreover, Chopin writes different types of ornamentations to emphasize the climax of the slow movement in the B section (Example 2.11). Before starting the next phrase, measure 74 attempts to crowd the notes of the arpeggios into the bars preceding them, and it runs smoothly and easily. The following phrase starts with the C dominant seventh chord in m. 75, however the non- chord tone Db in the “Transient Shake” accentuates the “principal tone” Db instead of the 12 John Petrie Dunn, Ornamentation in The Works of Frederick Chopin (New York: Da Capo Press, 1971), Preface. 23 chord tone C. Before arriving at the end of the B section, Chopin writes three sequential ornamentations over the dominant function vii°7/iv- V/vii- VI. First, the fully diminished A chord in m.68 shows the accentuation of the shake from below. The shake is the starting point of a little climax that culminates in the Bb of the next bar and begins it very lightly. Then the principal note A natural needs to be emphasized with a gradual crescendo until arriving at the note f. John Petrie Dunn writes “ in these wild and gloomy passages, the momentary clash is merely a drop in the tempestuous ocean of sound, and the player must on no account seek to elude the ‘dissonance’ by playing the grace notes before the beat, for the dissonance is intentional.”13 In short, grace notes have some common functions: they always happen above a functional chord, often lead toward a cadence, and play a role as a connection before the next section. Example 2.11. Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29 No. 1 mm. 74-82 13 Ibid., 6. 24 CHAPTER III ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN’S ETUDE OPUS 10, NO.12 Introduction This study concentrates on the analysis of Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12 through comparing Graham Phipps’s ideas and mine, from my own exploration of the Etude. The surface of a given musical composition can be interpreted as a Schenkerian graph, from which emerges the higher architectural levels. The higher architectural levels have many positive effects, and lead to “different understandings of the meanings of certain gestures” than a Schoenbergian analysis.14 Phipps writes: “The perceived cause and effect relationships of these opposite points of view lead to a very different understanding of the meanings of certain gestures, which result in almost diametrically opposed perceptions of musical macrostructure. Such is the case when one compares Heinrich Schenker’s analysis of Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12, with an analysis that makes use of Arnold Schoenberg’s Grundgestalt principle.”15 In addition to providing an interpretation that can be contrasted with Phipps’s Grundgestalt analysis, I believe Schenkerian analysis can help us improve our memory of Chopin’s Etude, figure out the reasons for specific dynamics, and identify the areas of modulation. This thesis illustrates two main aspects: how does Schenkerian analysis relate to different aspects of this piece (such as phrasing, form, harmonization, key scheme), and how does it relate to piano pedagogy. 14 Graham Phipps, “A Response to Schenker’s Analysis of Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12, Using Schoenberg’s Grundgestalt Concept,” Musical Quarterly 69/4 (1983 Autumn): 543. 15 Ibid., 543-69. 25 No matter the differences between Schenker’s theory and Schoenberg’s Grundgestalt, both of them focus on the relationship between harmony and counterpoint. I want to talk about the similarities and differences between Schenker and Schoenberg because both perspectives play an important role in my analysis. In Schenker’s theory, one identifies fundamental notes, and uses decorative passing or neighbor tones to fill in the entire composition, level by level. Graham Phipps wrote: “For Schenker, the Klang, made up of the fundamental and its first five partials, is the generating source of the entire composition.”16 In my understanding, the Schenkerian analyst creates a whole architecture to see the relationship between chords in a horizontal event. In lower levels, she shows how the composer decorates each chord to enrich the entire composition, in other words, how Chopin creates this whole piece through ornamentation (the linear motions from chord to chord, the characteristics of motivic development). I will begin by explaining how the unfolding of a Klang is presented here (through the function: Tonic-Predominant-Dominant-Tonic). Graham Phipps wrote: “Schenker accepts three variant forms of the Urlinie: Terzzug, Quintzug, and Oktavzug; the combination of one of these linear archetypes with the Bassbrechung, which he also limits to only a few prescribed possible archetypal forms, constitutes the Ursatz, which is then the background or originating source of all that happens in the composition.” 17 This definition of Schenker’s Ursatz is contrapuntal, which combines a linear melodic Urlinie and a melodic bass without rhythm values. Thus, rhythm happens at the levels closer to the surface in the compositional progress. I will show that the blueprint of the 16 Ibid., 53. 17 Ibid., 54. 26 “Revolutionary” Etude comes from the Ursatz and is decorated by the next developmental middleground layers. Schenker’s theory, always reduces pieces to the same fundamental elements, but different pieces have their own unique ways of getting there, never reducible to the same art work. As Schenker put it, “Always the same, but never in the same way.” Schoenberg was very critical of certain aspects of Schenker’s theory. Schoenberg writes: He (Schenker) becomes nebulous…when he speaks of the “mysterious” number five beyond which…we are not to go…He wants the number five to remain mysterious. Holding to this aim, he is not only blinded to reality, he also lets pass false and inexact observations; for otherwise this “mysteriousness” cannot be maintained.18 These observations by Schoenberg about Schenker show how the two of them were opposed about 20th –century music. Schoenberg wanted to use dissonant intervals and chords, while Schenker wanted to limit music to consonances. For the analysis of Chopin’s music, Schenker’s perspective works well, but there are many features that a Schoenbergian analysis would describe better (like motive processes). In my analysis, I will combine Schenker’s theory with the Schoenbergian method as presented by Phipps. But, in a way, Chopin’s music can also be characterized as nebulous. Chopin’s “Revolutionary” Etude was produced during 1829-1833, during that period of 1800 to 1850, in which the style of music trends toward romanticism. “Romanticism” describes the period from 1800 to around 1900. In the article “Mémoires of André Grétry”, it states that the earliest sustained applications of the term (Romanticism) to music happened in 1789. In the year 1810, E.T.A. Hoffmann gave the name “romantic” to Mozart, Haydn 18 Arnold Schoenberg, Theory of Harmony, trans. Roy E. Carter (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978), 318. 27 and Beethoven, which he called “the three masters of instrumental compositions”, since the three of them provided the same romantic spirit. For instance, Hoffmann believes that Mozart introduces us to the spiritual world. Hoffman characterizes Beethoven’s music by saying “our monstrous heart” can “strongly beat” to it. One of the advantages of Schenekrian analysis is that it takes what originally seems nebulous, and connects each detail to the prolongation of the Ursatz. But Schoenbergian analysis also can explain seemingly- nebulous music, in terms of a motivic expression of the “musical idea,” a logic that spans the piece horizontally. Graham Phipps’s portrayal of Schoenberg’s understanding of musical structure can be summed up in a quotation from Schoenberg’s “New Music, Outmoded Music, Style and Idea”: “every tone which is added to a beginning tone makes the meaning of that tone doubtful…. In this manner there is produced a state of unrest, of imbalance which grows throughout most of the piece, and is enforced further by similar functions of the rhythm. The method by which balance is restored seems to me the real idea of the composition.”19 This quotation suggests a number of differences between Schenker and Schoenberg. Compared to Schenker’s theory, Schoenberg’s terminology is based on the “phenomena,” which means the (surface of the) music itself, particularly the conflicts and resolutions that are created on the surface of the music. Phipps characterizes Schoenberg’s idea in this way: “thus he recognizes the fact that the generating source of musical material cannot be a constant, such as Schenker’s Klang, but must be an amalgamation of musical constructs which, through various uses in the past, have accumulated various 19 Arnold Schoenberg, Style and Idea, ed. Leonard Stein with translations by Leo Black (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984), 123. 28 meanings.”20 Related to this, Schoenberg writes: “An idea in music consists principally in the relation of tones to one another. But every relation that has been used too often, no matter how extensively modified, must finally be regarded as exhausted; it ceases to have power to convey a thought worthy of expression.”21 Music, painting, and sculpture are all art works. The work of music is invented by a composer, who creates fantastic things and establishes new relationships between harmony, and presents the relationship between questions and their consequences. In my analysis, even though I am using Schenkerian methodology, I want to incorporate some of Phipps’s Schoenbergian perspective. Schoenberg’s theory is related to the Grundgestalt which “should apply to all types of music, based upon the interdependence between a musical idea and the technique of developing variation.”22 In my words, I can say that a Grundgestalt is a basic shape, which the composer considers how to create or decorate using different tonalities, creating linear coherence. Phipps ends his presentation of Grundgestalt thus: firstly, through analyzing the surface, theorists recognize long-range musical relationships; secondly, theorists find the harmonic and melodic logic; thirdly, “the basis of Schoenberg’s discussion of harmonic principles comes directly from the nineteenth- century Viennese pedagogical tradition as exemplified in the theoretical writings of Simon Sechter”23. I will combine Schenkerian methodology and Schoenberg’s theory 20 Graham Phipps, “A Response to Schenker’s Analysis of Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12, Using Schoenberg’s Grundgestalt Concept,” Musical Quarterly 69/4 (1983 Autumn): 545. 21 Arnold Schoenberg, Style and Idea, ed. Leonard Stein with translations by Leo Black (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984), 269. 22 Phipps, 546. 23 Ibid., 547. 29 because of the usefulness of both approaches. Also I will do this by focusing on the details that make this piece quintessentially Chopin, together with the structure that gives rise to them. For example, a Schoenbergian perspective will focus our attention on large processes that connect motives, like motivic expansion. Comparison Between Schenker’s Graph and My Graph Example 3.1. Schenker’s four Teilen 24 Now I would like to summarize Schenker’s analysis of Chopin’s Etude Op. 10. No. 12. In Schenker’s four Teilen (Example 3.1), he draws the whole picture of this etude. Schenker’s basic harmonization is (V)-I-V-I-II-V-I. The first I-V harmonizes an interrupted Urline ^3-^2; the rest harmonizes the completed descent ^3-^2-^1. In this way, the whole piece reduces to a standard interruption form, with each part preceded by a long prolongation of the dominant seventh (as a neighbor to each ^3). In my Schenkerian graph (Appendix B), I bring out more of the details than Schenker described such as numerous motivic parallels, a 7-6 linear intervallic pattern, motivic expansions, passing tones, neighbor tones, chromatic motions, and cadences. 24 Heinrich Schenker, Free Composition (New York and London: Longman, 1979), Figure 12. 