The Structural Premises of Mahler's Introductions

8/20/2019 The Structural Premises of Mahler's Introductions

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-structural-premises-of-mahlers-introductions 1/30

The Structural Premises of Mahler's Introductions: Prolegomena to an Analysis of the FirstMovement of the Seventh SymphonyAuthor(s): John WilliamsonSource: Music Analysis, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Mar., 1986), pp. 29-57Published by: Blackwell PublishingStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/854340

Accessed: 28/07/2010 15:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell Publishing is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Music Analysis.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/854340?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/854340?origin=JSTOR-pdf



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

THE

STRUCTURAL

PREMISES OF

MAHLER'S

INTRODUCTIONS:

PROLEGOMENA

TO

AN

ANALYSIS OF THE

FIRST

MOVEMENT OF

THE

SEVENTH SYMPHONY

The

majority

of

Mahler's

first

movements have some form of

prelude

to

the

main

theme

group.*

The

diversity

of his

response

to an

evident

need

for

a

structuralupbeat is reflected in contrasts in scale and content from movement

to

movement: the

fifty-eight

bars

of

the

First

Symphony

as

opposed

to the

three

bars of

the

Fourth;

the

sleighbells

of

the latter

against

the

marching

steps

of

the

Sixth;

string

recitative in the

Second

followed

by

brass

declama-

tion in

the

Third. A

recurring

feature,

subjected

to

far-reaching

variation,

is

the

initial

establishment

of the

dominant

(using

the term

to

cover

S

and

V)

as

precondition

for

the

proper

statement of

the tonic.

At

its

most

tenuous,

this

procedure

is

exemplified

in the

Ninth

Symphony

by

the A of

cellos and

horn,1

at its

bluntest

by

the bar of

G at the

outset of

the Second

Symphony,

an

upbeat

to the

rhetorical

outburst

of

the lower

strings2

-

in

this

case,

b.

1

establishes the fundamental line of the movement with the minimum of

prevarication.

The

Third

Symphony

seems

to

counter

this

trend

by

the

most

traditional of

musical

units

-

A-D,

upbeat

to

downbeat in the

ferocious

sonority

of

eight

horns in

unison

-

but

it is

Mahler's

peculiar

achievement

here to

dissipate

the

momentous

tonic

by

predominantly

diatonic

means.3

In

the

absence

of

bass and

middle

parts

for

the

first

five

bars,

the

ensuing

dominant

pedal

(bs

6-26)

is

the

firmest feature

of

this

introduction,4

viewed

in

retrospect

from

the

twenty-nine

bars of

unbroken

tonic

that

begin

with

the

first theme

group

at

Fig.

2.

From the Fourth to the Sixth Symphony, the dominantemphasisis replaced

by

a

recurring

stress on

an

ascent

through

the

upper

tetrachord.

This

prefatory

gesture

results in

emphatic

cadencing

in the

case of the

Sixth

Symphony

(bs

4-

6),

though

the

presence

of

a

tonic

pedal

throughout

directs

attention

firmly

*

I

should like to

thank

Allen Forte

for his

invaluable

comments on

the

graphs

in

this

article.

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

29



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

towards

the

all-important

A-C

melodic

cell

at the start of the

principal

theme.

A

similarprocedureinforms

the

more complex opening

of the second

movement

of the

Fifth

Symphony,

where

a

preceding

movement has established

certain

motivic-harmonic

relationships;

its

presence

in

this

discussion,

which

focuses

on first

movements,

is

justified

partly by

formal

considerations,

partly

by

Mahler's characterization

of the movement as

Hauptsatz

in

spite

of its

unusual

placing

for

such a title within the

sequence

of

movements.5

The

rising

tetrachord

is

relegated

to an inner voice

(first

trombone,

bs

5-9),

reflecting

its

subordinate status

to the motive

of

the sixth

degree

as

neighbour

to

the

fifth,

a

figure

which

gradually

achieved

prominence

in

the Funeral March.

Finally,

the

brief introduction

to the

Fourth

Symphony provides

the most

succinct

statement of the

rising

tetrachord (first violins, bs 3-4), uncomplicated by

decorative

or

overlying

elements.

The stress

on the

rising upper

tetrachord

and the

preliminary

establishment

of the dominant

both become

features

of what

is,

in harmonic

and

melodic

terms,

Mahler's most

ambitious first-movement

introduction,

that to

the

Seventh

Symphony.

Here,

the various

degrees

of the scale

and attendant

harmonic functions

engage

in

a

process

of

deception,6 complicated

by

the

ambiguous

modality

of

the third

of

the

triad. Of

no section is

this more

true than

bs

19-31,

which forms

the basis

for

the

codetta to the

second

subject.

But this is

far from the standard 'confirmatory'codetta; instead the chromatic tensions

held

in check

in the

song-theme

of the second

subject

burst

to the surface.

All

talk

of

degrees

and

harmonies is

secondary,

however,

to the

possibility,

systematically

established

in the

introduction,

that

B

minor is the

main

key,

a

possibility

not

confirmed

by

the movement

as a

whole.

The

introduction

to the Seventh

Symphony,

of which

a varied

repetition

appears

before

the

recapitulation,

differs

in one

fundamental

respect

from most

of those

considered

hitherto

in

that

it is a

real slow

introduction.

Leaving

aside

the

unique

case

(from

several

points

of

view)

of the slow

introduction

to the

last

movement of the Sixth Symphony, there is only

one

significantprecedent,

the

introduction

to the

opening

movement

of the

First;

nor are there

any

significant

successors.

The extent

to

which

tempo

affects

the structural

function

of

an

introduction

is

questionable;

differences

between

the

kinds

of introduction

found in

the Second

and Third

Symphonies,

the

Fourth

to Sixth

Symphonies,

and the

First

and Seventh

Symphonies

are

of

degree

rather

than kind. It

is

a

regular

feature

in

Mahler,

for

instance,

that

regardless

of

tempo

differentiation

introductions

recur

at

structurally

important

caesurae.

Even

the

marching

steps

of the Sixth

recur,

while the

sleighbells

of

the Fourth are a motive

in

both

outer

movements.

While

such

recurrence

is founded

primarily

on

first

movements, the Sixth

Symphony

offers a striking instance of the role a

preludial

refrain

coupled

with an extensive

introduction

may

have

in a sonata-

form

finale.

By featuring

B

minor/major

as

a

prelude

to a

movement

in

E,

the Seventh

Symphony's

introduction

parallels

the slow

introduction

to

the

First

Sym-

phony.

Both

represent prolongations

of

the dominant

in

preparation

for

30

MUSIC

ANALYSIS 5:1,

1986



MAHLER S

INTRODUCTIONS

movements with a S

primary

tone,

and

I

is hinted at several times before

the

Allegrosconfirmit. They differ in the infinitely greaterrichness of melodic and

harmonic

detail of

the later

introduction,

which

sets out to

prepare

the

diversity

of

content in

the movement as well

as its structural

premises.

It is

part

of

the

structural

preparation

that

divisions,

tensions and

digressions

are

presented

within

the confines of

the

Seventh's introduction. This is less obvious in

the

case of

the First

Symphony,

where the

ingredients

are familiar

aspects

of

a

Mahler

nature

picture,

space

and stillness

(the

seven octaves

of

A),

fanfares

as

if

in the

distance,

birdsong,

and the

sentimental

folksong

on

horns.' That

conflict

proceeds

from

this

essentially

homogeneous

material

emerges

from a

style

of

analysis

hitherto

largely

resisted in

English

studies

of

Mahler,

Adorno's

'subjectively "projected"

philosophy

of Mahler's music'

(Karbusicky,

1978:

viii).8

Adorno's

analysis

(an

inadequate

term

to

describe a

remarkable

piece

of

'subjective'

writing

which

is

part

critique,

part

hermeneutics,

combining

the

musical

and the

material in a

'sociological

decoding')

is

'one

of

the

most

expounded

of

[his]

texts'

(Brinkmann,

1975:

117)

and ties in with

more than

the

introduction:

The

First

Symphonybegins

with

a

long pedal

point

on

strings,

all

playing

harmonics rom

the

deepest

of the

thrice-divided

asses o the

highest

A,

a

strangewhistling oundsuch asis emittedbyold-fashionedteamengines.

It

hangs

down

from the

heavens like a

flimsy

curtain,

of

threadbare

thickness;

o

smartsa

light

grey

cloud-covern

sensitive

yes.

