8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
1/20
Reconstructing MozartAuthor(s): Ludwig Holtmeier and Richard EvansSource: Music Analysis, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Oct., 2002), pp. 307-325Published by: WileyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3840794.
Accessed: 26/01/2015 16:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.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].
.
Wileyis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toMusic Analysis.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3840794?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3840794?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
2/20
LUDWIG HOLTMEIER
(translated
by
Richard
Evans)
Reconstructing Mozart
While the
exterior
of
Haydn's
and Beethoven's works
provide
a
secure
point
of
contact
for
analytical
action from which one
can work towards
their
core,
Mozart's
compositions
seem to be enclosed in
a
seamless,
glassy
shell
which
denies
entry
to
their interior.* No motivic-thematic
analysis,
no demon-
stration of
Haydnesque-Beethovenian developmental
logic
is
sufficient
to
explain what is most puzzling about them: how they succeed in achieving
coherence.
The maxim that
where
Haydn
and Beethoven
develop,
Mozart
invents,
captures
something
central.
In
contrast
to
development,
the
concept
of
invention aims at
a
particular
kind of freedom
-
freedom
from
the
consequences
of
a
process
set in motion
and,
with
it,
from the
demands
of
particular
musical
materials,
from the
agony
of
decision
and
the effort
of
compositional
labour
-
a freedom from constraints.
The
serenity
of Mozart's
music arises
from
its air
of
informality
and effortlessness: Mozartian themes
and
forms
appear
with
a certain
accidental
quality
as
if
something
different
could sound in their
place,
as if
they
were exchangeable.
Technically
this
is achieved
through
the
principle
of
contrast
by
juxtaposition,
that
is to
say,
the
opposition
and
ordering
of blocks of material
which
are self-contained
and
autonomous
within the
larger
context. This
sectional construction is driven
by
a metrical
grouping
into
periods
which
subjects
both
transitional
and fixed elements to
a
'periodic'
repetition
principle
and
thus,
to a
far
greater
extent than
in
Haydn
and
Beethoven,
parallels
its
large-scale
rhythmic
structure.
The Mozartian
compositional technique
is faced
with two
inherent
dangers:
firstly,
the
threat that
the
periodic
metrical
grouping
will
tend towards
a
monotony
of
forms,
a lack
of
tension
in the functional
whole,
which can result
in
the kind
of
banality
which marks so
many
works
of the
pre-classical epoch,
of Mozart's
contemporaries
and some of his
own as
weil;
and
secondly,
dramatic
juxtaposition,
as a
compositional
principle
itself
in
opposition
to the
unifying
tendencies of
periodic
metrical
grouping,
threatens to
destroy
the
coherence
of
the individual elements
among
themselves and
to
counteract
the
*
A
version
of
this
article was first
published
in
German
as 'Zur
Komplexitat
Mozarts.
Analytischer
Versuch iiber
eine
Sequenz',
Musik &
Asthetik,
16
(October 2000),
pp.
5-
23.
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
307
? Blackwell
ublishing
td.2002. ublished
y
Blackwell
ublishing,
600
Garsington
oad,
Oxford X4
2DQ,
UK
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
3/20
308
LUDWIG
HOLTMEIER
central
postulate
of
classical
music aesthetics: the
'unity
of
feeling',
the balance
of
affective
forms.1
The following analysis of a self-sufficient transitional section, whose
organisation
is
strictly proportional
viewed
in
periodic-metrical
terms,
is
only
concerned
with
the first of these
aspects.2
Harmonic movement
within
transition sections occurs in Mozart
primarily
within a
framework
of
simple
diatonic
sequential processes.3 Although
Mozart often
works
with almost
identical
harmonic
models
and
sequence types,
his transition sections
rarely
appear
banal and in
spite
of the
periodic-metrical
corset which constrains
fixed
and
transitional
elements
to the same
degree,
they
stir
up
a kind
of
developmental energy
which has a clear
influence
beyond
the
dynamics
of
the
harmonic
progression
alone. Mozart knows how to set
in motion
extraordinarily
complex processes
within
apparently simple sequential
models.