30 Schenker only drew the big picture of this etude. Both of us have the same background, ^3 ^2 ^1. In mm. 1-20, I found the important chords, which constitute the structure of the music. And then I added the ornamentation to show how Chopin decorates this Etude, such as passing tones, and then neighbor tones. It is important to notice that passing tones and neighbor tones can be found throughout the entire piece. Chopin presents the basic neighbor motion in the accompaniment (G, A flat, G in m.1), later he expands this neighboring segment with a different rhythmic pattern in the melody part (m.12, m.15, and m.22). (Example 3.2) Notice that the large structure of mm. 1-20 consists of a G7 arpeggio (B natural- D- F natural) leading in m. 11 to a ^3 in C minor. This ^3 then passes through a 7-6 linear intervallic pattern to ^2 in m.18. The ^2 is highlighted by a half cadence. Example 3.2. Phipps’s idea in Chopin’s Etude Op. 10, No. 12, mm. 1-3 31 Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12, is called “revolutionary.” This is expressed by the exciting accents and dynamics, the sixteenth notes in the accompaniment, and the rich melody line. In m.1-m.8, there is an opening introduction that begins with an accented dominant 6/5 chord in c minor. It is a logical thing that Chopin wrote notes from this dominant seventh on the downbeats of m.1, m.3, and m.5. (Appendix B) The V 6/5 chord characterizes mm. 1-8 as an introduction, before the A section proper comes in m. 9. Chopin uses passing and neighboring motion to connect the notes of the V arpeggio, with a regularity given by the evenness of the accents (every 2 measures), enabling the prolonged dominant to prepare for a tonic in m. 9. Thus, if we create a Schenkerian graph, we will start with arpeggiating the dominant chords; afterward we will decorate the V arpeggio with neighbor notes (G-A flat-G and D-E flat-D in m.1). Another feature that makes the introduction intensely emotional is the tightly connective sixteenth notes. One would think they are just basic scale motion, yet they can be understood in two different ways. Example 3.3. Phipps’s idea illustrated on the score: 32 Example 3.4. My idea: Neighboring motion represented in m. 1 Ab- G- F- D- Eb- D; B-G-Ab-G; F- D-Eb-D Graham Phipps suggests one repeating motive in this passage, which goes A-flat-G-F-D, and then sequences, but I believe the complete neighbors D-E-flat-D and G-A-flat-G become much more important later in this piece. (Appendix B) The complete neighbor particularly G-A-flat-G, is represented numerous times both on the surface and as hidden repetitions throughout the rest of the piece. This type of neighboring motive goes through almost the entire composition, and is expanded later in the piece. In Appendix B, there is a motivic expansion in the melody line (G-A flat-G) in mm. 11-12, marked with the Greek letter alpha. There is another in mm. 14 and 15, also marked with alpha, that changes the A flat to A natural. Before Chopin creates his melodic expansion, he had already presented the basic neighboring segment (G-A flat-G) in the four sixteenth notes of the accompaniment. In his Grundgestalt analysis, Graham Phipps points out the formal function of these sixteenth notes by calling them antecedent, and consequent. Additionally, this kind of relationship happens not only in mm. 1-4, but also in mm. 6-8. Noticeably, Chopin alters the consequent in m. 6. (Example 3.5) 33 Example 3.5. Graphic representation of level a activity in the Grundgestalt, mm. 1-2 and 3-425 However, it is interesting to notice that Chopin chooses to accent other notes besides the Ds and Gs which begin the neighbor figures. He accents B and F instead. There are two possible reasons for this; first, the B and F are the active tones of the prolonged V7 chord, and second, accenting B and F leads to fingerings that are easier. For the pianist, the accented Bs and Fs do lead, somewhat prematurely, to accented Cs on beats 3 and 4 of measures 2 and 4. 25 Phipps, 555. 34 The harmonization of the introduction matches the phrase structure well. At the end of m. 2, Chopin places what could be called iv6/5, leading to V at the beginning of m. 3. The same chord progression ends m.4 and begins m. 5. This lines up with the introduction’s sentence structure. (Example 3.6) Example 3.6. The introduction’s sentence structure m .1-m.8(2+2+4) Function Presentation Repetition Continuation (----2 measures----) (----2 measures----) (--------4measures--------) V iv6/5 V iv6/5 V6/5 I (m.9) Additionally, in m.1, the b-natural stressed on the third beat of measure 1 defines the tonality of C (Major or Minor) and may be separated from the rest of level b activity in the first eight measures (Example 3.5). Moreover, in m.2, C replaces b-natural as the pitch on the second half note. In effect, b-natural resolves to C, thereby confirming the c minor tonality which was defined by the previous dominant harmony. This small V7-I progression is a reflection of the V7-I which spans the introduction (mm.1-9). In mm. 7-8, the resultant four-note stepwise pattern becomes the model for a sequential series of four note patterns which, by their tonic accents, stress the “new” pitch class E-flat, a potential tonic of the previously emphasized B-flat dominant (Example 3.7). This is a reference to one of the piece’s later key areas (m. 28). However, in the immediate context, Schenker believes E-flat should function as an upper neighbor to the G7 chord (Example 3.8). In a way, Chopin’s introduction is about smaller melodic, 35 harmonic and rhythmic ideas that come back expanded. Two other examples are the G-A flat-G motive (more about that later) and the two-sixteenth (A flat-G), pickup into another pair of sixteenths which expands to a dotted eighth and sixteenth A flat-G in the right hand in mm. 2-3 (Example 3.9). Example 3.7. Sequence of four-note patterns based on Phipps’s “antecedent” and “consequent” in mm. 7-9 Example 3.8. Level b activity, mm. 10-12 36 Example 3.9. Expansion of the G-A flat-G motive in mm 2-3 In mm. 9-10, there is a bridge to connect to the beginning of the A (a) section, which uses the technique of retrograde, for example: C, G, C, D, E flat-E flat, D, C, G. These sixteenth arpeggios are used to predict the main statement, and introduce c minor function. In the beginning of the A section, mm.11-14, the melody line uses neighbor tones, and passing tones, including longer-held versions of the same neighbor that was heard in the introduction, G-A flat-G (Example 3.10). Example 3.10. Melody line of mm. 10-15 with marked score 37 Most importantly, m. 14 has an f#-diminished chord (viio7/V in the key of c minor), which looks forward to future conflicts in m.18 (Example 3.11). The diminished triad on A at the beginning of the measure suggests a substitute for F harmony and hence implies the dominant of B flat Major. The chord F sharp-A-C-E flat represents the dominant of G. The conflict has to do with proposed key area. Also, I think B flat is a rhythmic reflection from m. 7. For another example, I agree with Graham Phipps’s idea about B-flat in m.18 as a conflict, because it comes at the end of the section, with a half cadence to finish this sentence, which calls for dominant V(G-B-D-F). Also, I think the motive (B flat, A, G, F natural) in m.18 is a rhythmic transformation of the same four- note group in m.7 (Example 3.11). Both of the B flats are conflicts with an underlying G dominant 9th chord (G-B-D-F-A flat). In fact, the B natural appears later, on the third beat of m.18. The seven-diminished of V chord in m.14 not only predicts the conflicts in m.18, but also introduces a sequence, which ornaments a 7-6 linear intervallic pattern as shown in my graph (Appendix B). Since the fully diminished chord (F sharp-A-C-E flat) has to resolve to V (G-B-D-F), B conflicts with B flat in m.15. This sequence features similar melodic motives and parallel harmonic functions at mm.15 and 16. These measures had been preceded by the ascending minor third C-D-E flat and the upper neighbor G-A natural –G in mm.12-14 (Appendix B). 38 Example 3.11. Marked score of mm. 10-19 From the angle of piano pedagogy, I would like to suggest that students listen for the chords, and find the proper balance between melodic line and accompaniment. Especially, students need to pay attention to the top notes of chords (Ab-G-G-F in mm.15-16), which sometimes cover notes that lead the main melodic function (Example 3.12). Phipps’s explanation of the “antecedent” in mm.15-18 is really attractive, because it calls attention to another hidden repetition. He says the Introduction’s segment (E-flat, D, C, G), is transposed up a perfect fourth to A-flat (m.15), G (m.15), F (m.16), D (m.18). We can find Chopin using neighbors and passing tone to decorate these four notes. 39 Example 3.12. Phipps’s transposition of the “antecedent” in mm. 15-1826 Measures 19-36 are a varied repetition of the a section, which I will call a’. It represents a similar form that modulates to B-flat Major. How does Chopin naturally change the key to B-flat Major? According to my approach, there are two principal ways: one is through a connection in the accompaniment, another one is that the melody part chromatically ascends step by step rather than descending. Chromaticism is widely used in Chopin’s Etude, which could be related to his life background. Additionally, chromaticism develops the repetition of the material in a way that sounds “revolutionary”. In mm. 23-28, the bass part starts on c in tonic function and naturally shifts to c in a V4/3/ bVII chord (C, G, C, D shifts to C, F, C, D). Later on, compared to the melody line, the accompaniment has a parallel function (Bass: C, D, E, F, B-flat; melody line A, B-flat, B natural, C, C-sharp, D, E-flat, E-natural, F). Finally, the B-flat major area is reinforced by the cadence in m.28 (Example 3.13). Chopin likes to use connective sixteenth notes as he guides us to the next target. 26 Phipps, 556. 40 Example 3.13. Modulation to Bb major in mm. 23-28 Measures 29-36 is an astonishing passage, because of many complicated things that occur. It is hard to figure out the key within this connected progression, but it is obvious that a harmonic sequence is portrayed in this passage (Example 3.14). Through the theoretical angle, I can identify the melodic sequence by hearing, and then I will check the concepts to support me. Thus, mm. 29–36 can be divided into 3 groups: the first group is g-sharp minor to d-sharp minor, the second group is f-sharp minor to c- sharp minor, the third group is g#7-d diminished. These three groups have a duplicate characteristic involving 5 steps between each pair of chords. Most important, there is another characteristic; chromaticism occurring in the melody line. Graham Phipps wrote in his description of Simon Sechter’s theories, an important forerunner of Schoenberg: “building upon the previous two points, Sechter concludes that chromaticism occurs only 41 in the upper notes of chords, and that the relationship of fundamental tones must always be diatonic.”27 Example 3.14. Voice leading underlying mm. 29-36 In the B section (mm. 37-49), there are two parts. One part is two 2+2+4 sentences, which end on G7 in C minor (m. 45). The second part is a retransition to A’, at the same time it is also an introduction to A’ (mm. 45-49). If we go back to the end of section a’ (the approach to the beginning of B, mm. 35-36), it had arpeggiated C7, finally arriving in F minor at m.37 (Example 3.15). Example 3.15. mm. 37-40, basic harmonic function 27 Phipps, 549. 42 In the melody part, Chopin connected each chord with the melody line rhythmically, and the rhythmic pattern is simpler than section A. From the aspect of harmony, the B section is based on basic harmonic function. At the beginning of the 2nd sentence (m. 37), we hear i-iv6-VI-I (Example 15). From m. 41, Chopin already begins the return to the A’ section, so G7 appears in m. 41 (Example 3.16). Example 3.16. mm. 41-47, the ending of the B section connects with the introduction of A’ section An extended dominant pedal begins. Before the dominant returns on the downbeat of m. 43, the melody line touches on the iv6 chord. Finally, in m. 45, the chord G-B-D-F is given a strong accent. We hear a b diminished arpeggio, but the sound is consonant b diminished, it has common tones with the G7: B-D-F-A flat. In other words, the diminished seventh chord is a substitute for a dominant chord. It is interesting that Rameau also found a similar concept, “From Rameau, he derives the fact that the diminished seventh chord is a substitute for a dominant ninth chord whose “real” root is a 43 major third below the root of the diminished seventh chord.”28 My point is not exactly the same as Rameau, however we used the same way to explain obscure harmony. Chopin uses the half cadence to end section B, the important G7 chord is a substantive sonority. The layers of the B section are three-fold: the main melody line, the decoration of the melody line, and the accompaniment which is constituted by sixteenth notes appearing throughout section B (Appendix B). In section A’, the first sentence starts on c minor, and ends on a half cadence (G Major). The form of section A’ is similar to section A, both of them end on a half cadence in the first sentence (m. 58, m. 18). After the first half cadence, they both try to modulate to another key. In section A’, there is no doubt it will modulate to the home key eventually, however, it does not stay in c minor. Chopin modulates to E flat major first (m. 69), then uses common tone transfers to V in c minor (m. 70). (Example 3.17) Example 3.17. Connection through the common tone in mm. 69-70 Once the dominant chord arrives, that means it will go back to the home key soon. Section A had modulated to B flat major, also ending on a perfect authentic cadence (mm. 19-28). Section A had the continuation of a’, but section A’ does not have this, directly going to the coda in mm. 79-84. Why do I think the coda happens here 28 Ibid., 549. 