From

behind the

curtain

sound the

clarinet

fanfares,

...

in

the

lower

pale

register,

with the

third

part

in

the

meagre

bass

clarinet,

ustreless,

as if

it

sounded

behind

the

curtain,

strove to

pierce

through

and

acked

he

strength.

Adorno

1960:

10-11)

The

point

resides

in

comparison

with

the

later

eruption

of

the

fanfares in full

orchestra

before the

recapitulation,

a

fortissimo

so out of

scale in

the

movement

hitherto

(save

perhaps

the

vastness of

scale

and

silence

conveyed by

the

introduction)

that

it

constitutes the

'image

of

the

absolute',

the

'category

of

the

Durchbruch',

once more

like a

mediation

between

art and

social

meaning'

which

'finally

directs the

attention

to

the

methodical'

(Brinkmann,

1975:

118).

That the

procedure

operates

primarily

by

analogy

and

metaphor

is

interpreted

by

Brinkmann

(1975:

119)

as

evidence

that

sociological

decoding

for

Adorno

is an

'artistic

procedure'.

Without

inquiring

too

closely

whether

such a

view

represents

avariantof that'ultimate

heresy'

of

analysis

as 'work of art'

(Rushton,

1984:

4),

one

should at

the

very

leastask

whether

Adorno's

decoding

tiesthe

knot

too

tightly

between

art,

image

and

metaphor

for

music's

claim,

not

to

autonomy,

but to

that

multi-dimensionality

of

content

and

structurewhich

sits so

uneasily

beside

the

historicist

approach.

Yet

the

technical

dimension

as

analysed

by

Adorno

draws

attention

to

the

striking

formal

consequences

of

the

fanfare:

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

31



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

The

Durchbruch

n

the First

Symphony

ffects he entire orm. The

reprise

for

which it

prepares

he

way

cannot

manufacturehat

equilibrium gainwhose

expectation

s bound

up

with the sonata. It shrivelsto the

hasty

epilogue.

The

young

composer's

enseof formtreats t as

coda,

without

ts

ownduethematic

nfolding;

he

reminiscences

f the

main

deasdrive o

the

end without

delay.

(Adorno,

1960:

13)

The

idea that the

reprise

constitutes

a

mere

coda to the whole reflects

the

telescoping

of

thematic material

which Mahler had

presented

earlier

at some

leisure.

Nonetheless,

Mahler's view

of

recapitulation

is not without

interest

or

precedent,

orthodoxor otherwise. The retransition dwells on the

anticipated

V

(bs

352-7),

and

if

the

arrival

of I

fails

to

bring

the

expected

theme

from

Lieder

ines

fahrenden

Gesellen

which initiated

the

exposition,

replacing

it

with ideas

introduced

and

worked out

in

the

development,

this

procedure

has

certain

parallels

with Schumann

in

the

Finale of his Second

Symphony

(as

recently

analysed

in Newcomb

1984:

244-6).

Tonal

unity

is satisfied

in the

reprise,

inasmuch as the 'Gesellen'

theme

is

subsequently

reintroduced

in the

home

key

of D

major,

which is retained

to the end.

To

probe

more

deeply

into

Adorno's

comments

with their structural

implications

for the whole

movement

(and

in

turnfor thefirst movement of the Seventh Symphony), it is necessaryto examine

the shift

from

reprise

to

coda,

that

'shrivelling'

to 'the

hasty

epilogue'

that

plays

out the

consequences

of the fundamental

line whose

primary

note is

prepared

at

such

length

in the introduction.

In

spite

of Adorno's

reservations

about

Schenkerian

analysis

and its

tendency

to reduce

'in a certain

sense,

precisely

that

which is

really

the

essence,

the

being

.

.

of the music'

to the

'merely

casual

and

fortuitous'

(Adorno,

1982:

174),

his view

of Mahler's

reprise

presents

an

interesting

dialogue

with

a

Schenkerian

schema

for the closure

of the movement.

At the reintroduction

of the

'Gesellen'

theme

(bs

383-5),

the

primary

tone

A

Ex.

1:

Mahler,

First

Symphony,

first movement.

4

-

3

- ---

3

N

N

8-

-8

-•

i

I • --I IV V

32

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986



MAHLER

S

INTRODUCTIONS

(3)

is

inevitably

restressed

by

the

diatonic ascent

of

the initial

motive;

this

serves

to

reaffirmthe control of S over

proceedings

to this

point.

The

remainderof

the

reprise,

in

Schenkerian

terms,

is

the

completion

of

the fundamental

structure,

with the bass

arpeggiation

(bs

414-16)

in

strong

contrast

to

the

unvarying

drone

of the

coda's

double

pedal.

The

continued

presence

of

a2, however,

emerges

in

b. 411

(Ex.

1),

underscored

by

the

neighbouring

note

b2

n the

succeeding

bars.

Over

the A of

the

(second)

arpeggiation,

the

descent

from

S

(bs

414-16)

is

a

prominent

foreground

feature,

and the

coda

picks up

this

diminution

as

foreground

motive with

a2

and

a3

n the

second half ofb.

416. Violins

(bs

420-4)

and

woodwind

(bs

428-32),

heavy

brass

(bs

436-8),

and the last

three

bars

of

the

movement all

continue to draw

attention

to

the

Fundamental

Line in

diminution. These stepwise descents from S to

I

derive their motivic

significance

from

the 'Gesellen'

theme's

head-motive,

prominent

in

its

original

form

in

bs

416-18

(trombones)

and bs

424-6

(trumpets).

Such

motivic

inversions are

already

present

in

the

movement at

such

points

as bs

115-18

(e'-

a)

and in

the

original

Lied

(whose

Fundamental

Line, however,

cannot

be

described

as S

to I

in

D

major).

It is

in such

transformations

hat Adorno

tended

to

locate

the essence of

musical

articulation.9

In

Adorno's

attempt

to

relate

Mahler's

procedures

here to

traditional

formal

categories,

one

surmises

that the

'shrivelling'

of

the

movement

indicates

those

bars(410-16) which complete its essential structure in Schenkerianterms. The

'hasty

epilogue'

continues to

assert,

by

contrast,

that

A

constitutes a

point

of

melodic and

thematic

bias

for

the

movement in

such

persistent

terms

as to

recall

Julian

Rushton's recent

reinterpretation

of

Fundamental Structure to

fit

the

more

ambiguous

case

of

Faust's

'Invocation

A a

nature'

(Rushton,

1983:

252-

3).

Such

lingering emphasis

on

S

is

consistent

with the

movement's introduc-

tion,

where A

is

prolonged

in the

most

literal

sense.

But the

expansiveness

of

the

terrain over

which

the initial

A

casts both

melodic

and

harmonic

influence

goes

beyond

the

introduction,

a

procedure

obviously

analogous

with

the first

movement of

the

Seventh

Symphony.

Mahler's

own

thoughts

on

the

place

of A

in

the First

Symphony

are

pertinent

to

any

consideration of

the

structural

consequences

of

dominant

preparation

in his

introductions.

As so

often where

Mahler's

earlier

career is

concerned,

the

researcher is

dependent

on

the

testimony

of

Natalie

Bauer-

Lechner:

Mahler

said: 'In

earlier

years,

I

used

to

like

to do

unusual

things

in

my

compositions.

Even

n

outward

orm,

I

departed

romthe

beaten

rack,

n

the

way

that a

young

man

likes

to

dress

strikingly,

whereas

ateron

one

is

gladenoughto conformoutwardly nd not to excitenotice. One's inner

difference

rom

other

people

s

great

enough

without

that

So,

at

present,

I'm

quite

happy

if I

can

somehow

only pour my

content into

the

usual

formal

mould,

and I

avoid

all innovations

unless

they're

absolutely

necessary.

Formerly,

for

instance,

if a

piece

began

in D

major,

I

would

make

a

point

of

concluding

it in

Ab

minor if

possible. Now,

on the

contrary,

I

often

go

to a

great

deal

of

trouble to end in

the

key

in

which I

began.'

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

33



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

In

this

connection,

he

recalled hathe

hadendedhis First

Symphony

n D

major,

and had

always

believed hat t

moved

owards

hat

key,

whereas n

reality

he

principal

motivemodulates o A

major.

Everything

wouldhave

turnedout

differently

f

I

had aimedat

concluding

n that

key.'