It
is thanks to this
complexity
-
and not
merely
the
'pure'
beauty
ofthe
melodic
and
harmonic
invention
in
itself,
or the
'operatic' plot-line
in
which
the
individual elements are
placed
-
that Mozart's
technique
of
juxtaposition
avoids
the
danger
of
uniformity
and
banality.
The
informality
and effortlessness
of
his music
is
only illusory.
Behind
the
succession
of ideas
and inventions and
the formal
simplicity
lie
multi-layered
technical
procedures
that constitute the
background
of constraints
against
which effortlessness
as an aesthetic
quality
can
emerge.4
It is
rarely
possible
to
make
sense
of
Mozart's
simple
forms on one
hearing.
The resultant
'riddle
character'
{'Ratselcharakter',
a reference to
Adorno's
phrase)
of
the
autonomous blocks of material arises
from the
complexity
of
compositional
technique
and it is
made
possible by
Mozart's
manner of
ordering
materials
so
that
they
avoid
succumbing
to
banality.
Mozartian
juxtaposition
is also
successful
quite
simply
because
it
places
complex
blocks of material
side
by
side.
They
are related to each other
by
the
degree
of
their inner
complexity
and
achieve
coherence
through
their
specific
progression
of
complexity.
The fact
that
they
constitute the
compositional
means
by
which the form
is held
together
at another level will not be the
subject
of
discussion here.
The
following
analysis,
with its
many
musical
examples,
might
at
first
sight
seem
excessively
detailed.
Indeed,
the
results
of
my
investigations
could
doubtless
be
summarised
more
compactly.
What
concerns
me
here,
however,
is the
portrayal
of an
analytical procedure,
the
detailed
description
of a
methodological path.
In the
process
it will also be
necessary
to
explore
those
byways
which turn out in
retrospect
to lead
no where.
They
can,
in
any
case,
only
be
followed
because
they
are
suggested
by
the
specific
musical
?
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
4/20
Reconstructing
Mozart 309
structure;
only by
establishing
that
they
are diversions
can one
reach the
destination.
The fact that the method resists written formulation has to do with its
initial
origins.
It
is
derived
from an 'oral'
practice.
It
is
typical
of
the
particular
mode
of
analytical
access
associated with
practical
musicians.
One
surrounds a
segment
or
passage
with
alterations,
collages
and
rearrange-
ments in order
to
establish
by
transformation the
specific
construction
or
content. The
priority may
not be
to
set an
authentically
analytical
objective
concerned with
meaning
and
interpretation;
rather,
it
is
very
often
a matter
of
making
sense
of
its
particular
structure,
its inherent
logic,
in
order
to
be
able
to
memorise
it more
easily.5
To
this
extent,
almost
all of the
following
musical
examples
are to
be understood as notations
of
sounding
music,
as
opposed to abstract structural representations such as are often encountered
in
Schenkerian
analysis.
With this
analytical
method the focus is on the
level at
which a
composition
comes
into existence. In a
musical
language
which,
to a
crucial
extent,
works
with
pre-existent
models
and
material,
the musical
work
can be understood as
the
outcome
of a
process
of
decision-making
and
combination,
in which
the
most diverse
compositional
possibilities
and forms
are
subjected
to a selection
process.
The method
attempts
to
trace
these
processes.6
This
procedure
is also
typical
of
analysis
as
practised
in
German music
conservatoires,
where
the
connection
with
performing
is
predominant; analysis
is
associated
with the
skills
gained
through
pastiche compositional
techniques.7
Nothing
new
will be
articulated or
presented
in what
follows; rather,
this
will
simply
attempt
to
record a
customary practice
in
written
form.8
The role of
speech
is in no sense
superfluous
to this
method:
rather,
it
is
essential to its
inner
nature. What
the musical
example
lends
permanence
to,
through
schematic
representation,
is in real-time
practice
a
fleeting
moment of
experimental
exploration
which fades into silence. What
language
has
to
dissect and
paraphrase
laboriously
in
order to
explain
and
interpret
takes
place
in a matter of minutes
or
seconds
for the ear.