44 immediately? Before the coda, we can find a perfect authentic cadence in the home key (c minor). In mm. 78-79, Chopin writes a ii half diminished 4/2 chord leading to a G Major chord. He uses the same method in m.45. There is another reason: the coda repeats tonic to dominant chords (I-V-I-V-I). This is a great conclusion for a piece that had modulated so much. It is appropriate to ask why Chopin used C Major to end this whole piece. Personally, the piece is called “Revolution”, ending on C Major is a response to the name “Revolution.” This is because of the nationalistic quality of C major- it is used for the anthems of many countries. The shift from c minor to C major could represent revolutionaries overcoming their oppressors. Compared to section A, A’ is more decorative and interesting than A. The basic motivic patterns come from section A, but the A’ section adds some dissonant notes to decorate the motivic patterns, for example: C-C sharp-D-E in m.50, C sharp and D are doubling passing tones (Example 18). For another example, the second chord of m. 55 is viio 4/3/IV (Example 3.18), but the A flat of the melody part is a non-chord tone, a neighbor tone to decorate this motivic pattern. We saw this Ab in section A, but have the rhythm is different. Sometimes non-chord tones are important to connect each phrase, as a stepwise movement, especially in mm. 55-56. Through using the Schenkerian method, the beginning of A’ can be drawn as a Schenkerian graph to see its architectural levels (Appendix B). From mm. 55-59, the melody line and accompaniment have descending motion. In mm. 50-53, the motion is an ascending line, thus the two parts of the melody line are totally contrasting. 45 Example 3.18. My Schenkerian overlay of mm. 55-56 At mm. 60-64, Chopin uses chromatic elements to decorate the melody line (Example 3.19). From mm. 64-71, this passage is trying to get back to the key of C minor. It modulates through complicated chords to E flat major, and through the common tone G, it goes back to dominant G Major chords, finally to arrive at C minor. 46 Example 3.19. Modulation to E flat major and return through a common tone to V7 of C minor in mm. 64-70 In m. 72, Chopin uses the N6 chord to prepare for the coda. In the accompaniment (mm. 73-77), Chopin uses chromaticism to correspond to the chromatic segments at mm. 60- 63. Chromatic segments in measure 60-63 are always on the top of the chords. “Sechter concludes that chromaticism occurs only in the upper notes of chords, and that the relationship of fundamental tones must always be diatonic.”29 My analysis has illustrated the formal logic of this piece that has AA’B forms at sentence level as well as on larger formal levels, the motivic logic that brings back neighbor note figures at larger and larger levels, and the logic of modulation that goes to distant keys and then comes back suddenly through a common tone. I would now like to turn to a consideration of how the performer can bring out some of this logic. 29 Ibid., 549. 47 Chopin Op. 10, No. 12 from the Piano Teacher’s Perspective When we first look at this piece, reading and analyzing the music is the quickest and most useful method to understand it. This Etude requires strong technical skills for both hands. starting on M.M. 80-120. It is the best way for a musician to become familiar with the underlying finger patterns of the piece. I would also write some basic exercises which use the piece’s middleground and foreground to warm up my hands as well, demonstrating how to use analytical method to develop a strong piano technique. Based on the architectural structure, the pianist should play the important chords which are necessary to connect the whole piece. We can trace this structure using Schenkerian analysis, particularly the background and middleground levels. This is also a good method for memorizing a piece of music, because it helps the pianist memorize the basic structure. When the pianist plays on the stage, muscle memory is sometimes not enough to enable the pianist to completely finish the concert. However, if you memorize the architectural structure of a piece of music, even if an accident suddenly happens during the concert, you still have the ability to pick up the next phrase to keep going. Example 3.20. Scale with neighbor motion in mm. 1-2 48 In Example 3.20, I will first group the motives into groups of 4 such as A-flat, G, F, D and E flat, D, B-natural, G, the grouping suggested by Graham Phipps. A second grouping would be the alternative to Phipps I suggested: each complete neighbor motive plus the following note. This is a method to train the pianist how to play music with neighboring fingers. (especially for fingers 3, 4, 5). Thirdly, I will put A-flat, G, F, D, and E-flat, together, making sure that each note is even and equal. These are three particular ways to help the pianist build a strong fingering. Example 3.21. Arpeggio in mm. 10-11 Looking at example 3.21, this short passage is about playing arpeggios, and the reason I give it as an example of something difficult is because of the uncomfortable finger position. The pianist needs to transfer finger 1 to finger 2 through finger 3. I would focus on this part, and do slow practice to feel and remember the finger position. Example 3.22. Chromatic scale in mm. 17-18 49 This chromatic scale has an ascending line with incomplete neighbor tones (Example 3.22). I would like to write my own exercise for this short passage, which takes this analytical view into account. Firstly, in the melodic line, the dotted notes E and the sixteenth notes E-flat move up by half step. We can imagine the dotted notes as the underlying line, and the sixteenth notes as a decoration to enrich it. Example 3.23. Chromatic motion in melody part and accompaniment in mm. 23-28 In example 3.23, there is chromatic motion in both hands, and I recommend playing the chords in the right hand, and analyzing the voice leading between these chords such as moving up by whole step, or moving up by half step (see Example 3.24). 50 Example 3.24. Chords in right hands and voice leading B-flat, F, B-flat B-flat, G, B-flat B-natural, G, B-natural C, G, B-flat, C C-sharp, G, B-flat, C-sharp D, B-flat, D E-flat, B-flat, E-flat E-natural, B-flat, E-natural B-flat F B-flat B-flat G B-flat B-natural G B-natural C G B-flat C C-sharp G B-flat C-sharp D B-flat D E-flat B-flat E-flat E-natural B-flat E-natural In example 3.24, I would divide the accompaniment into three levels, based on the Schenkerian analysis. The first level consists of the root notes D, E-flat, E-natural, F. The second level would be based on the first note of each beat; D, B-flat, E-flat, B-flat, E-natural, B-flat, F, G-flat. The third level would be about holding one pitch and moving the other two pitches by half step: B-flat, C-flat, B-flat; B-flat, C, B-flat. In short, once we have the middleground structure well established, we can easily memorize difficult phrases, by dividing the phrase into smaller segments. 51 Example 3.25. Melodic Sequences in mm. 29-36 In example 3.25, we should be familiar with the melodic sequence underlying the music. This particular sequence ornaments a 10-5 linear intervallic pattern in its first four measures. In the accompaniment, it moves by ascending 5th: from g-sharp to d-sharp; from f-sharp to c-sharp, and then by 3rd from B sharp to D (Appendix B, in mm.29-32). Another assignable topic for the pianist studying the “Revolutionary” Etude is the difference between the A section and A’ section. I would list the differences, focusing on the different kinds of diminution in A and A’. There are several examples which show how Chopin created contrast and development in the A’ section. For example, in m. 50, he added a half step passing tone to the melody line with the C minor arpeggio; in m.52, he created a chromatic passing tone to enrich the melody line. (Example 3.26). 52 Example 3.26. Melodic differences between A and A’ in mm. 48-53 Chopin not only uses new ornaments such as added neighbor tones or passing tones, but he also creates motivic expansion within a 7-6 linear intervallic pattern in mm. 55-56. On the first interval 6 (and through the 4th beat of m. 55), he lengthens the G-A flat-G figure that appeared in sixteenth notes in the introduction (Example 3.27). In addition, the first 7-6 is part of a larger G – A natural – G motive that began in the previous measure (m. 54). Example 3.27. Motivic expansion within a linear intervallic pattern in mm. 51-56 53 In general, when the pianist learns Chopin’s Etude, they should have a study guide (their own piano exercises) in their mind, because every pianist has a different level of piano technique. Moreover, no matter whether you are a pianist or violinist, musicians should be familiar with elements of music theory such as phrase, form, Schenkerian analysis, scheme, and harmonization. In the art of music, it is not just about playing, but about understanding music and playing it expressively based on understanding. Once the musician can deeply understand a piece of music, they will have enough ability to memorize it and play it convincingly. 54 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF MOZART’S PIANO SONATA K.281 Schenkerian analysis is a considerably useful method to examine a piece’s formal structure, and a key to unlock formal ambiguities. Konrad Wolff writes “[Mozart’s] was the dramatic secret of providing surprises and creating contrasts, suddenly and breathtakingly, without breaking the line of the music: what Edvard Grieg called the ‘seamless’ quality of Mozart’s music.”30 The first movement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281 is a very good example of this seamlessness; it is full of structural ambiguities in the connections between its sentences, nevertheless the Urlinie ^5-^4-^3- ^2-^1 or ^3-^2-^1 is a visually and aurally indispensable foundation. It is very important for the performer to clearly understand the fundamental structure, because it is an essential hint to understanding appropriate expression. Heinrich Schenker points out that a performer should not only maintain conceptual integrity during the performance, but also meet the stringent conditions for an appropriate rendition.31 This chapter concentrates on using the Schenkerian method to clarify formal ambiguities, the relation between expression and Schenkerian analysis, and what Schenker might contribute to performance and piano pedagogy in a Mozart sonata. The exposition of this sonata form divides up into 5 sentences, two for the first theme, two for the second theme, and one for the closing theme, which divide into two categories (Table 4.1). The first category features melodic and harmonic parallelism between the first four and last four measures, and thus seems like a hybrid between 30 Konrad Wolff, Masters of The Keyboard (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), 77. 31 Heinrich Schenker, The Art of Performance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 3. 55 sentence and parallel period; the other group consists of more conventional 2+2+4 sentences. The first sentence, mm. 1-8, and the fourth one, mm. 27-34, illustrate what I call parallelism, because they feature a similar structure between the first four measures and the second four measures. In the first sentence (mm.1- 8), mm. 1-4 starts with a tonic prolongation, RN I-viio6-I6-IV-I-V-I, and mm. 5-8 have a similar harmonic function and similar motivic patterns compared with mm. 1-4, except the ending of mm. 5-8 drives to a perfect authentic cadence (I-viio6-I6-ii6-V6/4-V7-I). The only feature that marks mm. 1-8 as a sentence and not a parallel period is the rest at the end of m. 2, dividing mm. 1-2 from mm. 3-4. The fourth sentence in F major, mm. 27-34, has a similar structure to the first sentence; mm. 27-30 presents a basic idea and repetition leading to I, followed by a similar beginning in m. 31 that drives toward an authentic cadence in m. 34. Table 4.1. Phrase structure in Mozart’s Piano Sonata VIII K.281, First Movement Exposition Measures Key Areas Cadence Line Content First theme The First sentence mm.1-8.5 4+4 Bb Major Pac ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 5 4 3 2 1// 5 4 3 2 1 Sentence structure in parallelism The Second Sentence mm. 8.5-16 4+4 Bb Major HC ^ ^ ^ ^ 5 4 3 2 With a sequence The Second theme The Third Sentence mm. 17-27.5 4+6 F Major HC ^ ^ ^ ^ 5 4 3 2 With a sequence The Fourth Sentence mm. 27.5- 34.5 4+4 F Major Pac/Pac ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 3 2 1 //3 2 1 Sentence structure in parallelism The Fifth Sentence mm. 34.5-40 4+3 F Major Pac ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 3 2//3 2 1 The dominant pedal function until the end Development A 2+2 phrase mm. 41-45.5 2+2 F Major IAC ^^^^^ 54321 A 4+4+2 sentence with an extension mm. 45.5- 55.5 4+4+ 2 FM to Gm PAC/IAC ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 3 2 1// 3 2 1 With an extension A 2+4 sentence mm. 55.5-61.5 2+4 Gm-Cm-Gm- Cm Pac ^ ^ ^ 3 2 1 A 3+5 sentence mm. 61.5-69.5 3+5 F Major Pac ^ ^ ^ 3 2 1 In my Schenkerian graph (Appendix C), the first sentence from mm. 1-8 illustrates the emphasis on the primary tone F at the beginning of the sentence as a cover tone extending until the dominant function ii-V6/5-V4/3 in m. 7 followed by the 56 authentic cadence in m. 8. Additionally, in measures 1-4 it does not sound like a complete cadence even with a lower level ^5-^4-^3; the pianist should still seek out the authentic cadence in the continuation phrase (mm. 5-8). In measures 27-34 of the Schenkerian graph it is not hard to see a similar Urlinie in both phrases (27-30 and 31-34) because of the parallelism (Appendix C). Even though measures 27-30 shows a complete phrase structure with a fundamental line ^3-^2-^1, it still ends on the sequential thirty-second notes with descending semi-tone neighbor motion in measure 30. The thirty-second notes delay the closure of the first phrase, and at the same time prepare for the beginning of the second phrase in measure 31. To properly express the link between these two phrases, the pianist should make a very short breath with dolce arriving at the E natural in m. 31 with tenuto and also make a contrast between forte in m.30 and piano in m.31. The performer