(Bauer-

Lechner,

1980:

131)

This

dates

from

summer

1899,

as

Mahler

worked on a

symphony

in

G

major

which would end in

E,

two

years

before

starting

a

symphony

in

CQ

minor that

would

end in

D;

after the

Third

Symphony

(which

appears

o

begin

and end in

D,

though

a certain amount of

evidence exists to

suggest

that

Mahler

regarded

t

as a

symphony

in

F'0),

only

the

Sixth and

Eighth,

and

also the sketch

of

the

Tenth,

end in the keys in which

they

begin.

It is of course

dangerous

to

try

to build

coherent

systems

out

of

random

remarks thrown

out

in

the midst of artistic

creation,

a

danger

to which

writers

on

Mahler

of

such

differing standpoints

as

Adorno

and Floros are not

always

immune

-

one of

Redlich's criticisms

of

Adorno's

monograph

on

its

appearance

was that it

placed

too much trust in

Natalie's

memory

(Redlich,

1966:

224).

There are

warnings

in the second

paragraph quoted

above when she refers

(without

quotation

marks)

to

the

principal

motive

in

a

curious

antithesis

with

the

tonality

of the

whole

symphony.

The

composer

of a sonata-form movement

was

expected

to reconcile a closed

tonal world with modulatory implications residing in thematic and motivic

material.

Mahler's

contrast

of D

major

and

Ab

minor is a wild

exaggeration

to

prove

a

point;

none of

his

earlier

progressive'key

schemes were of so

outlandish

a

nature,

even

among

his

songs,

which boast

a

few

endings

'out of

key', including

the semitonal

relationships

of 'Ich

hab'

ein

gliihend

Messer'

(D

minor to

Eb

minor)

and

'Die

zwei blauen

Augen'

(E

minor

to

F

minor).

The First

Symphony

begins

and

ends in

D,

accepting

for

the moment that

the introduction stands

for a

V

that is not

tonicized;

the

reference to

'moving

towards'

is

confusing.

The

Second

Symphony

alone

before 1899

obviously

'progresses',

from C

minor to

Ebmajor,no bizarrestretching of the tonal universe.

Given

these

reservations,

there is still

pertinent

matter

in

Mahler's

remarks,

above all

the

possibility

that

the

symphony

could

somehow have

ended

in A

major.

That the

symphony

is

motivically

unified

by

the

cell of

a

fourth,

the

first

significant

sound within

the initial

curtain

of

A,

is well

known. That

the

inversion

of

the fourth is

a

favoured interval

within Mahler's

idiom

in

drone

pedals

and

frequent

bare

fifths,

a feature which

in

part

explains

the

strong

diatonic

roots

of

many

of his more

chromatic

passages,

is

also taken

for

granted

in much

writing

about

his

music.

Schenkerian

procedures

reveal

clearly

enough

the

primary

note

5

in

the

symphony's

first movement.

This

D

major

work

places a significantenough stress on A, both melodically and harmonically, to

suggest

a

closer

examination

of Mahler's

thinking

in

Natalie's

report.

There are

several

aspects

to this structural crux

which

bear

in

varying

degrees

on the

implications

of

the

Mahlerian introduction

for

the

whole movement

or

symphony, especially

when the

introduction

to the First is taken as a

point

of

reference

for the more

complex

but

related

procedures

of the Seventh. The

two

34

MUSIC

ANALYSIS 5:1,

1986



MAHLER S

INTRODUCTIONS

symphonies

are dissimilar

in

that,

after

slow introductions

of

pronounced

dominant bias, one holds to a basic tonic (D) while the other shifts from one

centre

(E)

to another

(C).

Mahler's sonata-form

movements, however,

do

tend

to subscribe

to

one

unifying key

centre. In the

quotation,

Mahler leaves

the

term

'principal

motive'

undefined;

presumably

he

intends not the

fourth

but

the

melody

borrowed from

Lieder

einesfahrenden

Gesellen.

Comparison

of

song

and

symphony

shows

that the former

(which

begins

in D

and moves

to

F#

with

no

significant

use of

A)

was

recomposed

to

produce

the move from

tonic

to

dominant

by

over-preparation.

This

suggests

that

the

apparently

'natural'

first

movement

was achieved

by

concern for

traditional structure attended

by

'a

great

deal

of

trouble'." A

by-product

of this is

the

early

abandoning

of

the

tonic, in an

exposition

of

just

over a hundred bars. The tonic is

prepared

n the

introduction

at

considerable

length,

in

alternation

with

V

under the

curtain

of

A,

to hold

the

stage

fleetingly

for

sixteen

bars and

then

disappear

before

the

dominant,

which is

prolonged beyond

the

double

bar

in

the

return of

the

introduction. Mahler's

remarks

reflect the

fact

that D

major

is

rarely

actually

presented

in

this D

major

movement

and

symphony,

especially

in

view of

the

drastic

telescoping

of the

reprise

described

by

Adorno. Its

repeated

turnings

to

A'2

are reflected in

the

equivalent

movement

of

the

Seventh

Symphony

in

the

relationship

of B

major/minor

to

E;

dominant

bias there

suggests

real

uncertaintyas to the basickey, intensifiedby such shifting passagesas bs 19-26,

and

by

the

seemingly

parenthetical

C

major

of the

second

subject

song-theme.

The

quotation

also bears

uncertainly

on

Mahler's

favoured

metaphors

for

the

nature

of

music,

which

typically

for

a

German

composer

lean

to

the

botanical

and

biological

spheres.

In

1896 he

had stressed

the

primacy

of

'clarity

of

line'

and 'the

laws of

pure

vocal

polyphony

.

. even in

the

most

complex

orchestral

texture':

the

relationship

of

these

laws to

composition

resembled

'the flower

and

the

thousand

branches of

the

tree .

..

developed

from

the

pattern

of

the

simple

leaf';

'the

human head

is

nothing

but

a

vertebra'

(Bauer-Lechner,

1980:

75).

Such

organicist references sit uneasily beside the 1899 reference to 'the usual

formal mould'.

It would be

rash

to

write off

the

inconsistencies

as mere

'noise'

generated

by

the

pen

of

Bauer-Lechner.

The

metaphors

needed

to

describe

the

nature

picture

of

the Third

were

clearly

inadequate

for

the

'neo-classical'

aspects

of

the

Fourth.

When

Mahler

noted

that a

deficiency

in

contrapuntal

technique

had

to be

remedied

by

intellect

and an

'expenditure

of

energy

.

.. out

of

all

proportion'

(Bauer-Lechner,

1980:

147),

he

pointed

to

a rift

within his

picture

of

symphonic

structure

that had

its

roots

in

an

antagonism

between

his

ideal of

the

higher

music,

almost

Schenkerian in

its

belief

that

organic

laws

of

linear

construction

shape

the

individual cells

and

limbs of

the

whole,

and

the

intrusive ego of the composer.

Again

and

again

in Mahler's

comments,

things

turn

out

differently:

the

planned

connections

between

the

movements of

the

Third

Symphony

fail to

materialize;

the

resolve

of 1901

to write

a

'regularly

constructed

symphony

in

four

movements,

each

of

which

exists for

itself

and is

self-contained,

linked to

the

others

solely

by

a

related

mood'

(Bauer-Lechner,

1980:

173)

results

in

the

five-movement

Fifth

Symphony

with

its

grandiloquent

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

35



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

chorale

peroration

linking

the outer

parts. Something

in Mahler rebelled at the

proportion

of A

major

to

D

major

in

the First

Symphony. Perhaps

he

sensed

that

the

confirmatory recapitulation

had

collapsed

to a shrunken

relic of 'the

usual

formal

mould';

he could

hardly

foresee,

with

Adorno,

the

message

of

history

and its

justification

in his

failure

to

prolong

the absolute

of

the

Durchbruch.However that

may

be,

his

remarks

to Natalie

confirm that

there

is

potential

for

'progression'

in

the tonal

sense,

with its

corresponding

im-

plications

of reorientation

on

other

levels,

that

does

not

square

with his

will for

the

movement.

In

view

of this

discrepancy

it

might

be

argued

that

the

conflict

generated

by

the

theatrical

contrast between the

fanfares

behind the

curtain and

their

immediacy

before the

recapitulation

belongs

to a

relatively

naive

level

of

structural organization, which leaves a mark on the passage before the

Durchbruch,

a

rather

forced

injection

of drama into

the

predominant

mood

in

the

form

of

the

Finale's

F minor. In the Seventh

Symphony's

first

movement,

this

naivety

of

organization

achieves

a technical

dimension,

without

discarding

the theatrical

n formal

terms. In this

context,

it

should be

noted that

images

of

tableau

and

stage

have

played

a

large part

in evaluations

of the Seventh's

Finale,

often

in a

negative

sense

(Adorno,

1960:

180;

Sponheuer,

1978:

358 and

371;

Williamson,

1982:

89 and

95-6).