Presenting
thoughts
in
language
requires every single step taken along the analytical path to be analysed and the
decision-making
and
cognitive processes
that determine its direction
to
be
traced. At the
same
time,
apparent
fundamentals,
or self-evident
compositional
procedures,
have
to
be
made
verbally
explicit,
when
in
real-time
practice
they
are in effect
processed
unconsciously.
It is
only
through
linguistic
formulation
that the method
is forced
to
account
for these decisions taken
unconsciously,
to
investigate
and scrutinise
them,
and to
subject
the whole
process
to
analytical
logic. Only by removing
the oral element from the method can it reveal its
full
strengths
and
achieve
the
status
of
a scientific
technique.
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
5/20
310 LUDWIG HOLTMEIER
Ex.
1
(Allegro
ssai)
Ex.
1
shows the
transition
passage
from the
exposition
ofthe first movement
of
Mozart's Piano Sonata
in
F,
K.
280,
in which
harmonic
space
is
opened up
for
the
appearance
of the
second
subject.
The initial
four-bar
period,
which
divides
into
two
sections,
is
followed
by
a
sequence
of
falling
fifths,
whose
structure is
clarified
by
the
regularity
ofthe
two two-bar
groups
(bars
18/19,
20/21).
This
apparently
simple
sequence
is
an
example
of one of those
puzzlingly
complex passages
in Mozart's
oeuvre,
of the kind which are
a
recurrent source
of
uncertainty
for the
performing
musician.
If one wishes to
recall it
after
an interval of
time,
the
attempt
regularly
fails because
of its subtle
irregularity,
and
straightaway
one reaches for
the score
again
(Ex. 1).
A
minor
alteration is sufficient to remove a
little of this
passage's
confusing
character
(and
also,
we
should
note,
to rob it of
its
particular
charm).
We
need
only
take
out
the second
group
of
triplets
in
bar
17,
relocate the barline a
crotchet later
from bar 18
onwards,
and insert a
new
triplet
group
-
like the one
removed
from
the
F
major
context
-
in bar 22
(Ex.
2).
In
this
version the
harmonic
V-I
progressions
are to be found at their 'natural' metrical-cadential
positions.9 However, even in this revised form the course of the sequence is
>
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
6/20
8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
7/20
312 LUDWIG HOLTMEIER
Not
only
does
this
sequence
work in
opposition
to
the 'natural'
cadential
metre,
but in
addition
the
right
hand's
figural
motion forms
a succession of
2/4
bars which runs counter to the triple harmonic rhythm of the sequence. A re-
notation
of
the
rhythm
brings
out
the
complexity
of the
passage:
Ex. 4
$tt}iw*jfri
ttfjgtEfef
*mw
^[friflf^Jg^P^i
J^Lj^i
s
pmmm
m
The
mystery
of
this
transition
passage
is, however,
not
yet
completely
unravelled.
We
have
established that the
right
hand
proceeds
in
duple
time,
counter
to the
cadential
metre;
it
remains
to
be
discussed
why
Mozart does not retain the
interval
structure ofthe initial
sequential
pattern
(bar
18)
within the
sequence
as a
whole,
thereby
increasing
the
restlessness
and
irregularity
of the
passage.
The
first two
triplet
groups
in bar 18
appear
as
if
rotated around the axis
of
their middle
note
in
bar 19
-
that is
certainly
the visual
impression.
However,
the third
triplet
group
in
bar
19 does
not
obey
this
principle.
Mozart does not write:
Ex. 5
n
-P
?
^-*
18
m^m
>
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd.
2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
8/20
Reconstructing
Mozart 313
Such an
alteration
would
destroy
a central
structuring
element
of Mozart's
original conception.
In this passage Mozart is clearly aiming for a 'total' chromaticising of the
texture. Four voices
are in
simultaneous chromatic descent:
Ex. 6
Two of the voices have the same
pitch-classes,
which is to
say
that one voice is
effectively
doubled
(notated by
small
squares
on
Ex.
6).
For
all
that,
the
chromatic motion unfolds
within
the constraints of
four-part
counterpoint
devoid
of
parallel
motion.