needs to be aware of the integrality of the sentence rather than ignoring the functions expressed by the repeated patterns. In short, parallelism is represented in my Schenkerian graph by similar structures in the fundamental line in mm. 27-30 and 31-34. The reason to bring out the fundamental line is that it helps the performer simplify the structure, making it much easier to remember the piece. After my consideration of some of the exposition’s sentences, I want to discuss how to use the Schenkerian graph to learn how to memorize and play these parallel sentences. Measures 1-8 clearly shows that the first four measures present a tonic prolongation and the second group of four measures drive toward the cadence. In the Schenkerian graph of mm. 1-8, (Appendix C), the bass line not only shows the harmonic function but also presents its own melody. It is very easy to remember the R.H. melody and ignore the accompaniment. But a pianist should also memorize the bass line, 57 remembering that it applies passing motion, a tonic prolongation I-vii-I, and the dominant prolongation ii-V 6/5-4/3-I. Meanwhile, the Urlinie ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1 clearly underlies the decorations in the melody. Measures 27-34 split into parallel phrases, and in my Schenkerian graph it also shows a ^3 ^2 ^1 structure in the first four measures, and a second ^3 ^2 ^1 in the next four measures. It clearly gives the pianist useful information, helping her to recognize similar harmonic functions. The Schenkerian graph also includes an “imaginary continuo,” which leads the pianist to pay attention to the harmonic progression. Learning to compare such similarities and differences is an efficient way to memorize the piece. The remaining sentences in the exposition, no. 2, 3, and 5, state a 2-measure basic idea, a 2-measure repetition, and finally end after 4 more measures on a cadence, the standard pattern. Often, the continuation phrases in sentences 2, 3, and 5 also create sequences. For example, the six-measure continuation part of the third phrase (mm. 22- 27) contains a two-measure sequence. It is notable that sentence 3 and sentence 4 overlap each other on the downbeat of m. 27, because the dominant V (C chord) is a connection between two sentences; a half-cadence for sentence 3 and a beginning chord for sentence 4. Through analyzing the piece in this way, it is not hard to find where two sentences overlap. As pianists, how do we express these kinds of overlaps? For instance, Example 4.1 clearly shows the direction of the sequential pattern in m. 26, toward the first note G in measure 27 which is simultaneously the end of sentence 3 (mm. 17-27½), and the beginning of sentence 4 (mm. 27½ - 34½). The performer should think about the duration of the note G, and how to appropriately play the note G so that it connects the two 58 sentences; thinking of it as a goal for the previous music as well as a starting point for the following music. In this way, we should think deeply about how understanding the sentence structure applies to piano performance. Example 4.1. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, First Movement, mm. 24-29 In my Schenkerian graph, sentences 3 and 4 both clearly present the primary tone as a sustaining tone, from which the descending lines harmonized with the interesting sequences follow. For example, it is certain that the ^5 C as a primary tone in F major which reveals itself at the beginning of the third sentence, continues as a main tone in m.20 and m.21 until it initiates the falling fifth sequences with an intervallic pattern 10- 10 in mm. 22-24 (Appendix C). In general, sequential patterns are generally built on some sort of linear intervallic pattern, which will be indicated in the Schenkerian graph. From the piano pedagogy aspect, once a pianist finds such a pattern, they should be able to predict what happens in the following phrase. Measures 17-27 does not just show a linear intervallic pattern in mm. 22-25, but also clearly shows how the whole passage creates a descent ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2. 59 In the development, measures 41-44 serve as an introduction and consist of a 2+2 phrase, ending on an imperfect authentic cadence. The next sentence, mm. 45-55, which seems like a 4+4 sentence with a two-measure extension, borrows its musical material in mm. 45-47 from the exposition and projects a complete fundamental line ^3^2^1 in F major. In the continuation, Measures 48-52 state sequentially modulating scales and end on a half cadence in m. 52 with the same rhythmic pattern in the key of F major (a ^3-^2 line). Measures 53-55.5 then create the extension (Example 4.2), which modulates to g minor through a new sonority (C#o7) with a complete primary line ^3-^2- ^1 (Appendix C). Here are several ways to explain how F major connects to G minor. In my Schenkerian graph, it is obvious that the note Bb with tenuto marking in m. 50 is the same pitch class as Bb in the chord viio7/V in measure 53. Measures 51-52 restates the same rhythmic pattern as the previous measures in viio7/V with crescendo until we arrive at the solution: the dominant C major chord in m.52. Then, measure 52 shows a scale motion with staccato in the accompaniment until we reach the note C# over the C# diminished 7th chord at m. 53. Even though measure 52 sounds like a cadence closing the sentence, the expressive marks from staccato to the longer note C# with tenuto highlight the direction of the accompaniment, essentially a C-C# semitone in the bass. In these ways, the Schenkerian analysis helps us to understand just how Mozart creates a sense of “seamlessness.” 60 Example 4.2. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, First Movement, mm. 52-62 Measures 53-54 not only play the role of completing the previous sentence as they finally arrive at the imperfect authentic cadence in g minor at m. 55 (Example 4.2), but they also become a preparation for the repeating sixteenth-note motive in the following sentence (mm. 55-61.5). I claim that the rest in measure 54 only seems to interrupt the harmonic motion from the f#o 4/3 chord to its resolution, the G minor 6. Looking at mm. 61 53-55, we already mentioned that the sentence (mm. 45½ - 55½) proceeds by musical sequences, and creates an intensive feeling at the viio of g chord in m. 54 (Example 4.2). For the performer, it is hard to determine how long the rest should take, and how much imaginative space this rest should contain for the performer or the audience. But analyzing the formal structure provides an explanation. From the dominant chord to the viio of g chord, it is no doubt about the dynamic forte, however one needs to distinguish between the forte markings in measure 54 and measure 55. The rest leaves a space to continue the following sentence. These overlapping sentences at m. 55 are yet another example of Mozart’s “seamless” quality. However, if we consider what would be the normal dynamic structure in a sentence, the beginning of sentence would typically be piano, the continuation would crescendo to a forte (which happens in the first sentence, but not the second). Another way to look at the connection between mm. 53-55 is that starting with the small neighbor motives in the piano phrase at m. 53, motivic development leads us to the double neighbor tone in measure 55 which begins the second sentence. The increasing dynamics support this motivic “leading” from one phrase to the next. When the piece reaches real tonic function in g minor (m. 55), it states two different melodic ideas, both repeated after the initial statement, Group A of one measure (mm. 55-56) and Group B of two measures (mm. 57-60) (Example 2). The final section of the development starts in g minor and returns to F as dominant of Bb major, the home key. It is a 3+2+4 sentence, in which the repetition at m. 64 diminutes the Eb major arpeggio of the basic idea (mm. 61-62). Overall, the formal structure ending the development part is atactic, because it is different from a 2+2+4 structure. 62 Overall, due to its formal ambiguity and the quality of “seamlessness” in Mozart’s music, it is hard for a pianist to play the music with a clear formal structure, and to properly portray the coherence or overlap between adjacent sentences. Sentences, phrases and different sections never stand alone, they are always supported by each other. A good formal-structural analysis always leads a pianist to deeply think about the music as a complete art work, even when it marks a rest which then leads to a contrary motion. Besides, in the recapitulation part, it has a similar structure compared to the exposition. The pianist can memorize the recapitulation based on its similarity to the exposition. The Schenkerian graph also shows that different layers reflect different priorities of the piece. Measures 27 -30 harmonize the last part of an Urlinie replication, ^4-^1, with V-I in F major, in which it develops from viio7/ii to ii under ^2, finally the ii chord (g minor) resolves to the dominant C chord (still under ^2). But the descent still keeps going until it reaches the F major chord under ^1. The Schenkerian graph clearly indicates the relationship between the chords and their relative importance. Comparing the graph to the piano score in mm. 28 1/2-30, the score also shows a descending line: from the high register note C6 to the note F5. It takes a more tortuous path over the chord progression viio7/ii-ii-V-I, a path that is simplified by my graph’s ^3-^2-^1. The chromatic chord progressions are tied together by the middleground descent. Moreover, the Schenkerian graph calls our attention to expressive details of the piece of which the pianist should be aware. If we compare the Schenkerian graph and the piano score, the graph clearly indicates the direction of a passage. In example 4.3, mm. 5- 6 and mm. 10-12 in my Schenkerian graph show prolongations of the tonic (mm. 5-6, I- viio6-I6; mm. 10-12, I-IV6/4-I) by a stem and slur, and if we compare with piano score, 63 we see that those chord progressions define segments of the phrasing: two-measure segments in both cases. From the piano pedagogy perspective, the pianist should think about connecting among three elements: dynamics, prolongation, legato. How should the pianist interpret multiple features correctly? The prolongation clearly portrays this phrase as an ensemble. It clearly tells us the direction of the phrase. A good performer should take the responsibility of leading audiences into these kinds of details. Example 4.3. Mozart’s Piano Mozart K. 281, mm. 5-6 and mm. 9-12 Additionally, as the sentence-structure analysis discussed above, Measures 45-55 in the Development restates thematic ideas from the Exposition, followed by a transition part modulating from f major to g minor. There is a clear ^3 ^2 ^1 line showing the direction of the phrase in mm. 45-48, and ending on the note F with a tenuto unison sound, which begins the transition part. The transition part in mm. 49-52 clearly shows a sequential harmonic function, with the F# diminished 7th chord resolving to the g minor chord (viio7/ii resolves to ii) and the B diminished 7th chord resolving to the C major chord (viio7/V to V). Thus it can be explained by scale degree 3 over the chord viio7/ii 64 extending the primary sound until arriving at scale degree 2 harmonized by the dominant V chord, the C major chord. In the Schenkerian graph, measures 53-55 presents a ^3-^2- ^1 in the g minor key area, however this g minor key area was anticipated at the ^3 and upper neighbor harmonized by viio7/ii and ii in the F key in mm. 49-50. The Schenkerian graph illustrates that the neighbor tone Bb harmonized by RN ii (m.50) can be heard as anticipating the g minor key area (mm. 53-55). A ^3-^2-^1 then presents the descending motion to G minor, reinterpreting the C chord as a predominant IV, and ^2-^1 harmonized by the dominant V chord resolving to tonic first inversion (mm. 53-55). The types of hidden information which a Schenkerian graph can show include tonal connections between phrases like we just discussed, as well as the structure that underlies modulation (the connection between different key areas) and melodic sequences. In my Schenkerian graph from mm. 41-44, the sixteenth notes in the bass on the surface are shown to decorate a descending sixth in F major, F4-E4-D4-C4-Bb3-A3. If one looks at the Schenkerian graph from mm. 48-55, the reduction shows a progression that underlies and gives sense to the modulation to G minor. Such structural clues can be very useful to help the performer to remember the progress of the development section. Usually, developments are very diverse because of frequent modulations. This development moves from F major, to C major, G minor, and finally goes back to F major. But we can understand the beginning of it as an establishment of F major through ^5-^4- ^3-^2-^1, followed by ^3-^2-^1. The motions through C major to G minor in mm. 49-55 can then be heard in terms of ^3-^2-^1 in the key of G minor, branching off from a Bb neighbor note in the F minor music at m. 50. 