The

positive

side,

however,

affects

the

whole

symphony,

which

reworks

a favourite

Mahler

schema

-

'from inferno

to

paradise'as the programmeforthe First Symphony puts it - in technicalterms

whose

affective

implications

dwindle

to

the

level

of

ironically-questioned

clich6s.

It

is

appropriate

that this

symphony

which Mahler

described

as

'clear

and

engaging'

(Mahler,

1973:

308)

should have

puzzled

contemporaries

and

posterity

alike.

At

a

time

when

the

analytical

methods

of Alfred

Lorenz

seemed to

hold the

promise

of

a

new

world

of

musical

elucidation,

Hans

Tischler,

in

his

dissertation

on Mahler's

harmony,

proposed

that the

Seventh's

introduction

be

viewed as

a Bar

of the second

type,

that

is,

one

in which the

Abgesang

brought

new material

and

a

change

of

tonality (Tischler,

1937:

122-37).

The

inherent

problem

in

such

integrative

standpoints

emerged

in

Donald

Michell's

com-

ments

years

later,

after

Adorno's

dialectically

fractured

image

of Mahler's

music

had

radically

changed perspectives

on its

expressive

achievement

(Mitchell,

1975:

75-6):

the

'exalted,

mysterious'

mood

of the

opening

is

'abruptly

terminated'

when the

march

at

b. 19

'bumps

us down

to earth'.

The

shock

of

such

generic

dislocation

is not

to

be

bridged

lightly

by

analytical

method.

Mitchell's

conclusion,

that

conflict

arises

from

a

'sudden

drop

in

the

level

of

harmonic

tension',

deserves

some

consideration,

though

he

further

broadens

the area

of discussion

to

the

'sudden

change

in the character

of

the

musical invention'. The change in characteris as much structuralas generic,

with

extended

periodicity

inflected

by

subtle

irregularities

of

phrase

giving

way

to

more

open-ended

harmonic

and

motivic

evolution;

but the

root of

the

contrast

is a

change

in the

rate and direction

of harmonic

content.

In the

slow

introduction

to the

Finale

of the Sixth

Symphony,

Mahler

presented

a

succession

of

'musical

prose', periodic

presentation

within

the

36

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986



MAHLER S INTRODUCTIONS

chorale

genre,

and the

extension

of

periodicity

to

the

material of the

'prose'

section. The Seventh's introduction flies in the faceof such orderby placingthe

quick, homophonic

march that

is

tonally

and

harmonically

unstable

within

the

context

of a

slower,

'closed'

theme

begun by

the tenor

horn. In the

corresponding

section

of the First

Symphony,

periodic

writing

also served as a

contrast within more

'open-ended'

sections: horns at

b. 32

present

balanced

phrases

in

an otherwise

fragmentary

motivic context.

Ex.

2

presents

the first of

these

phrases

in

rather

more

analytical

detail than the

second in view of the

richer

texture

of bs

32-6

by

comparison

with bs

40-4;

the two

phrases

are

virtually

identical,

with

their characteristic

opening

neighbouring-note

motion

echoed

at the

higher

octave

in

the

linking

bs

37-40.

Although

this

pair

of

phrases

is reducible to

neighbouring-note

motion in the

inner

parts

of

V,

it is also

the

clearest

and most extended

premonition

of

the

tonic. The

long-held

A of

the first

thirty

bars lacks tonicization.

The

motivic

fourth establishes the connection

a2-e2,

which

is

extended

(bs 7-8)

to

c2.

The

neighbouring

notes,

f2

and

d2,

relate to

bb',

which

passes

between a' and

c2

(Example

2,

b.

9).

Bb

'shapes

itself into a virtual

stage',

as Schenker

described

a

similar

point

in

the

introduction to the third Leonore

overture

(1979:

64),

for

the clarinets'

fanfare. The

trumpet

fanfare

of

bs 22-6

is

a

preview

of

the

more

extended

neighbouring-note prolongation

beginning

at b.

32,

but also

brings

the motivic fourth into the relationship

a'-d2-a'

for the first time. The

cumulative

effect

of

this

fanfare,

the horn

phrases,

and the shortened

reprises

of

Ex. 2

L6"

I

N."IN

I

6-5#6-

4-3_4-

V

-55

-3

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

37



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

the

fanfare

(bs

36-7 and

44-6)

is

to

point

firmly

away

from A

and towards

D,

whose tonic realization s

delayed

further

by

the

canonic

extensions

of

bs 7-9

in

horns and clarinet

from b.

49 onwards. After the chromatic

cello line

of bs

47-

58,

the alternation of

Bb

and

A

confirms the

impending

D

major,

whose

principal

theme at once ascends to the

all-important

A. The tonal

sense of

proportion

serves to

divide

the introduction

structurally

into two

parts,

the

'inert'

possibility

of

A

minor,

and

the

dynamic,

functional

D

major,

introduc-

tion

proper

and transition to

the

principal theme-group.

In

the

corresponding

movement

of the Seventh

Symphony,

a

division

occurs

with the march

at b. 19. In Donald

Mitchell's

description,

the march

here

and

elsewhere

is linked to the famous

hurdy-gurdy

of Mahler's

'childhood

trauma'

(Mitchell, 1975: 76); it becomes the ironic and commonplace that 'punctures

and deflates'

the tenor

horn

theme and

its continuation.

If this march

is to

be

relegated

to the

artless,

it

is nevertheless artful

in construction. It

is

shown

in

Ex.

3a,

with its

delayed

cadence 'tidied'

for the

moment into an

eight-bar period

for

analytical

convenience.

Ex. 3:

bs 19-26

(a)

,,

,r

•

I

"

A

OIL

N

law

,

L

Zr N

mk

II

Lt•_•

"

'-..•,"

• •

2',"--•

" • -"

A-

- -

6

-

-------j

Melodically,

it

is constructed

from an initial

motive,

3-2-1

in

G#

minor

(to

take

the simplest

view of the

initial

harmony).

This

motive

(x)

occurs

in

everybar;

in

b.

21 it

is diminished

to

fill two beats

rather

than

four,

while

bs 25-6

prolong

the

initial

step.

The

upbeat

to

b.

24

(d#3)

is

a

moment

of some

interest.

Extending

the

number

of

steps

by

one,

it

offers

x' as two

interlocking

motives,

an

interpretation

that

raises

wider

questions

of structure

for the

march.

Although

the tonal

instability

of the

march

creates

an

open,

evolving

impression

of

its

construction,

the

eight

bars

of

the

tune

subscribe

to avariant

of

the

antecedent-consequent

model,

with

the

substance

of the first four

bars

reshaped

melodically

and

tonally

an

octave

higher

in

the

consequent.

The

agent

of the

rise into the

upper

octave is

depicted

in Ex. 3b. Such

a

linear,

gap-filling

pattern s reminiscentof LeonardMeyer'sapproach.The first noteof theascent,

d#2,

is

a

third

above

b',

and

the

gap

is filled

in b. 20

by

x.

The same

gap

is

reopened

in the

consequent

(b2-d#3)

and

similarly

filled;

whereas

d#2

is on

a

strong

beat,

however,

d#3

is

an

upbeat.

The

analytical

counterpart

to

this

change

of stress

is

apparent

in Ex.

3b,

where

d#3

has

no

significance

for the

octave

ascent,

at

least as

far

as

bs

23-4 are

concerned.

Here the

significant

note

38

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986



MAHLER

S

INTRODUCTIONS

is

c#3,

the

first beat

of

b. 24.

If,

in

retrospect,

d#2

is

subordinated to

c#2

by

analogy

with bs

23-4,

the octave rise shown

in

Ex. 3b becomes

rather

meaningless,

and the

statement

of x in

b. 20

is

a

relatively superficial

feature;

voice

leading,

it

must

be

said

in

anticipation,

supports

this

conclusion.

When the

march is considered in

context,

G#

minor is

immediately

reduced

to the

level of

interruption,

I(5)6

in

B

minor/major.

The unbroken

(lower)

ties

in

Ex.

3 show

the skeleton of

a B

major

arpeggio running

through

the

antecedent,

with

an

E

minor

arpeggio

above. Their

structural

mportance

depends

on

their

mutual

relationship.