Here,
we
are not
looking
at
the classical
technique
of
harmonic
arpeggiation [Auffacherung]
in
(typically
pianistic)
figuration,
which allows
parallel
voice-leading
in
order to
complete
the
texture,
a
technique
Mozart
employs frequently
in his
early
works,
and not
only
there.
Rather,
the
triplet
groups
in
the
right
hand are
arpeggiations
of a
'strict'
four-part
chordal
texture.
Total
chromaticism
is,
however,
not
possible
within strict
four-part
counterpoint.10
Mozart is
concerned
here with the
illusion
of
four-part
chromatic
motion within
strict
compositional
constraints.
The function of
the
right
hand's
duple
metre is
to
promote
the
illusion
of
total chromaticism.
The
F
in the
right
hand
in bar
17
(Ex. 6)
resolves
onto
E
in
bar 18 without
it
becoming
apparent
that the
contrapuntally
correct resolution would
be via the
D
in
the
same bar
(the
dotted
square
on
the
example).
It is not
perceptible
because the
duple
metre in
the
right
hand
denies
the
ear
the
recognition
effect
and, therefore,
retrospective
integration.
As
early
as
the
second bar of
the
sequence
the
voices
in the
right
hand
are to
be found
at
different
rhythmic
locations. In this
way,
the
linear forces
and
relationships
are
emancipated
from
their dependency on their vertical harmonic integration. The logic of the
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
9/20
314
ludwig holtmeier
harmonic
voice-leading
in the
triplet
figures
is blurred
by
the
rhythmic
organisation.
Comparing
this with a
rhythmically
entirely regular
arpeggiation
makes this immediately obvious:
Ex. 7
The
concept
of total chromaticism is also the reason
why
Mozart
does
not
write
the
regular
sequential
pattern
shown in
Ex. 5.
In
Mozart's
original
form,
the
lowest notes
of
each
respective triplet group
constitute
a line related to
the
soprano
voice
at each
respective
cadential
step (notated by triangular
boxes
and
beams
in Ex.
6).
In the
regular
sequential
model in
Ex.
5 this
structure
is
destroyed.
Here a note
in
the
soprano
is
'repeated'
(Ex.
5,
circled notes
and
beams).
It is
noteworthy
that the destruction of this
soprano voice-leading
pattern
would not occur
if
Mozart had matched the
direction of
movement
of
the
triplet
figures
to
the
harmonic
sequence's triple
metre:
Ex.
8
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002 Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
10/20
Reconstructing
Mozart
315
He could
just
as
easily
have
chosen the
second bar of
his
sequence
(bar 19)
as
the
prototype;
in this
case,
he
would
have had
a
strictly
regular
structure
and
the total chromaticism envisaged would have been retained completely intact:
Ex.
9
18
EH^Afer
WW S^tfteiie
A
single play-through
of this
example
is
enough
to
see that the character
of
the
music has been fundamentally transformed. A harmonic fracture separates the
sequential
sections,
which in Mozart's version
interlock
organically
from the
outset.
In this
example
there
is
a succession of IV-V-I cadences
in which
the
sequential
sections
are
pulled
apart
by
the
abrupt
mediant
progressions
(bar
18:
C
major/Eb
major;
bar
20: A
major/C
major;
bar 21:
G
major/Bb
major):
the
respective
transitional chords do
not
belong
to the
preceding
cadences.
Mozart
avoids these
abrupt
transitions
-
plausible
enough
in the
harmonic
language
of
the time
-
in order to
achieve a
quite
specific rhythmic-harmonic
effect.
After
cursory inspection
of the
sequence
one becomes aware of a
change
of
harmony
on the last crotchet of
the
bar,
whose
missing
bass
voice can be
filled
in for clarity's sake as follows:11
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
11/20
316
LUDWIG
HOLTMEIER
Ex. 10
17
j*-
19
?k
ttttt
SE?
E*E
K
fi
1
~\p4?
20
21 22
gjfe^fasfe
lf\
$^^m
=
However,
the rest in the left
hand also
appears
to function
as
an
agogic
caesura.