65 One of the hardest things about learning this piece is memorizing its exposition and recapitulation, because both of them sound very similar with some noticeable changes. First, I want to point out that much of the recapitulation is a transposition of the exposition, as is customary in sonata form (mm. 86-109). Playing the reduction in the Schenkerian graph of the original and transposed second and closing themes is a good way to let the performer become familiar with the same harmonic progression in different keys. If a performer can look at the exposition’s second and closing themes in the Schenkerian graph and transpose them to the key of Bb, it will give her the ability to prepare for that change of key in the piece itself. The reduction contains many of the same notes as the score, which will enable the pianist to use muscle memory to remember hand posture. However, the Schenkerian graph does not give complete information about how to perform: some performance decisions still depend on the unique style of the individual composer. Mozart creates unity, but at the same time has an innate theatricality, which were the most two useful qualities in the “accomplishment of his fantastic merits.”32 In his music he creates “a world of dramatic mystery, of surprises and contrasts, sudden and breathtaking, without breaking the line of the music.”33 Measures 1-2 begin with a trill on the tonic Bb, and the melodic pattern uses triplets as a technique of rhetoric to emphasize the Bb up until the note D (Example 4.4). This motivic pattern, 32 Wolf. Konrad, Masters of The Keyboard (Indiana University Press Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1990), 77. 33 Ibid., 66 projecting do-re-mi in Bb, needs to be played with a certain flowability that creates a contrast to the following measure, m. 3. Example 4.4. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, the First Movement, mm. 1-2 Staccato technique was defined by Schenker in the “Art of Performance” as shortening the individual note for the pianist—in the same way as the singer or violinist.34 Schenker writes: “in other words: also in staccato a certain distance from the [piano] key is related to a different expression. One has to observe furthermore that the height has a crucial effect for two reasons: not only is the elasticity of rebounding from the key thereby expressed, but the strength of the attack of the following key is determined simultaneously. Thus the height must represent a specific point above the keys.” Under certain circumstances, especially when a crescendo or decrescendo combines with staccato (mm. 12-15 in example 4.5), the pianist, like the violinist, who can make a transition from longer to shorter bow strokes, can create a series of highlights which, as the following figure shows, can run in a gradual scale form high to low or from low to high. 34 Heinrich Schenker, The Art of Performance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 31. 67 Example 4.5. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, the First Movement, mm. 9-15 In measures 21-22, the repeated notes C6 approach the high register D6 through the chromatic passing tone, not shown in my Schenkerian graph (Example 4.6). The first three repeating notes C have “staccato” marks on the top, but the last repeated note C has a slur to approach the note D with an accent mark and a staccato mark, highlighting the chromatic passing tone continuing with a chromatic scale until the note Bb with “tenuto” mark (Example 4.6) in m. 23. Example 4.6. Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, the First Movement, mm. 20-23 Additionally, Mozart’s piano sonatas sometimes contain “orchestral” elements. Example 4.7 shows that when the bass moves in octaves (like m. 30) more attention should be given to the stable diatonic motion. The bass moving in octaves creates a contrast to the 68 surrounding chromatic motives, and these octaves should sound like bass and cello playing the same note in different registers and the violins playing the top melody line. Example 4.7. Mozart’s Piano Sonata k.281, the First Movement mm. 30-32 But even though it does not account for every detail of the surface, as we have just seen, the Schenkerian graph does make some of the hidden details more visible: the expansion of melodic motives such as the stepwise ascents and descents through a third mentioned above, the harmonic basis of the phrase structure, and linear intervallic patterns. When the pianist reads the score, she should be aware of these structural relationships, but she also needs to be careful about the details given by the markings on the score. The Schenkerian method is the result of comprehensive analysis, including harmonic function, phrase structure, formal structure, dynamics, etc. But I want to explore how to use the analysis of different genres through the Schenkerian method to inform piano pedagogy. From the aspect of formal structure, I would like to compare Mozart’s piano sonata K. 281, first movement to Chopin’s Nocturne, Op. 9 No. 2. In its Schenkerian graph, Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 clearly presents an ABA’ form with a “formal coda” section (Example 4.8). Comparing this to the voice leading graph of Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281 first movement, the latter piece consists of three parts: 69 exposition, development, and recapitulation without a “formal coda”. In Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, A section, Example 4.8 clearly shows the primary tone ^3 followed by a prolonged descent from G-F-Eb by passing motion. In Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 281, first movement, the exposition part begins in Bb major, and expands the I- V harmonic function with a half cadence under the descending line ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2. However, the exposition part modulates to the secondary theme in F major key. The secondary theme starts at the F major chord, and continues to establish it with the basic harmonic structure: I-ii-V-I. The descending melodic line in secondary theme traces the motion ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1. In other words, Mozart’s piano sonata K.281 arrives at the dominant key area in the exposition part, ahead of where Chopin puts the dominant in the Nocturne. Because the dominant area in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 does not come until the B section, the B section shows the connection back to the A’ section with an interruption. In Mozart’s Piano Sonata, K. 281, the development section stays in the dominant F major for most of the section, over the fundamental line ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1. However, the note C is also ^2 in the home key of Bb, so that the development can be understood as a long prolongation of ^2 in Bb major key. The A’ section in Chopin’s example and recapitulation in Mozart’s piano sonata K.281 both present a complete fundamental line until the perfect authentic cadence in the original key. But Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 adds a “structural coda” over the RN I-V-I. The reason I bring such matters to the attention of the piano teacher is because understanding the contrapuntal structures and how they compare is very useful, but this method always seems to be ignored by the pianist and her teacher. It is easy to remember phrase structure and melodic fragments because information about these is written in the 70 score. However, understanding the whole architecture always comes from either training or analysis. Simplifying the structure is always effective for memorization. The pianist should always train their ability to memorize in different ways, not just be able to memorize the phrase structure in parallelism, but also be able to think about the phrase structure of the whole. Example 4.8. Schenkerian Analysis of Op. 9 No. 2, from John Rink, “Structural Momentum and Closure in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2”35 Example 4.9. Voice leading graph of Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281, First Movement 35 John Rink, “Structural Momentum and Closure in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2,” Schenker Studies 2, ed. Carl Schachter and Hedi Siegel (1999): 119. 71 We have seen that, in the case of the Mozart Sonata K. 281, first movement, the Schenkerian analysis allows the performer to understand what seem to be ambiguities of phrasing in terms of their underlying contrapuntal structure, showing that what seems surprising and unexpected actually ornaments a clear tonal motion beneath the surface. In this way, though Mozart’s harmonic, rhythmic and melodic style certainly differs from Chopin’s, the relationship between complex, chaotic surface and orderly middleground and background is similar in the music of both composers. As we progress to the Nocturnes Op. 9, Nos. 2 and 3 in the following chapter, we will see the same phenomenon: differences on the surface and even in more basic aspects like musical form that distinguish one Nocturne from the next, but an underlying structure that ties them together as pieces in the same genre by the same composer. 72 CHAPTER V EXPLORATION OF CHOPIN’S NOCTURNES OP. 9 Analysis of Chopin’s Nocturne, Op. 9 No. 2 Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.2 is one of the most well-known pieces. The Nocturne in E flat major is a good example of stylistic purity. Chopin masterfully uses a single type of delicate accompaniment throughout this work. The Nocturne develops from a single theme which is varied in other sections, creating a continual flow through a great variety of ornaments and figurations. At the conclusion of the work, Chopin presents a variation that suddenly erupts into powerful expression and leads into a purified ending (mm. 25- 34). The forward motion suddenly breaks down with a fermata, but the sound still goes on with the repeating sixteenth notes playing freely and lightly in measure 32. Finally, in m. 33 the piece returns from duple rhythm to triple rhythm. This study uses Schenkerian analysis to show how the formal structure grows out of the underlying Urlinie, how Chopin applies different compositional techniques to make each varied section distinctive, and how the performer can interpret Chopin’s composition correctly. Most commentators have articulated their impressions of the E flat major Nocturne with superlatives. Kleczyński believes that “this charming bagatelle did more for the popularity of Chopin than all his other works.”36 However, he also wrote that “it is impossible to deny certain resemblances to Field’s First Nocturne, if only the key, the 36 Jean Kleczyński, How to Play Chopin: the Works of Frederic Chopin, Their Proper Interpretation (London: William Reeves, 1900), 14. 73 rhythm, and the last peculiarity... [but] there is a certain tinge of earnest sadness unknown to Field, which even at that time began to manifest itself.”37 Chopin’s Nocturne in E-flat major, Op. 9, No.2 has a rounded binary form (with repeats), A1 A2 B1 A3 B2 A4, followed by a coda (Table 5.1). However, William Rothstein believes that “The form of Chopin’s piece is a simple ABA’ plus coda (Example 5.1); the A and BA’ sections are each repeated with their figuration slightly altered. Each letter of this scheme stands for a four bar phrase (also a four-bar hypermeasure).”38 The A and B sections develop with increasing ornamentation in each recurrence, excellent examples of Chopin’s signature technique of repeating with variations. Basically, these two different ways to understand the formal structure are both correct. Table 5.1. A Rounded Binary Form in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2 A1 (mm. 1-4) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M A2 (mm. 5-8) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M B1 (mm. 9-12) Eb Major- Bb Major ^^^^^ 54 3 2 1 in Bb M A3 (mm. 13-16) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M B2 (mm. 17-20) Eb Major-Bb Major ^^^^^ 54 3 2 1 in Bb M A4 (mm. 21-24) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M Coda (mm. 25-34) Eb Major-Bb Major-Eb Major 37 Ibid., 38 William Rothstein, “Phrase Rhythm in Chopin’s Nocturnes and Mazurkas,” in Chopin Studies, ed. Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 118. 74 Example 5.1. Schenkerian Analysis of Op. 9 No. 2, from John Rink, “Structural Momentum” showing closure in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 239 The A1 section (mm. 1-4) starts with the tonic prolongation: I- viio7- I, later proceeding to predominant function from the note C6 over V7/ii descending to the note Ab in the predominant chord ii, and finally it ends on a perfect authentic cadence. Before section A arrives at the perfect authentic cadence, it shifts and emphasizes the dominant: V-V/vi-vi-viio/V in measure 3. It is interesting to point out the chromatic double neighbor in the accompaniment in this passage, because this figure helps each chord resolve to the next. It is typical to find Chopin using the harmonic pattern: V-V/vi-vi-viio/V to create a deeply sad and emotional sound before the cadence. The A2 section (mm. 5-8) has exactly the same harmonic function as the A1 section. The B1 section begins with the dominant chord approaching the tonic Eb chord through the subdominant Ab in mm. 9-10. The next phrase, measures 11-12, leaves from the strong chord viio7/ii, and from there moves directly into a tonicization of the dominant: V7-vi-ii-V-I in Bb. Measure 12 is another place that shows chromaticism, suggesting E 39 John Rink, “Structural Momentum and Closure in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2,” Schenker Studies 2, ed. Carl Schachter and Hedi Siegel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999): 119. 