The

motion

g2_a2-g2-f#2

has the

contour

of

a half-close

with

embellishing

neighbouring

note,

though

no

foreground

B

major harmony

supports

f

2;

g2

in

b.

22

is

supported

by

an

E

minor

triad,

and a2

by

A

minor,

which confirmsthe interpretationof the latter as a

neighbouring

note

(IV-I

in E

minor).

Again

voice

leading

does not

accord with

a

pattern

of

implication

and

motive

and

should not

lightly

be

put

aside

in

the

manner all too

familiar

from

the

analyses

of

Meyer.'3

The

implicative

method

in

general,

like

the thematic

process

in

R6ti's

sense,

strays

into the

error of

'frequent disregard

of

hierarchical unction'. To

introduce

'hierarchy'

s

to

run the risk of

entering

the

complex

debate

surrounding

'the

perceptual

status,

in terms

of tension

and

relaxation,

of

music

viewed

as a

sequence

of

discrete events'

(Lerdahl

and

Jackendoff,

1983:

342,

277).

Whatever the

stones

thrown

against

the

musicologists' view of hierarchy by Narmour, it is difficult to quarrel with

Lerdahl

and

Jackendoff's

programme,

'to

let the

bass,

which

governs

the

harmony,

control

the

connective

possibilities

in

the

melodic

tree,

yet

allow a

certain

leeway

for

melodic

notes to

form

their

own

connections'

(276).

In

later

Mahler,

the

relationship

between

harmony

and

melody

is

particularly

rich in

oblique connections,

leading

towards

that

'polyphony

tending away

from

the

thorough-bass

schema'

discerned in

the third

movement

of the

Ninth

Symphony

by

Adorno

(1966a:

207);

evaluation

of

hierarchical function

here

becomes,

if

anything,

more

vital.

The

problems

associated

with this

march and its analysis are of varying

degrees

of

generality.

The

fundamental

issue

involves the

incorporation

of

x

-

in

foreground

terms

(Adorno's

'in

a

certain

sense')

the

essence

of the

music

-

without

violating

voice

leading.

This

involves

specifically:

proper

evaluation of

d#2

and

d'3

in

conjunction

with

the

C~s

adjacent

to

them,

and

rejection

of the

gap

b'-d#2

as

a

significant

structural

feature;

the

connected

problem

of

reading

the

harmony

of bs

23-4

satisfactorily;

and the

wider

issue of

the

connection

between

g2

and

f#2,

which in

turn

relates to

the

connection

between

e2 and

d( )2.

This

suggests

that an

adequate

relationship

should

be

explicated

for B

(of

mixed

modality,

in

Mahler's

fashion)

and

E

(similarly mixed);

B

minor is

self-

evidently the key of the first nineteen bars, but it would be

presumptuous

to

identify

a

'key'

in

the

march.

A

Schenkerian

view

may

appear

to

produce

tension

with

some

statements of

x,

but also

reveals

deeper

motivic statements

affecting

the

movement

between

the

'keys'

hinted

at

in

the

march.

The

march's

bathetic

character

derives in

part

from

its

initial

G

major triad,

I(5)6

in

B

minor. In

the course

of

the

antecedent

there

follow a

perfect

cadence of

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

39



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

G#

minor,

plagal

cadence

in

E

major,

triads of C

major

and

G

major, plagal

cadence in

E minor,

and

perfect

cadence in

G

major.

The

consequent

makes

much less direct hints

at

G#

minor and

E

before

concluding

in

Eb

major.

The

most

compressed

of

these

hints is the

'deceptive

cadence' in

G#

minor

in

b.

23,

the clearest evidence

of the care with

which

Mahler

has

composed

his

foreground

'chaos'.

The

tonicization

of

G#

minor

and

G, however,

is

largely

decorative.

E

inevitably

has

the

strongest

link with

B,

but the

process

of

tonicization

is

disguised

by

x in b. 19.

The

melodically

stressed

d#2

of b.

20

leads

to

c#2

and the

underlying

b',

while

G#

minor arises

through

a

passing

note;

d#2

is

referable

to

an inner

part by

overlap.

The

characteristic

bass

descent

by

thirds,

which has a wider role in the

movement as a

whole,

projects

IV of E horizontally, to which any notion of IV of G# minor is incidental. In

Ex.4

X

(:X+N)

(

0)0(C)

x

X56

1

6B

~][-]

[

3

3II-

'-3

"

II

II

II II

iII

I

II

II

II

E:

8

5

4

II

40

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986



MAHLER

S

INTRODUCTIONS

Ex.

5

A

(5)

10

10

10

10

-

10-

56

-6

6

6

6-•6

5IW

-

-/-

mI

B :

I

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

41



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

Ex. 5

cont.

6

----

-5

6

#

6

6

t 7

42

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986




Ex.

5 cont.

A

(5)

x

W

-

1

-

6

- -

-----

S

--

II@Pu

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

:1,

1986

43



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

Ex.

5 cont.

A

(5)

X

inv.

1X

-5

'-

6

- - I IL•W - I

S-I III- I

( -

--

ti

)

ffl•

'la

44

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986




Ex. 5

cont.

8

/

-

---

7

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

45





MAHLER

S INTRODUCTIONS

Ex. 5

cont.

A

(5)

10o5

V

I

dp-E==Z

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

47



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

Ex. 5

cont.

A

A

(5)

5

8-

7

6

I

"

48 MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986




b. 23 the same

passing

note

is

present (a#2)

but

without the

leaping

d#;

this

time d# moves by step and is even more decisively reducible to an inner part

(Exs

4c and

d).

The

neighbouring

note

d#3

is treated

in

a

way peculiarly

characteristic of Mahler: as it moves

to

c#3, c#

moves to

d, chromatically

dependent

on

d#. (The

9-7

exchange

is

memorably compressed

to

d'-e

at

b.

139

of

'Der Einsame

im

Herbst',

the second movement

of Das Lied von

der

Erde.14)

This detail

(Exs

4d and

f)

is

secondary

to the

'

over

e,

which

passes

between

E

major

and

Eb

major

to make the link

to

the

episode

in

Ab

minor

(Ex.

4e,

IV(8)7).

E,

like

IV

in

the

introduction,

is a decisive internal force

in

the

structure of

the march tune and the introduction as

a

whole.

In

the

introduction

to the

First

Symphony,

the

tonality

of

the movement was first

suggested

by

the

horns as the first

significant

structural division within the dominant areaover

pedal

A.

The

content

and context of

the march

in

the Seventh are

more

complex,

but nevertheless

the

tonic is

anticipated.

By

claiming

that

G#

minor is a

foreground

embellishment,

this

analysis

runs

the risk of

relegating

the

'essence'

to 'the

merely

casual and

fortuitous',

since

Mahler marks its eventual

establishment

at b.

27

by

the first

change

of

key

signature

of

the

symphony

(in

the

enharmonic

form,

Ab

minor),

a

significant

gesture

for a mere five

bars. Neither

G#

nor

Ab

have

any

special prominence

in

the

movement,

however,

and the

importance

of

these five bars is

mainly

thematic. Motive x undergoes a transformation. Exs 4d and e have already

suggested

that an

inversion

of x

(b2-_C#3-e3/d#3)

is the

agent

of

change

on

one level

in

the

movement,

from

the

consequent

of the march to

the

change

of

key

signature.

The

three

large unfoldings

in Ex.

5,

bs

23-29,

show

this

organic

connection in a

wider

context. At

the

foreground

level,

the

trombone motive

of

bs 27-8

(Ex.

6)

is

shown as a

further variant of

x,

which

grows

to

particular

prominence

in

the

movement's

coda at b.

495:

Ex. 6

Trombones

. I ..L

.

b,#."•

:(con8va)

o

3

Ile%

v I

That

developments

of

the

motive have

thematic

importance

in

the

introduction

and

beyond

is shown

as

early

as

bs 28-9 and

b.

33;

in

the latter

case,

x

is

incorporated,

whereas bs

27-8

employ

it

as a

frame

(Ex.

5).

A

deeper

statement

of x

is

present

in

bs

27-32,

in

the

form

d#3-c#3(-b2),

the

last note

withheld

in

a

manner

familiar in

Mahler;

b2

is

not

restored until

b. 40

(Ex. 5).

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

49



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

Voice

leading simultaneously

abrogates

motivic

processes (e.g.

b.

20)

and

elevates

them

(bs

23-9

and

28-9,

albeit

in

different

ways).