It
creates the illusion that the
preceding
octave,
which continues to resonate
through
it,
functions as
part
of a substitute chord. Behind this unusual
sequence
lies a
familiar
sequence
model which
(inevitably enough12) emerges
in the
recapitulation,
where it
is
accompanied by
other
surprises:13
Ex. 11
^[IjQjLu m
uJ'
QuLur
gff4
20
^cULlt
m
m
ta^s
-Je-
=?=>
It
seems reasonable
to want to
explain
the
deviation from
regularity
within
the
sequence
model
by
referring
to the intrinsic
problems
of the tonal
sequence,
which has to negotiate the diminished-fifth step between bar 19 and 20: Mozart
'
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd.
2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
12/20
Reconstructing
Mozart 317
could avoid the critical
note
Bb
here,14
change
from
a
II-V-I cadence
to a
IV-
V-I
cadence,
using
the D minor
chord,
present
both
in
Bb
major
and
A
major/
minor, in order to create a smooth harmonic transition. But it is precisely this
alteration,
intended
to smooth the harmonic flow over this obstacle
implicit
in
the
tonal
sequential
model,
which leads to
disruption
in
a
different
place.
In
order to
maintain
the
symmetry15
in
the
periodic
metrical
grouping
of
melody
and
harmony
Mozart writes a Bb chord on
the
last
beat of bar
21,
analogous
to
bar
19;
this
chord
is in a
contrasting
mediant
relationship
with the
preceding
G
major, although
here
nothing
would have stood
in
the
way
of
a
continuation via
G
within II7 of the
following
cadence. There are
no
serious
objections
to the
harmonic
flow
of Ex. 5. What matters is
that it
disrupts
the
pattern
of
total
chromaticism.
Here
something
essential to and
typical
of Mozart's compositional technique
becomes
apparent:
complexity
in Mozart occurs when
different technical
procedures
come
into conflict with each other. The illusion
of
total
chromaticism forbids
the
regularity
of the
sequence
in
Ex.
5;
the
notion of
an
integrated duple
metre,
which
originally promoted
this chromatic
illusion,
and the
subsequent
Exs.
7
and
9,
all
destroy
the notion of a harmonic flow
which,
by
its
avoidance
of
partitioning
harmonic
progressions,
is
inseparably
allied to that
of total chromaticism.
But
should
we
trust
this
analysis?
Does
not its demonstration
of
deviations,
irregularities
and
complex
combinations
of technical
procedures
contradict
our
own
listening
experience,
which in this case
perceives
no more than
a
slight
element of
confusion
within
a self-sufficient
musical
process?
What is
the
point
of
highlighting complex
processes
and
relationships
when such
complexity
cannot
occupy
centre
stage
within
the
music? To
put
it more
directly:
how is
it
that the
complexity
is
not more
forcefully
evident in the musical
foreground?
In
fact,
everything
that has been
demonstrated
analytically
so far
is,
in a
certain
sense,
incorrect,
despite
everything being
in its
proper place.
In
order
to understand
why,
let
us examine
the
sequence
more
closely.
I stated
that
the total chromaticism
unfolds within a strict
four-part
texture.
But what does this four-part texture look like? The beginning of the sequence
(Ex. 1)
-
the first
two crotchet beats in bar 18
-
implies
the dominance of a
simple
schema:
the
bass
voice
is
to be found in the left
hand,
in the
right
the
remaining
three,
spread
around the succession
of
triplets.
Then a rest occurs
in
the bass voice
while the
top
three
voices
carry
on in the
right
hand. That
is
the
illusion the
sequence
creates. The listener's ear and the
player's
eye
are led to
accept
this harmonic
division
into
three voices. It is the
perceptual
dominance
of
this
ordering
-
and
this
alone
-
which creates the sense
of
confusion.
For this
sequence
is
based
on
a
completely regular
schematic structure.
However,
its
four-voice texture
is unusual
and
the distribution of voices
at the
opening
of
the sequence is deceptive. At the end of bar 18 the right hand suddenly turns
Music
Analysis, 21/iii
(2002)
?
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
13/20
318 LUDWIG HOLTMEIER
into four voices.