75 major briefly on its way back to Bb and finally Eb. This creates another kind of compositional strategy—dramatic chromatic motion that suggests momentary modulation. Additionally, the A3 section follows after the B1 section (at m. 13), and has the same harmonic function as before, but with more diminutions in the melody line. Later on, B1 A3 repeats again as B2 A4, with only slight differences between the two B groups (m.10 and m.18) and the two A groups (m.16 and m.24). Finally, the Nocturne in Eb major comes to its conclusion in the Coda, developing the motives from the beginning. Measure 25’s right hand slightly varies the rhythmic profile of measure 1, and measure 26 imitates the rhythmic patterns originally stated in measure 5. Measures 29-34 starts with a tonic prolongation, modulating to Bb major in mm. 31- 32, the large V under ^ 2. The Eb chord as a pivot chord (IV in Bb major), leads into a perfect authentic cadence in Bb major with the fermata chord, but the tonic chord in Bb major includes a 7th to return to the home key. It is followed by repeated sixteenth notes, sounding like a little babbling brook at night, and repeating the double neighbor figure around Bb that preceded this passage in the bass in mm. 31-32. Finally we arrive at a perfect authentic cadence in the original key, Eb major, at measures 33-34. The most interesting thing here is how Chopin displays similar music with gradually- increasing ornamentation. How does the Schenkerian graph help the performer identify similar sections, and play them expressively, and differently? In the A1 section, the melodic line starts on the tonic chord note Bb4 and leaps up to the note G continuing with a melodic descending motion: G5-F5-Eb5. The melodic interval of a major 6th from Bb to G emphasizes the primary tone G with the longer dotted rhythm, which, according to the Schenkerian reading, is prolonged for the whole piece. At the beginning of this 76 piece, Chopin writes espress. dolce which means expressively and sweetly. The melodic line and the accompaniment all use stepwise motion and ornament the primary tone ^3. At bar 3 the melodic line shifts to the longer note ^2, which is prepared by a descending line C-Bb-Ab-G-F. Measure 4 is a 10th leap upward with ornamentations to emphasize the high note D6 and the stepwise downward motion from it: D-C- Bb-Ab-G. This descending motion prepares for the perfect authentic cadence at bar 4. The A2 section has exactly the same Schenkerian graph as section A1. However, this A2 section develops the underlying structure through ornamentations. At measure 5, it still shows the descending motion G-F-Eb in the middleground, but Chopin uses neighbor and double neighbor motives to ornament the line with similar motivic pattern (Example 5.2). Even though m. 5 is ornamented already in section A1, Chopin still adds trills on the notes F and Eb to emphasize the important tones. At bar 6, it imitates the double neighbor motion F-G-F-E from m.5, and inverts it to B-C-Db-C. This passage shows the predominant function driving toward the dominant function, with the arpeggio Db-F-Ab-Db (related to the predominant F) marked with accents in measure 6 (Example 5.2). It is a compositional technique to make this melody more dramatic and expressive. Before arriving at the authentic cadence, Chopin writes a shake to conclude with a turn on the principal note F over the dominant Bb chord in measure 7 (Example 5.2). The A2 section also ends on a perfect authentic cadence, but the dynamic marking creates a difference between measure 4 and measure 8, while the pitch material is almost identical. Like m. 4, m. 8 has a melodic interval of a 10th leaping from Bb4 up to the note D5, and the phrase fades into a downward stepwise motion: D6-C6-Bb5-Ab5-C5-D5- Eb5 with staccato under a slur. Each note should be heard clearly, but still combined as a tenuto 77 with pianississimo. In addition, the grace note Ab6 in bar 8 slightly highlights the V7 in the perfect authentic cadence. In every case, the new ornaments call our attention to either structural melodic notes or structural harmonies. Example 5.2. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, mm. 3-8 In both the A and B sections, the melody begins on pickup notes, before the downbeat. Bar 8 sounds like a link with its pianissimo, softly preparing for the beginning of section B1. The syncopated notes D-Eb in m.8 raise the melody to the scale degree ^2, F, which is above the dominant Bb major chord. Compared to the A1 and A2 sections, which both clearly show an Urlinie replication ^3 ^2 ^1, the B section starts on the scale degree ^2 as a neighbor to Eb, emphasizing the dominant chord Bb in the key of Eb major. The neighbor F5 is decorated by its non-structural neighbor tone G5, which receives an accent. It recalls the primary tone from the A section again, while underlining the importance of scale degree 2 in the B section. From the perspective of the whole, in the A section the scale degree 3 G5 extends to the B section to connect with the second scale degree F. But another way to understand mm. 9-12 would be as a descent, ^5 ^4 ^3 78 ^2 ^1, in the dominant key, Bb major. The note F5 could also serve as scale degree ^5. The notes Eb occurring in the repeated melodic pattern and the double neighbor pattern with the dotted notes in m. 10, harmonized first by IV and eventually by I (bVII and IV in the key of Bb) could be heard as playing the role of ^4 in this section (Example 5.3). Example 5.3. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 9-10 Example 5.4. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 mm. 16-18 It is noticed that the repeated Eb in m. 10’s triplet seems like it expands the motivic pattern with the double neighbor motion with the expressive meaning poco ritard. Comparing to measure 18 in the B2 section, measure 18 presents 4 against 3 sounding like flowing water against the established rhythmic pattern (Example 5.4). Then, starting at bar 11, the harmony leaves Eb major, modulating to Bb major through F7 major chord, which can be understood as either a secondary dominant chord in the key of Eb major or the dominant V7 chord in Bb major, and continues to the submediant vi chord: g minor under scale degree ^3. In m. 11, the descending motion with the symbol a tempo is a preparation for m. 12, in which the first three beats provide the authentic cadence in Bb, followed by the chromatic chord progression V4/2 of E, E6, V 4/3 of ii, V7/V, V7. The ^1 in Bb on the dominant chord is expanded by the chromatic motion, until the primary tone 79 appears at the beginning of A3. Measure 12 presents chromatic triplets emphasizing the dominant function and expanding it. The chromatic triplets create tension with their slow rallentando. Compared to the end of the A section, the B section presents a dramatic picture. Looking more closely at the Schenkerian graph, the alto line in mm. 9-11 shows a connection by step from C5-Bb4-A4-G4. Performers can easily understand the surface level inherently, but this kind of underlying connection can be heard and played only with training (Appendix D). The A3 section is based on the same fundamental structure as the A section, but it varies that structure through adding ornamentations, and the slurring is changed to highlight different groupings in performance. However, the ends of the A3 and A4 sections have some slight differences, as we can see from example 5.5’s comparison of mm. 16 and 24. Example 5.5. Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.2 a) mm. 16-18 and b) mm. 23-24 a) Mm. 16-18 b) Mm. 23-24 80 Measure 16 clearly shows the big leap from Bb4 to D6 and then descends with a chromatic scale and a diminished arpeggio in staccato in the unambiguous vertical rhythmic structure. Comparing this to measure 24, the latter measure begins with a syncopated rhythm and a dotted rhythm, and follows that with two groups of quintuplets to emphasize the arrival of the perfect authentic cadence. If we look at the horizontal line, m. 24 descends with a chromatic scale from D6 to Ab5, and rises from A♮4 to D5. Chopin still focuses on the fundamental structure to present his authentic cadence, but he uses different rhythmic patterns, expressive marks, and changes the position of slurs for a natural sound without the mechanical use of embellishments. In the coda section (mm. 25-34), the opening tonic prolongation iv 6/4-I leads the melody into the retrograde of the melodic scheme found in m. 1, accompanied by the same tonic pedal tone. Compared with measure 25, measure 26 expands this motive through neighbor motion and ornamentations (Example 5.6). The poco rubato in m. 26 calls for the pianist to play this passage more lightly, freely and naturally. This is followed by a leap from Eb5-Eb6, in which the hand motion slightly shifts to move up to the Eb6, followed by the sound going down stepwise from Eb-Db-C-Bb. One of the highest notes in the whole piece is the note G7 in measure 27, which needs to be performed dolcissimo and stay at the level of pianissimo. Measures 29-34 does not have same structure as mm. 25-28, but in the Schenkerian graph it also clearly shows a fundamental line, ^3-^2-^1, the main Urlinie for the Nocturne. There is no doubt that the primary tone G is sustained through an octave coupling in m. 30 and a ^5-^4-^3 descent in m. 31. In measure 30, there is the predominant chord Ab preparing for tonic Eb major, followed by a motion to the dominant Bb. The arpeggiated descending and ascending 81 motion in m. 30 creates a strong sense of “con forza” to reach the highest note, G7. And the octaves with the expressive marking “stretto” prepare for the cadence at m.32. Thus scale degree ^2 can be found at the end of m.31, approached by a sol- la-fi-sol double neighbor in the bass. The cadenza part in m.32 uses this same double neighbor to extend the Bb with fermata mark, finally these little repeating sixteenth notes gradually slow down. (a diminuendo that fades very slowly, accompanied by a ritardando.) Finally, the melody goes back to the original tempo as the Urlinie reaches ^1. Example 5.6. Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.2 mm. 25-34 Analysis of Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 82 The A section in Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.3 is a complicated structure, because it consists of two large parallel periods: the first parallel period (which repeats) from mm. 1-40, and the second parallel period from mm. 41-87. See Table 5.2. Table 5.2. Formal structure in the A section (mm. 1-87) Parallel Period 1 mm. 1-8 Antecedent (phrase a&b) Phrase a1 mm. 1-4 Phrase b1 mm.5-8 B major ^3 ^2 mm. 9-20 Consequent (Phrase a&c) Phrase a2 mm. 9-12 Phrase c1 mm. 13-20 B major ^3 ^2 ^1 mm. 21-28 Antecedent (phrase a&b) Phrase a3 mm. 21-24 Phrase b3 mm. 25-28 B major ^ 3 ^2 mm. 29-40 Consequent (Phrase a&c) Phrase a4 mm. 29-32 Phrase c1 mm. 33-40 B major ^3 ^2 ^1 Parallel Period 2 mm. 41-64 Antecedent (phrase d&c) Phrase d mm. 41-56 Phrase c mm. 57-64 B major-D# minor-B major ^3 ^2 ^1 mm. 65-87 Consequent (Phrase d&c) Phrase d2 mm. 65-80 Phrase c mm. 81-87 B major-D# minor-B major ^3 ^2 ^1 The first period presents the phrasing abac two times. Phrase ab (mm. 1-8) is an antecedent ending in a half cadence and Phrase ac (mm. 9-20) is a consequent with a perfect authentic cadence. Phrase ab (mm. 1-8) begins with a playful compound meter 6/8, ending on the dominant chord F#7. In the consequent, phrase a (mm. 9-12) has the same harmonic function compared with mm. 1-4, but it introduces different kinds of polyrhythm: 5 against 4 in measure 9, 7 against 3 in measure 10, and three times triple 16th notes against one eighth note in measure 11. There is no doubt that Chopin loves to use ornamented melodic lines to enrich the sound. (Basically measures 8-11 sounds like grace notes added to the main chord tones, however Chopin writes out the embellishments on the score such as 5 against 3 or 7 against 3. These kind of embellishments sound like ornamentation, but there are important differences. The 83 ornamented melodic line has to follow the instructions on the score with respect to exact rhythmic divisions. Ornamentation in the works of Frederic Chopin should not be played completely freely. This can be easily misunderstood by pianists without traditional training. Example 5.7. Chopin Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 mm. 1-20 In the phrases that are variations of previous ones such as mm. 9-12, the melodic motives still show the most important chord tones, the direction of the musical motives, 84 and the characteristics of each melodic fragment. Measures 9-11 use the polyrhythms 5 against 3, 7 against 3, and 9 against 3, but no matter what types of polyrhythm are used, they have the same purpose—to show the direction of the melody and feature the chord tone. In measure 10, there is a passage which contains 7 sixteenth notes: C#-B#-C#-C double sharp- D#-E natural- E#, acting as a chromatic scale over the half diminished ii 4/2 leading to the b minor seventh chord in measure 11. In measure 11, motive a follows, which consists of three groups of sequential triplets which start with a chromatic motion and end on arpeggios. Motive a and motive a2 in the second half of m. 11 have a similar contour, but the whole phrase in measures 11 and 12 creates a tonic prolongation with a descending motion from F# through E# to E natural with legato. It is not hard to notice that each motive, a and