The

space 3-1,

particularly

in the minor

mode,

was a fertile source

for invention

in

Mahler's

middle

period

(as

at the

start of the second

movement

of the

Fifth).

Adorno

discerned

a

cancrizans

pattern

over the course

of the

outer movements

of the

Sixth,

A-C-B-A

in

the

first movement

shifting

to A-B-C-A

in the

Finale

(Adorno,

1966b:

227).

With such

elementary

motives,

used often

with

relatively

little

elaboration,

reconciliation

of

Schenkerian

parallelisms

with a

view influenced

by Schoenbergian

developing

variation

requires

no tour

de

force.

Music's 'likeness

of itself' has become

an end

in

itself

'without

having

recourse

to outside

associations'

(Schenker,

1979:

93),

by

comparison

with

'sociologicaldecoding', where the variationsof the motive arepartof a nexus of

transformation

requiring

interpretation.

That

Mahler

presents

as

foreground

events

motives

which lend

themselves to

both

approaches

with the

minimum

of

'reading through'

(Rothgeb,

1983:

41)

is

more than

happy

chance.

The bathos

of Mahler's

march

stems

in

part

from the

clipped periodicity

of the

genre,

in

part

from

the

plainness

of

the

foreground

diminution and

elaboration,

factors

which

in

turn assist

in the construction

of the

shifting

harmonic

middleground.

A

parallel

can be

seen

in the violent

section

of harmonic

disarray

at

b. 385

of the

Sixth's

Finale,

where

melody

and

rhythm

are

reduced

to cliches.

Motives

in

these contexts seem possessed of some double function, parallelto the concepts

of

utility

and

symbolic

functions

adopted

by

Dahlhaus

from Eco

(in

a

melange

of contexts

that

draws on

the

military

sphere

and

Mahler

-

Eco 1976:

11,

239,

260 and

307-8;

Dahlhaus

1983:

163).

In Adorno's

critique

of

Mahler's

music,

symbolic

functions

cluster

with

particular

density

around

the

march

as

'collective

figure

of

going',

but

this

'musical

equivalent

of

the time

of

the

narrator',

'Time marches

on',

is

interpreted

extra-musically

as a

sign

from

which

Mahler's

'childhood

impressions',

with

their

promise

of

multiplicity

of

denotative

and

connotative

levels,

have almost

been

edited

out

(Adorno,

1966b:

218-19).

Thus

motive

x derives

its

continuing

interest

from

its

adaptability

to

genres

associative

in

their

values

as

expressive

currency

-

the chorale

figure

at

b.

258,

for

instance,

which

represents

the

extreme

point

of transformation

to

which

Mahler

takes

x

in

the

movement.

Within

the field

of

musical

interrelationships

x

acquires

more

complex

contexts,

which

in turn have

their

own

infra-

and

intertextual

associations.

Whereas

5

in the

First

Symphony's

introduction

was

a

pedal,

or

all-

embracing 'grey

cloud-cover',

the

introduction

to the Seventh

presents

5 as

compass-defining

function

of the

principal

melody (b).

The tenor

horn's

opening

solo and

its

more

extended

statement

at

Fig.

2 have

a

range

of

f#

(b. 12) to a' (b. 14); but a' is a simple neighbouring note to g#1, the

structural

landmark.

Complementary

to

this,

particularly

in relation

to

the

first tenor

horn

solo,

which

lies

entirely

within

g#

and

g#',

is the use

of

the

latter

as a

lower

landmark

(again

discounting

a

neighbouring

note,

in b.

4)

to

the

woodwind

continuation;

this leads

to an

upper

limit

of b2

(with

neigh-

bouring

note

c

3):

50

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986




Ex. 7

?

Tenor

I

Woodwind

H o r n

?

Q)

Trumpet

Ww.

G)

t

7

Ww.

Tpt.

In

accordance

with

Mahler's

normal

practice, melody grows

into

polyphonic

writing (from

b.

12),

both melodic

parts

embraced in a

passage

of

orchestrally-widened

range vividly

illustrated

by

the first violins' two-octave

displacement in b. 11:

Ex.

8

TI H

I

I1

Ten. Hn

VIn

Viewed in

analytical

reduction

(Ex. 5),

the

upper

line from b.

10,

which covers

the

join

from

melody

to

two-part

writing,

produces

the

rising upper

tetrachord

already

apparent

in

the

first five

bars

(Exs

5

and

7).

Given the

subdivision

of the

first nineteen

bars

at b.

12,

the

same

sequence

of

musical events

occurs in

each

section:

rising

upper

tetrachord,

neighbouring-note

motion

involving

b2

and

c#3,

and a

descent

involving

a

perfect

cadence.

In

Ex.

5,

the first

descent is

indicated as a

transfer of

the

Fundamental Line

(5-1)

close to

foreground

level

to an

inner

part

with

tonicizing

bass

line

(bs 10-12).

But

the

descent

in

its

fullest

form also involves the

motion n

the

upper

line

from b2 to

f#2

(b.

9);

the full

octave

descent is

broken

into fourth and

fifth and

registrallyseparated

by

octave

transfer and

voice

exchange.

The

second octave

descent

(bs 14-18)

is

retained

within

one

octave

register (b2-b').

In

effect,

this descent

is a

counterpart

to

the

arpeggiation

of

the

B

minor triad

discernible in

the

middleground

of

bs

1-5'5

and

makes a

connection

with the

E minor

arpeggiation

of

bs

21-3;

the

problem

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

51



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

of

the connection to

the

E

minor triad in Ex.

3 is thus reducible at

a

deep

level to

a motion of inner

parts

(_)

analogous

to

those rather more

transparent

movements within the

pedal

A in

the introduction to the First

Symphony.

It is

noteworthy

that the climax of

the first nineteen

bars,

the

establishment

of

B

major

at b.

15,

is followed

by

a turn to minor as

the

descent reaches d2.

It is

from

this

pitch

that motive x

is

generated

in

bs

17-18,

a more

organic

connection than similar

figures

based

on

a

third in

bs

10-11.

The

repeat

of

x

from d' combined with

the return of the

opening

rhythm

at its

original pitch

(d1)

in b. 18

suggests

a broadercontext for

x;

the coherence of the first nineteen

bars is the basis for the

fragmentation

of

the next twelve.

The

importance

of

g~'

as delineator of

compass suggests

that

the

initial

#

has a significancewhich goes beyond coloration. Its full importancemay best be

gauged

by

consideration of other events in the movement

(e.g.

b.

259).

The

function of the sixth at the start is that

of,

as

it

were,

an irritant.

The

'exalted

tone' of the first

eighteen

bars arises from the

bold

progressions

through

perfect

intervals,

in

opposition

to the

fragmentation

associated

with thirds

in the

march. In this

sense,

the

discontinuity

noted

by

Mitchell

is concerned

with

fundamental

intervallic

space.

Both the

slightly

uncouth

tone of the

tenor

horn

and the

#6

contaminate

the

sonority.

The melodic

outline

of the tenor

horn

theme

suggests

a

movement,

fl'-(g#'),

which

converts

parallel

fifths

into

5-6-5. But the parallel fifths still take place (and parallelsixths as well). The

movement

"6-

at the

opening

of the Seventh

lends a

slightly

comic

edge

to the

exalted

invocation,

one

not

apparent

in the traditional

and

authoritative

account of

the introductions's

genesis.'6

The

#5

recurs

in

the

introduction,

sometimes embellished

by

a

delayed

resolution

(b. 7)

or

by

a

neighbouring

note

(b.

12);

the

change

from

g#

to

g

in bs 18-19

further

helps

to

generate

the

change

in tone characteristic

of the

march.

(Combinations

of

pitches

with

dependent

neighbouring

notes

are not unfamiliar

in

Mahler.)

The

important

restatement

of the

6

at b.

32 is

preceded

by

striking

examples

in bs 29-31, as

d#'-eI

anticipates

d

2-e2

and as

e sounds

with

the

pitch (d1)

to which

it resolves

(Ex.

5).

The

simultaneous

statement

of

pitch

and

dependent

neighbouring

note,

in the case

of the

5,

is elevated

to structuralfeature.

In contrast

to the

introduction of the

First

Symphony,

the first

structural

landmark

is not defined

primarily

in terms

of

generic

type

(Naturlaut

then

folksong, prose

then

periodicity)

but at

the fundamental

level of

interval.

That

the Seventh

Symphony

is 'interval'

music

in a

deeper

sense

than

its

predecessors

is confirmed

by subsequent

events.