If
one
follows the
logic
ofthe
voice-leading,
then
the
E in
bar
18 falls to
Eb,
while the G has a double
function,
effectively
being
tied over:
Ex. 12
The underlying harmonic model takes the following form:
Ex.
13
$m(
^m
m
if
wf
ffpF^
i*m
?
\
Oe
fc
^
ii:
^
Mozart subordinates
this harmonic model to the
rhythmic
scheme of
triplet
groups,
whereby
the note which sounds across the
transition
from
the tonic
major
chord to
the
'subdominant'
seventh
chord
[subdominantischen
Septakkord]
on the
second
degree
is the
pivotal
point.
The D minor in bar 19 and
the Bb
major
in
bar
21
are in this
respect
merely
'accidental'
products
ofthe
triplet
duple
metre ofthe
right
hand which
dissipates
the
harmony's
four-part
structure.
A
rhythmic-
harmonic
revision
will
clarify
the
regularity
of
the harmonic flow
disguised by
the
rhythmic organisation
of
the
right
hand:
Ex. 14
'
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd.
2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
14/20
Reconstructing
Mozart 319
But how does Mozart arrive
at
this
sequential
model and its
idiosyncratic
voice-leading?
It is the
product
of
necessity
borne of
voice-leading
requirements. Here Mozart combines two familiar harmonic sequential models
that cannot
be combined
-
and
most
definitely
not in
the distribution
he
chooses. On
the one
hand,
there is the
sequential
model
pivoting
on the
diminished seventh
chord,
which
can
be
represented generically
as
follows:
Ex. 15
SPg ^ i
,i
? *
,j
^
On the other
hand,
there is
the model which links
the
sequence's
V-I
steps
via
a seventh chord
on the
second
degree
and with a further voice
brought
under
the chromatic influence of
the
descending soprano
line.
As a
consequence
of
the
subdominant
colouring
of
the 'tonic'
position
in
the
sequence,
and in
contrast
to
the
model
based on successive V-I
progressions,
the
sequence
appears
as a
chain of
independent
cadential units:
Ex. 16
Pp pp
*
1
1C?Z
^
?
#
Technically, these two models can be combined correctly only in one way (and
appropriately
to Mozart's
purposes
here) by
presenting
the
upper
three voices
in their
closest
form:
Ex. 17
j|fea
iii
f >
f
t*U
p
fH?
^m
^#^
pp^
s
^^
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
)
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd.
2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
15/20
320 LUDWIG
HOLTMEIER
As far as
I am
aware this
sequential
model cannot be
found
in the
literature
in
this
form,
and
to
explain
its
compositional
neglect
here
we
need
only point
to
the break in the chromatic motion in the top voice and the unsatisfactory effect
this has. Mozart
combines both
these historical
models
in order to
achieve his
ideal of total
chromaticism.
Of the two
possible
inversions of the
diminished
seventh chord which allow him to create
the
sequence,
he chooses
the one
which sets
the
bass voice in
descending
chromatic motion.
However,
when
the
diminished seventh
is
employed
in this
way,
the
rule
is that when the
ninth16 is
in the
top
voice,
the
progression
of all the notes of the chord is fixed.
If it is
in
the
top
voice,
then the third must be
doubled in the
following
tonic chord
in
order to avoid
parallel
fifths.17
But if the third is
doubled,
then the tonic
three-
voice chord
cannot
progress
to a subdominant four-voice
chord on the second
degree of the following cadence. It is the third note that has to descend
chromatically.
According
to
the most ancient rules
of
dissonance and
voice-
leading,
however,
no
note that
progresses
chromatically
can be
doubled.18
Mozart locates
the
ninth in the
top
voice
in his
sequential
model. He is
concerned
with
the element of
flowing
chromatic
movement,
beginning
with
the most dissonant chordal constituent
in the
top
voice,
in other words
in its
most
radical and
accentuated
form. When Mozart
put
the ninth
in the
top
voice,
it was
obvious
to him that he would become involved
in a
compositional
conflict,
and that
he would
have to overcome a
compositional
impossibility.