a2, starts and ends on the same notes. Understanding the underlying F#-E#-E♮ framework is essential for memorizing fundamental patterns like this one. Phrase a establishes a simple tonic prolongation, but the accompaniment creates linear chromatic motion which can create harmonic ambiguity, such as in measures 11-12. Another example is the beginning of the consequent, which is still based on an anarchistic function, as in the beginning of the antecedent. However, the pick-up F#4 is developed as a sequential upward scale from E#4 in m.8 1/2. That sequential upward scale gradually starts with 16th notes at the second part of the fifth beat and continues with 32nd notes and a crescendo, until we arrive at the B major chord tone D5 in m. 9. With respect to form, measures 21-40 restate the first parallel period. However, the biggest difference is a diversification of the rhythmic pattern. Comparing mm. 9-12 and mm. 29-32, Chopin follows the basic rhythmic structure: the legato marking on the 85 score keeps the same line, but the rhythm has a number of differences, such as the varied motive with double neighbors in measure 29. Noticeably, Chopin distinguishes the sections from one another by changing the rhythmic patterns, slurs, and melodic fragments. Measure 29 involves metric displacement compared to measure 1 and measure 9 (Example 5.8). Measure 29 has a syncopated ascending start with staccato and the double neighbor fragments seem to begin the pattern as the first beat, but measure 1 and measure 9 fit the pattern within the beat. The different slurring in different sections projects different metrical contexts. Example 5.8. Chopin Nocturne Op. 9, No. 3 a) Measure 1, b) Measure 9, c) Measures 28- 31 a) b) c) 86 In the second parallel period from mm. 41-87, part d (mm. 40 1/2-56) departs from the key of B major and closes with the dominant A# major in D# minor, passing through the key of F# major. The Schenkerian graph from mm. 40-56 clearly shows how this passage modulates from the key of B major to D# minor. This passage modulates smoothly through the secondary dominant seventh chord C# in measure 43. Then the phrase ends on a half cadence in the key of d# minor in m. 49. It prepares for the new key through the E# half-diminished chord in measure 46 as a pivot chord leading to the RN function ii7-V-i-V. Once part d arrives at the dominant A# chord, the continuation presents sequential progressions over a dominant pedal to emphasize the dominant function and create an incomplete ending in measure 56. Later on, phrase c from measure 57 to measure 64 is repeated from the first parallel period (mm. 13-20). It should be noticed what connects phrase d and phrase c to each other. In measures 56-57, the accompaniment uses register transfer from register E#4 to the note E#2; besides, the phrase c melody line is approached at the end of measure 56 by ascending half steps. Lastly, phrase d and phrase c repeat again, but Chopin creates a slight difference between phrases d1 and d2 on the repetition. I would like to point out the comparison between measure 47 in phrase d1 and measure 71 in phrase d2. Comparing these two similar 87 measures, measure 71 adds four additional notes, C♮- C#-Cx-D#, to expand the sense of dominant function. (Example 5.9) Example 5.9. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3: a) mm. 43- 47 and b) mm. 69-72 a) Mm. 43-47 b) Mm. 69-72 Likewise, measure 55 and measure 79 extend the d# minor chord through the higher register from F#6 down to D#4. (Example 5.10) The melodic line in measure 55 shows a descending chromatic line with stepwise motion, but the melodic line in measure 79 follows a more intricate pattern. Every three notes are a rotation, and the first notes of the rotations are highlighted as F#6-F#6-D#6-D#6-Gx5-F#5-D#5-F#4. These sequential 32nd notes are played with con forza approaching the half cadence which ends on the note A# with a fermata. The passage makes a big contrast with the beginning of phrase c in mm.81-87. Example 5.10: Chopin Nocturne Op.9 No.3: a) mm. 53-56 and b) mm. 79-82 a). mm. 53-36 88 b). mm. 79-82 The B section starts in the key of b minor which is the parallel key of the home key: B major. The structure of the B section is simpler than the A section (Figure 9). Table 5.3. Form in the B section in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 Section Measures Key area Cadence Primary line B1 mm. 88-95 B Minor HC ^3 ^2 B1’ mm. 96-105 B Minor PAC ^3 ^2 ^1 B2 mm. 106-111 C# Major HC ^3 ^2 B2’ mm. 112-118 B Major HC ^3 ^2 B1’ mm. 120-129 B Minor IAC ^3 ^ 2 Basically, the B1 section reaches from measures 88-95, and illustrates a thematic melody line enriched with chord tones, accompanied by triplet floating notes and ending with a half cadence. The B1’ section in measures 96-105 forms a consequent to the previous phrase’s antecedent, restating the thematic statement, and ending with a perfect authentic cadence in b minor at m.105. The B2 section develops a thematic idea from the 89 B1 section, the dotted-eighth-sixteenth-quarter figure that descends. The B2 and B2’ sections have essentially the same function, with B2’ transposing B2 down a whole step. Finally, there is a conclusive ending in the B section which repeats B1’. Nevertheless, measure 129 ends with a secondary dominant chord, compared with measure 105 which arrives at a perfect authentic cadence. This V6/5 of V leads on to a root position V in a bridge section, mm. 130-31, setting up for the return of A’ in m. 132. A’ then progresses toward the final cadence similarly to before, with a typical Chopin cadenza linking the final ^2 over V to ^1 over I. Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.3 follows the A’ section with a coda, which has the same complete fundamental structure ^3 ^2 ^1, as mm.1-20. After arriving at the authentic cadence at m.149, the Coda section plays a very important role to summarize the entire piece. Intra-opus Connections in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3 Both Chopin’s Nocturnes Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3 begin with compound meter. Even though Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.2 is a rounded binary in 12/8 and Op. 9 No. 3 is a ternary form in 6/ 8, they still share compositional strategies, including motivic hidden repetitions, the development of varied motivic patterns without a “mechanical” sense, and the connection between parallel modes. Understanding these pieces in Schenkerian terms, both formal structures are based on 3-lines, either interrupted or not, which gives us a clue to understanding their expressive meaning, and enables us to deal with hidden repetition of pitch patterns and understand the fundamental line in each piece. Both pieces have their own unique thematic material which matches the meter naturally, and 90 that meter is displaced and developed throughout. Tonal structure and metric patterns are the two most important essentials in shaping each piece. Additionally, Chopin Nocturnes Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3 have some distance between them tonally, but still show a sense of immediate continuity. Op.9 No.2 starts with Eb major in section A, and modulates from Eb major to Bb major in the B section (Table 5.4a). No.2, which is a rounded binary form, modulates to the dominant chord in the B section which is a natural connection for a piece that frequently shifts between A and B sections. On the other hand, Chopin’s Nocturne Op.9 No.3 begins with B major and modulates to closely-related keys D# minor and C# major. Nevertheless, the primary tone ^3 D# in B major, which is enharmonic for No. 2’s Eb, plays a prominent role throughout (Table 5.4b). At the end of Op.9 No.2, measure 33 emphasizes the Bb in the tenor line which is a semitone below the tonic note B at the beginning of Op.9 No.3 (Example 5.11). Finally, the end of Op.9 No.2 ends on the Eb4 over the tonic chord which is only an enharmonic minor third below the first note F# 4 in the beginning of Op.9 No.3 within the similar metric context (12/8; 6/8). Table 5.4. Comparative outlines of Nocturnes Op.9 Nos. 2 and 3 a) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No.2 Rounded Binary form 12/8 Andante A1 (mm. 1-4) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M A2 (mm. 5-8) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M B1 (mm. 9-12) Eb Major- Bb Major ^ 5 4 ^ 3 ^ 2 ^ 1 ^ in Bb M A3 (mm. 13-16) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M B2 (mm. 17-20) Eb Major-Bb Major ^ 5 4 ^ 3 ^ 2 ^ 1 ^ in Bb M A4 (mm. 21-24) Eb Major ^ 3 2 ^ 1 ^ in Eb M Coda (mm. 25-34) Eb Major-Bb Major-Eb Major ^3 ^2 ^1//^3 ^2 ^1 91 b) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3 Section A 6/8 Allegretto Parallel Period 1 mm. 1-8 Antecedent (phrase a&b) Phrase a1 mm. 1-4 Phrase b1 mm. 5-8 B major ^3 ^2 mm. 9-20 Consequent (Phrase a&c) Phrase a2 mm. 9-12 Phrase c1 mm. 13-20 B major ^3 ^2 ^1 mm. 21- 28 Antecedent (phrase a&b) Phrase a3 mm. 21-24 Phrase b3 mm. 25-28 B major ^ 3 ^2 mm. 29- 40 Consequent (Phrase a&c) Phrase a4 mm. 29-32 Phrase c1 mm. 33-40 B major ^3 ^2 ^1 Parallel Period 2 mm. 41- 64 Antecedent(phrase d&c) Phrase d mm. 41- 56 Phrase c mm. 57- 64 B major-D# minor-B major ^3 ^2 ^1 mm. 65- 87 Consequent (Phrase d&c) Phrase d2 mm. 65-80 Phrase c mm. 81- 87 B major-D# minor-B major ^3 ^2 ^1 Section B 2/2 Agitato B1 mm. 88- 95 HC B minor ^3 ^2 B1’ mm. 96- 105 PAC B minor ^3 ^2 ^1 B2 mm. 106- 111 HC C# Major ^3 ^2 in c# major B2’ mm. 112- 118 HC B major ^3 ^2 B1’ mm. 120- 129 IAC B minor ^3 ^2 Section A’ 6/8 Allegretto Parallel Period 1 mm. 130- 139 Antecedent (phrase a&b) Phrase a1 mm. 130-135 Phrase b1 mm. 136-139 B major ^3 ^2 mm. 140- 149 Consequence (Phrase a&c) Phrase a2 mm. 140-143 Phrase c1 mm. 144-149 B major ^3 ^2 ^1 Coda Example 5.11. Comparison between a) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 2 mm. 33-34 and b) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9, No. 3 mm. 1-4 a) 92 b) Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 and No. 3 both have coda sections. Both have a similar fundamental structure, ^3-^2-^1. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2 contains a complete Schenkerian structure, repeated: ^3 ^2 ^1//^3 ^2 ^1, while No. 3 projects a single ^3-^2-^1. Measures 25-28 in No. 2 starts with thematic material leading up to the primary tone G in the Eb tonic chord, and reaches its highest note G6 over the secondary dominant chord F7 at m. 27. A chromatic descending motion with staccato sweetly decorates ^2-^1 in mm. 27-28. Measure 29 begins with a tonic prolongation to the primary tone G, however the chromatic octaves push toward the dominant Bb. The ^2 comes above that dominant. But the piece continues with its cadenza part on the dominant chord until arriving in m. 34 at its authentic cadence with fermata. In No. 3, the 93 ^3-^2-^1 begins harmonized by a vi chord in m. 151, but the proper harmony I arrives a measure later and the Urlinie descends from there. Both codas apply con forza with an ascending motion to notify the listener of the coming closure. In both pieces, the cadenza part presents on the dominant chord and is played with senza tempo. It is very important to determine the grouping and rhythmic patterns in the cadenza part, and play it with gradually slower and softer notes (Rallent). After the cadenza part, both pieces arrive at their tonic chords with similar rhythmic patterns to extend the tonic function, until the final tonic chord appears with a fermata. Example 5.12. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, coda section 94 Example 5.13. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3, coda section How to fit Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 72 No. 1 into Sonata Form Type 1 As we have just seen in our comparison of the second and third Nocturnes of Op. 9, Schenkerian analysis is useful to show similarities and differences and explain formal ambiguities in different works by the same composer. In another of Chopin’s Nocturnes, Op. 72, No.1, it is hard to distinguish the formal structure; it is neither a binary form nor a ternary form. It contains two varied sections (A1 A1’ B A2 A2’ B), and could be thought of as a theme and variations. Since the beginning of the piece gives an opening phrase as an introduction (A1) that connects with the section A1’(variation on theme A1), I prefer to simplify the structure of the whole piece as A1B1A2B2. It also has connections with sonata form. In a typical sonata, the exposition presents a primary theme with an introduction and the transition part will lead the music to a second theme 95 before a coda. In the development part there is varied melodic motion, different harmonic patterns, and contrary rhythmic patterns. In the recapitulation, it needs to be resolved harmonically and thematically. An introduction and a coda may be present at the beginning and end of the piece. However, different sonatas have analogous structures which can be elaborated or expanded. Sometimes, the sonata does not have a development, and Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 72 No.1 could be heard, I think, as an irregular sonata form without development. In Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the Late- Eighteenth- Century Sonata, James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy introduce five sonata form types. The first is the Type 1 sonata which only consists of an exposition and recapitulation without development, also called the double-rotational sonata.40 The most significant feature of the Type 1 sonata is the connection between and different functions of the two different structural sections: the expositional and recapitulatory rotations.41 In this type of sonata, the second rotation sounds similar to the primary one, but stays in the original tonic. 