In the

Allegro,

the

importance

of

the third

is

preserved

within the

contours

of the

main theme

(bs

50-7),

somewhat

in the manner

of

the Sixth

Symphony's

opening

movement;

but

whereas A-C was presented there in a rigidly closed shape defining the tonic

(Adorno's

A-C-B-A),

the Seventh's

horn

theme

places

the fourth

degree

beneath

the tonic

(b.

52)

in

strong

contrast

to the motion

el-g'-f~'-e'

above.

A much

more

complex

set of

harmonictensions

is initiated.

More

interestingly,

the subversive

third,

with its fluctuations

of

mode,

is

replaced

by

the

fourth as

agent

for

harmonic

disruption.

The

irruptions

of fourth-based

harmony

reveal

52

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986



MAHLER S

INTRODUCTIONS

another side of the hierarchic

solemnity

of

the

opening

material. Thus bs

45-7

include a

chord of

three

superimposed fourths,

which is

nevertheless

assimi-

lated in

the

dominant that controls the introduction as a whole and

which

resolves

in

b. 50

to

E

minor and

its tonic chord. The fourth-chord is the

climax

of

a

steady process

of

preparation

from

the

return of the

06

in b. 32.

Bars

33-9 outline

the dominant of B

minor

in

counterbalance

to

the

preceding

IV.

Although

Ex. 5

reveals a

broadly

familiar

structural

pattern

in

this

dominant

preparation,

the

dissonances

(0ff1,

bs

36-7)

prepare

the area

of

overlapping

neighbouring-note

tension

between bs 39 and

45. That

B,

E

and

F#

have

already

been thrown

into

tension

in

these

bars

lends a

sense of climax

to

the

subsequent

fourth-chord.

Ex. 5

interprets

the

chord as a

staggered

movement from dominant to tonic (with the lower

prefix

a#2);

f~' alone

within

the

chord

may

be

thought

of as

moving

by

leap,

to

b',

which

moves to the

tonic.

The

alignment

of

b

-e2-a#2

in b. 48

generates

another

sonority

and

motive

which

plays

a

part

in

the

movement

as a

whole. That Mahler

was aware

of

the

broader tensions

between

third

and

fourth

in the work

emerges

in

the

coda,

which

combines a

descending cycle

of

thirds

(prominent

in

the bass at bs

57-9)

with

an

ascending cycle

of

fourths in

a

progression

that

elaborates on

contrary

scale

motion within

the

final

tonic

prolongation

(Ex.

9).

Character-

istically,

there is

a

reference

to

both the

combination of

perfect

and

augmented

fourth and the initial 5 at register

b2

in animposingly-scoredascentthroughthe

fifth.

Ex. 9

D

~

ii

A51

Ir

L.4.•

-

F

,

"

•

f

.

-'"

t

•

. .

b-- I

I, -r

. r

Jr....

I

.

...-

-

The fourths

sonority

is the

most

striking

feature of the

transition

from

introduction proper to first

theme-group.

In the First

Symphony

(Ex.

2),

the

movement within

the

inner

parts

generated

a

5

(b.

54)

which

failed to

resolve

to35

efore the

resolution

V-I.

17Dependent

upon

the

4

are the

motivic

fourths from

bs

7-9,

which

coalesce on

1.

Comparison

with

the

Seventh's

equivalent

point

reveals

the

extent to

which

the

amorphous

Naturlautof the

First

-

in

which

the

blurring

of

structural

articulation

by

pedal

and

by

motivic

fourth

points

to a

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

53



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

moreradical

xtension

of

ambiguity,

o the

mechanics f construction

tself

-

prefigures

the structuraltension in

the Seventh's introduction.

In both

movements,

he

polarity

f

tonicanddominant

s

explored

ith

an element

f

realignment

nitiated

by

the

introduction's

emphasis

on the dominant

as

structural

upbeat.

Given

that

analysis

of Mahler

has

barely begun

to move

beyond

traditional

nalytical

nd hermeneutic

ategories,

xploration

f such

structural

arallels

as

something

o

contribute

o the evaluation

f

the

aesthetic and technical achievement

of

Mahler,

beyond

the

labels which

modern German

musical

scholarship,

n

spite

of

its real

merits,

has

hung

around

his

neck.

NOTES

1. The initial

A

of

the

Ninth

Symphony

forms

the

basis of

a

'

sonority,

with the

neighbouring

note b.

There is no movement to

5,

tqwever,

to

clarify

the first

six

bars as V.

Ilnstead,

bs 6-7

align

melody

and bass

as

3,;

not

until bs 14-16

does

the

alignment

3-

take

place.

The structural

division,

of introduction

from main

theme,

at bs 6-7 is

deliberately

blurred

as the first

step

in the

process

of attenuation

and

displacement

which culminates

in the final

progression

of

the movement

(bs

448-

54);

there,

3-2-i

is

played

out as

f'-e-d3.

2. An

early

sketch for

Todtenfeier,

he

original

form of the

first movement

of

the

Second Symphony performed recently in Berlin (Damm, 1984: 106-7), labels bs

18-21

Hauptthema

Reilly,

1979:

274),

suggesting

that Mahler

envisaged

the

first

seventeen

bars

as introduction.

3. In

analysing

the characteristics

of

'new-style'

folk

melody

of the

Iglau

area

and

applying

his conclusions

to

the Scherzo of

Mahler's

Fifth,

Vladimir

Karbusicky

has thrown

some

light

on

the

opening

of the

Third. The

succession

in bs

3-4

-

fl

el-dl-c'-a

-

is relatable

to those

major-mode

melodies

which,

by falling

through

the

leading

note,

cadence

on

the

third.

The

interpretation

of

the first four

bars

of

the

Third

as

prolongation

ofJ)

arises

from

viewing

c1

as

dependent

on

d' when

the

reverse

may

be the

case,

giving

a flavour

of

F,

the

key

in

which

the movement

ends

(Karbusicky, 1978: 55-7).

4.

Granted

the

dominance of

F

major

after

b.

224,

it

might

seem more sensible

to

regard

everything

to that

point

as

introduction,

rather

than

scrolling

off

the first

twenty-six

bars to

preserve

the norm

as

last

resort

in the face of

the

abnormal

(e.g.

La

Grange,

1979:

1042).

It

is

the

establishment

of

V

of

D minor

(bs

6-26)

which

most

decisively

marks

these bars as structural

upbeat.

5. Mahler's

view of

the movements

of

Part I of

the Fifth

Symphony

is clarified

by

a

reply

to

his

publisher's request

for

a

tonality

for

the

jacket

of the score.

'It

is

hardly

possible

to

speak

of

a

tonality

of the

"whole

symphony"

from

the order

of

the

movements,

and

to avoid

misunderstandings,

such a

thing

is best

left

unspecified.

(The main movement [Hauptsatz] no. 2) is in A minor

-

the Andante (no. 1)is in

C# minor.)

One

calls

the

symphony

after

the main movement

-

but

only

if

it

stands

in

first

place,

which

hitherto

has

always

been

the case

-

with the

unique

exception

of

this work.'

(Klemm,

1979:

35-6;

my

translation.)

6.

The

kind of

initial

feint

away

from

the

real tonic

discussed

here

is

more

often

accomplished by

IV or

a

more

oblique

resource

(notably

in the outer movements

of

Bruckner's

Eighth Symphony).

Schumann's

Fourth

Symphony

presents

a

possible

54

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

:1,

1986



MAHLER

S INTRODUCTIONS

parallel

for

Mahler's

First

Symphony (and

hence the

Seventh)

by

its

initial

prolongation

of dominant

harmony

and

pedal

A

spread

over severaloctaves.

7. The cadence onto the third in the horn

folksong might again

be referred to

Karbusicky's

'new-style' melody, though

the

parallel

here is

slighter

than in

the

case

of

the

opening

of the

Third

(see

above,

n.

3).

8.

Translations from

Karbusicky,

1978;

Brinkmann, 1975;

Adorno,

1960,

and

Adorno,

1966a

and

b

are

my

own.

9.

Articulation

in

the

literal sense

-

'to

bring

the elements

of musical

structure

to

speech'

-

is

the

goal

of Adorno's Mahler

monograph

(1960:

10).

10.