42 The second rotation is a closure, a regenerated replication of the prime, and often will compress it in a smaller passage without repetitions. Hepokoski and Darcy write “even if we allow for ellipses, expansions, and recompositions, the impression given by the second rotation is that of an immediately undertaken, complementary rotation that balances, and resolves the expositional layout.” 43 40 James Hepokoski & Warren Darcy, Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the Late-Eighteenth-century Sonata, (Oxford Scholarship online 2011), Chapter 16. 41 Ibid., 42 Ibid., 43 Ibid., 96 Several considerations will illustrate how Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 72, No. 1 can be categorized as a Type 1 sonata form (see Table 5.5). Firstly, the A1 section’s opening phrase serves as an introduction which presents the basic idea, the basic rhythmic pattern, and the basic harmonic function. It is worth noting that the A1’ section which is a variation on theme A with some embellishments (mm. 10-22), can be identified as a transition to the secondary theme, because it sets up the modulation to the dominant. At the end there is an interlude (mm. 18-22) which modulates to a different key. The B1 section can be treated as the secondary theme, starting in the key of B major: the dominant of e minor. It is obviously seen that new materials are added in the B1 section. Finally, the A2 and B2 sections seem like a recapitulation, with more ornamentations such as trills and passing tones. 97 Table 5.5. Comparison of the forms of Op. 72, No. 1 and Op. 55, No. 1 with Type 1 sonata form Concentrating on the foreground and middleground levels of this Chopin nocturne illustrates remarkable compositional relationships, especially when we compare it with Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 55, No. 1. In general, Chopin’s Nocturnes can be understood as in ternary form (ABA), with the different sections characterized by changing meters, different keys and different melodic patterns. Comparing the Schenkerian graphs of Op. 98 72, No. 1 and Op. 55, No. 1 illustrates another intra-opus connection. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 55, No. 1 is in a different form from Op. 72, No. 1, the former ternary and the latter sonatina or “Type 1” sonata, but through analyzing the foreground and middleground levels of Op. 55, No. 1 and Op. 72, No. 1 we discover considerable compositional relationships between them. Both of them include an introductory statement of the A theme at the beginning of the piece, followed by a variation on theme A. In Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 55, No. 1, the variation depends on a 10-5 linear intervallic pattern (mm. 32-36). In Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 72, No. 1, a 6-5 linear intervallic pattern creates an ambiguous key area (mm. 16-22). Through this intervallic pattern, the A section changes the key of e minor to B major. Additionally, in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 55 No. 1, the modulations in the B section are quite dramatic: it leaves the key of f minor and switches to the key of g minor in measure 54. Later on, it modulates to B flat minor at mm. 61-67. Before it arrives at the dominant chord of f minor at the end of the B section, it states a viio7 of f minor in m. 67 to reach the German sixth chord at m. 69, then finally the German sixth chord resolves to the dominant chord (mm. 71-72). Our discussion of the Nocturnes Op. 9 and 3 has focused mainly on musical form, the underlying middleground structures and how they give continuity to repetitions with rhythmic variation, which are so common in both pieces, and other features of the two Nocturnes that tie them together. But many of the analytic observations I made certainly have impact for the performer who is preparing these pieces. Awareness of the Schenkerian middleground and how it fits with the musical form is an indispensable aid to memorization. The middleground also, in many cases, gives the pianist clues about the purpose of grace notes and trills in their contexts. Finally, middleground structures, both 99 melody and chords, help the pianist determine which parts of the phrase more forward other parts, and which are goals, an indispensable aid in phrasing. Not only that, but the comments I made at the end of the chapter are important for the performer in that they enable her to grasp general characteristics of Chopin Nocturne as a genre. 100 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION I would like to conclude by talking about why I was attracted to the topic of how Schenkerian analysis can influence piano performance. As we know, most instrumental studies rely on traditional teaching methods such as imitative learning. I do not dispute that there are benefits from traditional teaching, however I believe a combination of theoretical study and traditional teaching is always the most efficient method to help the pianist understand the music appropriately. The reading of a score is certainly the most direct approach to learn about a composition. However, Schenker points out that “The mechanical realization of the work of art can... be considered superfluous.”44 After understanding the laws underlying the composition, a pianist can maintain its conceptual integrity without allowing misconceptions to influence the performance. Schenkerian analysis is a comprehensive and multidimensional approach, because it presents and explains many elements in the vertical and horizontal dimensions, including harmonic ambiguity, linear intervallic patterns, motivic repetitions, formal structure, expressive meaning, and others. The study of Schenkerian analysis can always aid the performer in creating a more coherent reading, with a stronger sense of direction of line. It is also very useful in memorization. In chapter II, I explained Chopin’s Impromptu Op. 29 No.1 as an ABA ternary form. In the A section, it is very important to bring out the hidden repetitions under the surface level. Even though the A section has a homophonic texture, it does not mean the 44 Heinrich Schenker and Heribert Esser, The Art of Performance (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), p. 3. 101 sound should be static. I discussed several distinctive strategies for the performer to avoid a mechanical performance: paying attention to grouping annotation, linear motions, and shifts from triple meter to duple meter. In my Schenkerian graph, the B section of the Impromptu clearly presents sentence structures in parallel. I illustrated how formal structure influences the expressive meaning by means of my Schenkerian analysis. Moreover, one must understand how to interpret Chopin’s ornamentation, which is not independent of but is inextricably linked to the tonal direction of the phrase, even if it does not always appear at the higher levels of the Schenkerian graph. Heinrich Schenker claimed that “Undoubtedly, a misconception of the significance of performance in music and uncertainty about how to guarantee a true rendition have led to that proliferation of performances which is one of the causes of the decline of art.”45 Pianists should confine themselves strictly to the ornaments that are abbreviated or written out in the score, paying attention to the more basic lines behind the ornaments. Chopin’s Etude Op. 10 No. 12 is considered in Chapter III. The Etude is always a complicated genre, and provides pianists a good opportunity to examine various aspects of technique. In Chapter III, my Schenkerian analysis pays attention to the motives on the surface level, and I create exercises for the pianist from them. Additionally, the pianist can use Schenkerian methods to examine Chopin’s narratives through the piece, which include musical sequences, hidden repetitions of motives in different layers, and tonal ambiguities. In Chapter IV, Mozart’s Piano Sonata K.281 is a great example of the “seamless” quality of Mozart’s music. Through applying Schenkerian analysis, we can unlock and 45 Ibid., p. 4. 102 explain formal ambiguities, and show their influence on expressive meanings. Chapter IV also applies concepts from Schenker’s “Art of Performance” to explain how to express Mozart’s compositional structures in different technical ways: involving the technique of playing non-legato, legato, and staccato at the keyboard. In Chapter V, the main purpose is to discuss intra-opus connections in Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 2, which is a rounded binary form, presents stylistic purity through sentence structures in parallel. Understanding the underlying structure and middleground and background line through Schenkerian analysis enables the pianist to play expressively in the varied sections. Chopin’s Nocturne Op. 9 No. 3, which is a ternary form, has a different formal structure from No. 2. My Schenkerian graph clearly presents the sentence structures in the different sections, however it shows how parallelism is always evident in No. 3 through comparing the varied sentences. Chapter V discusses how Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3 have a certain “tonal distance” from one another, but how they still fit together tonally, and it considers the similarities between their coda sections. I have shown through my thesis a great variety of ways that Schenkerian analysis can benefit the pianist: including helping her to understand the formal structure of a piece, and highlighting the directional motions within and between phrases that the pianist should be aware of in performance (without necessarily accenting the middleground or background notes). These directional motions are quite useful in understanding the relationships between varied repetitions of the same material, which we encounter constantly in Chopin’s music. I also demonstrated several practical ways that Schenker can aid the pianist in the preparation of a performance: by highlighting 103 motivic groups that can serve as the focus of practice exercises, through creating “imaginary continuos” that can help the pianist memorize underlying chord progressions, and through creating a large framework that the pianist can use to memorize the whole of a piece. Traditional teaching of the piano will always be important and necessary—but I believe theoretical study, and specifically Schenkerian analysis, can aid such teaching and eventually make the student performer more successful. 104 APPENDIX A CHOPIN IMPROMPTU OP. 29, NO. 1 105 106 107 108 109 APPENDIX B CHOPIN ETUDE OP. 10, NO. 12 110 111 112 APPENDIX C MOZART PIANO SONATA, K. 281 113 114 115 APPENDIX D CHOPIN NOCTURNE OP. 9, NO. 2 116 117 APPENDIX E CHOPIN NOCTURNE OP. 9, NO. 3 118 119 120 121 APPENDIX F CHOPIN NOCTURNE OP. 72, NO. 1 122 123 REFERENCES CITED Burkhart, Charles. “Schenker’s Theory of Levels and Musical Performance.” In Aspects of Schenkerian Theory, ed. David Beach. New Haven: Yale University Press. Cadwallader, Allen, and Gagne, David. 2011. Analysis of Tonal Music: A Schenkerian Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Caplin, William. 2002. “Theories of Musical Rhythm in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, ed. Thomas Christensen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 657-94. Dunn, John Petrie. 1921. Ornamentation in the Works of Frederick Chopin. New York: Da Capo Press. Forte, Allen. 1982. Instructor’s Manual for Introduction to Schenkerian Analysis. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Hepokoski, James and Darcy, Warren. 2006. Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hood, Alison. 2016. Interpreting Chopin: Analysis and Performance. New York: Routledge. Kleczyński, Jan and Whittingham, Alfred. 1900. How To Play Chopin: the Works of Frederic Chopin, Their Proper Interpretation (6th ed.). London: William Reeves Press. Larson, Steve. 1996. “A Strict Use of Analytic Notation.” Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy 10: 37-77. London, Justin. 2004. Hearing in Time: Psychological Aspects of Musical Meter. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phipps, Graham. 1983. “A Response to Schenker’s Analysis of Chopin’s Etude, Opus 10, No. 12, Using Schoenberg’s Grundgestalt Concept,” Musical Quarterly 69/4 (Autumn): 543-69. Schenker, Heinrich. 1973. Das Meisterwerk in der Musik. Translated by Sylvan Kalib. Ph.D. dissertation, Northwestern University. Schenker, Heinrich. 2010. Free Composition. Translated and Edited by Ernst Oster. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press. 124 Schenker, Heinrich. 2002. The Art of Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schoenberg, Arnold. 1978. Theory of Harmony, trans. Roy E. Carter. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Schoenberg, Arnold. 1984. Style and Idea, ed. Leonard Stein with translations by Leo Black. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Wolff, Konrad. 1990. Masters of The Keyboard: Individual style elements in the Piano Music of Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Chopin, and Brahms. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.