Blaukopf

(1976:

plates

214

and

215)

reproduces

the

title-page

of

the

first

edition

and

a

poster

from the

Krefeld

Tonkiinstler-Versammlung

f

1903,

both of which

fail

to

specify

a

key

for

the

work. But

Weinberger's

advertisement for the first

edition

describes the Symphony as in F major (Mitchell, 1975: end-papers), and an

undated

note

in

Mahler's hand

(probably

from

1897;

see

Klemm,

1979: 21 and

97)

refers

to the work

by

the

key

of

F

major.

11.

The

details of Mahler's

transmutation of

song

into

symphony,

in

particular

the

creation of

an

exposition

from

material

lacking

strong

emphasis

on

the

dominant,

are

traced

in

Tibbe

(1971: 25-33).

Sponheuer

(1978: 57),

who discusses

Tibbe's

analysis,

correctly

notes the absence

of

thematic

contrast

in

the

exposition,

but

puzzlingly

states that 'on the whole

[the

lack

of]

differentiation

of

tonality

in

the

sense

of the

sonata tradition is

striking', ignoring

the

move from

D

to

A

which

Mahler has

added

to

the

song

material.

12. The shift from D to A comes three times in all if the exposition repeatis observed;

the

third occurs at b. 229.

13. A

typical example,

with

tangential

relevance

to

the

present

discussion

in

view

of

its

motivic use of

the 1-2-1

pattern,

may

be

found

in

Meyer's

analysis

of

the

main

theme

of the

slow movement

of

Haydn's

Symphony

No.

97

(1973:

164),

which

ignores

the

connection

a2-g2.

On

subsequent pages

(165-7),

his

analysis

of the

main

theme

of the first

movement of

Mahler's

Fourth

postulates

as structural

basis

a

pattern

of

linked triads

extrapolated

from

the

fugue subject

'And

he

shall

reign',

from

Messiah,

with

unsatisfactory

results;

the

traditional voice

leading,

6,

is

sundered

for no

good

reason,

and the

structural

importance

of d2

(3)

in bs

5-6

ignored.

14.

Exchange

is

used

here

without

particular

reference to the

traditional

10-6

voice

exchange.

Since

much

of Mahler's

instrumentation

is

dependent

on

expanded

compass

and

interchange

of

orchestralvoices in

often

elaborate

ways,

it is

tempting

to

conclude that

there

may

be

more subtle

principles

of voice

exchange

in his

music

involving

other

pairs

of

complementary

intervals.

Voice

exchange

is

singled

out

by

William

Drabkin

(1982: 207)

as one

of three

specifically

Mahlerian

techniques

of

prolongation

(along

with

'his

peculiar

approach

to

Nebennotenharmonie,

nd his

extension of the

technique

of

Mischung').

15.

The use

of blank

noteheads

beamed

together

for

an

arpeggiation

of

inner

parts

at

middleground level was suggested by Schenker's graph of the third Leonore

overture

(1979:

Fig.

62/2).

16. The

account of

Mahler's boat

journey,

the

stroke of the

oars,

and

the

'rhythm

and

character' of the

introduction's

theme

are details

from

a letter

to

Alma

(Mahler,

1973:

328).

17. The

omission of the

leading

note

in

the

transition

from

introduction to

Allegro

of

the

First

Symphony

has a

motivic

aspect;

the

relationship

between

tonic and

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986

55



JOHN

WILLIAMSON

leading

note is

abrogated

in

favour of the connection

D-A

prominent

in both

introduction and

'Gesellen'

theme.

The

omission

of the

leading

note

(under

similar

circumstances)

is also a feature of the retransition

(bs

352-8,

and 356-7 in

particular).

REFERENCES

Adorno,

Theodor

W.,

1960:

Mahler.

Eine musikalische

Physiognomik

(Frankfurt:

Suhrkamp).

-

1966a and 1966b: 'Wiener

Rede' and

'Epilegomena',

in

Gustav

Mahler,

ed. the

publisher (Tiibingen:

Rainer Wunderlich

Verlag), pp.

189-215

and

215-34.

- 1982: 'On the Problems of Musical Analysis', trans. Max Paddison, Music

Analysis,

Vol.

1,

No.

2,

pp.

169-87.

Bauer-Lechner,

Natalie,

1980:

Recollections

f

Gustav

Mahler,

trans.

Dika

Newlin,

ed.

Peter

Franklin

(London:

Faber).

Blaukopf,

Kurt,

1976:

Mahler:

A

Documentary

tudy,

trans. Paul Baker et

al.

(London:

Thames and

Hudson).

Brinkmann,

Reinhold,

1975: 'Vom

Pfeifen

und von alten

Dampfmaschinen.

Zwei

Hinweise auf Texte

Theodor

W.

Adornos',

in

Beitrdge

zur musikalische

Hermeneutik,

ed.

Carl

Dahlhaus

(Regensburg:

Gustave

Bosse),

pp.

113-19.

Dahlhaus,

Carl,

1983: Foundations

ofMusic

History,

trans.

J.

B.

Robinson

(Cambridge:

C.U.P.).

Drabkin,

William,

1982:

review of The Music

Forum,

Vol.

5, 1980,

in

Music

Analysis,

Vol.

1,

No.

2,

pp.

203-9.

Damm, R.,

1984:

'Ein

"unbekannter

Mahler"

in

Berlin',

Osterreichische

Musik-

zeitschrift,

Vol.

39,

pp.

106-7.

Eco,

Umberto,

1976: A

Theoryof

Semiotics

Bloomington:

Indiana

University).

Karbusicky,

V.,

1979: Gustav

Mahler und seine Umwelt

(Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche

Buchgesellschaft).

Klemm, E.,

1978: 'Zur Geschichte

der

Fiinften

Sinfonie

von Gustav

Mahler.

Der

Briefwechsel

zwischen Mahler

und dem

Verlag

C.

F.

Peters

und andere

Doku-

mente',JahrbuchPeters(Leipzig), pp. 9-116.

La

Grange,

Henry-Louis

de,

1979:

Gustav

Mahler.

Chronique

'une

vie,

Vol.

1

(Paris:

Fayard).

Lerdahl,

Fred and

Jackendoff,

Ray,

1983:

A

Generative

Theory

of

Tonal Music

(Cambridge,

Mass.:

M.I.T.).

Mahler,

Alma,

1973:

Gustav

Mahler. Memories

and

Letters,

trans.

Basil

Creighton,

ed.

Donald

Mitchell,

3rd edn.

(London: John Murray).

Meyer,

Leonard

B.,

1973:

Explaining

Music:

Essays

and

Explorations

(Chicago:

University

of

Chicago).

Mitchell,

Donald,

1975: Gustav

Mahler.

The Wunderhorn

ears

London:

Faber).

Newcomb, Anthony, 1984: 'Once More Between Absolute and Program Music:

Schumann's

Second

Symphony',

Nineteenth-Century

Music,

Vol.

7,

No.

3,

pp.

233-

50.

Redlich, Hans,

1966:

review of

Adorno

1960,

in

Die

Musikforschung,

Vol. 19,

pp.

223-

4.

Reilly,

Edward,

1979:

'Die

Skizzen

zu

Mahlers

Zweiten

Symphonie',

Osterreichische

Musik

zeitschrift,

Vol.

34,

pp.

266-85.

56

MUSIC

ANALYSIS

5:1,

1986




Rothgeb, John,

1983:

'Thematic

Content:

a

Schenkerian

View',

in

Aspects of

Schenkerian

Theory,

ed. David Beach

(New

Haven: Yale

University), pp.

39-60.

Rushton,

Julian,

1983: TheMusical

LanguageofBerlioz

(Cambridge:C.U.P.).

1984:

Guest

Editorial,

Music

Analysis,

Vol.

3,

No.

1,

pp.

3-7.

Schenker,

Heinrich,

1979: Free

Composition,

rans. and ed. Ernst Oster

(New

York:

Longman).

Sponheuer,

B.,

1978:

Logik

des

Zerfalls. Untersuchungen

um

Finalproblem

in

den

Symphonien

GustavMahlers

(Tutzing:

Hans

Schneider).

Tibbe,

Monika,

1971:

Lieder

undLiedelementen instrumentalen

ymphoniesatzen

Gustav

Mahlers

(Munich:

Katzbichler).

Tischler, Hans,

1937: 'Die

Harmonik

in

den Werken

Gustav

Mahlers',

unpublished

dissertation,

Vienna.

Williamson, John, 1982: 'Deceptive Cadences in the Last Movement of Mahler's

Seventh

Symphony', Soundings,

No.

9,

pp.

87-96.

Date post:	07-Aug-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	abelsanchezaguilera
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

The Structural Premises of Mahler's Introductions

Documents