It
is
typical
of
Mozart's
compositional
thought
to
develop
the
sequence
out of this
compositional impossibility.
The
compositional problem
itself
is its theme.19
Following
the constraints of
voice-leading,
the
doubled
E in bar 18
necessarily
causes
parallel
octaves between bass
and
alto
(Ex.
18a);
or else
it
leads to an
'unacceptable'
leap
in one
voice and a
change
in texture
(Ex. 18b):
Ex. 18
18
\>
s
8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
16/20
Reconstructing
Mozart
321
speaking
(however
one
might
interpret
it).
The
point
is both
to
avoid the break
and
to
avoid
breaking
the
compositional
rules,
and to make
the
impossible
possible. He has conceived the passage in such a way that the sudden four-
voice texture
in
the
right
hand
appears
to
have
three voices because of
its
rhythmic
form.
The
continuous
triplet
motion
in the
right
hand blurs
the
change
from three voices to
four and maintains
the illusion of a
strict
three-part
texture.
The unusual construction of this
sequential
model is also
responsible
for the
fact
that the shift
in
the metric-cadential accent shown
in Ex.
2 is not
quite
as
definite as
it
might
appear.
At the same
time,
everything
is to
be found where
it
should
be.
The
camouflaged
four-part
texture
implies
a
model that
emerges
when we
try
to continue
the bass
line
strictly through
the rest
(compare
with
Ex. 18b), even
though
the
voice-leading
'violation' is more
apparent
than in
Mozart's case because
of
the
missing
rest:
Ex.
19
19 20
i
LiaaSin
llJLLrilJ
Ll rdJ Lly
'): ^
)
t
0*
L
f'r^^jT3
22
_
,?
^
The dissonant seventh is prepared by the consonant third of the subdominant
seventh chord
on the
second
degree.
We
recognise
the
ancient
contrapuntal
device
of the
syncopated
dissonance,
which is
prepared
on a weak beat
and
sounds
on
an accented
beat,
resolving again
on a weak
beat.
The tied
(i.e.
prepared)
seventh on the
accented beat
is to be found
in
a
widespread
classical
model
of
cadential
closure,
which above
all is familiar
from slow
movements.
Here,
though,
the
seventh
is
never to be found
in
the bass
but,
most
often,
in
one
ofthe
middle
voices.
However,
the bass
voice
of
this
sequence
does in fact
move with the
upper
voice ofthe octave in a middle-voice location. This octave
doubling
is more than
just
a
strengthening
of the
bass,
as
it was
in the
previous
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
)
Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
17/20
8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
18/20
Reconstructing
Mozart 323
tendency
of the
metrical-periodic
grouping.
They
do not take effect
in
the
'motivic-thematic'
foreground,
but rather
at
the
limits
of
a level which can
be
called 'rhythmic' in the broadest sense of the word, and in which Mozart
operates
with
a
surefootedness and
originality
which
none
of his
contemporaries possessed
(and
hardly
any
of
his
successors).
Rarely
does
Mozart allow these
rhythmic
conflicts
to
flare
up
overtly.
The
elements
do not
join
battle
in the musical
foreground,
as is
already
the case in the
opening
theme
of
Beethoven's
first
Piano
Sonata,
Op.2
No.l.
In
fact,
it could be said
that
Beethoven
pushes
the
Mozartian inheritance
of
rhythmic
complexity
into
the
musical
foreground.
In
the
process,
the
technical
principle
acquires
both
an
unexpected
dynamism,
but
also a coarseness.
The initial
rhythmic
conflicts
and
impulses
of Beethoven's themes remain
unresolved. They drive the musical process forward and dominate it. The
music
is
forced
to work at
this conflict
as
a kind of
problem
to
be
solved,
and
it
determines the initial thematic
shape
in terms
of its
function within
a
developing
whole.
Generally
it could
be said that
the
cadential
metre,
melodic
accentuation and
phrasing
in
Beethoven seldom stand
in
as
complex
a
correlation as in Mozart's
case. His
rhythmic
conflicts
tend to occur
on a
unified level and
only
in
this
way
can
they
reveal themselves
in
the
foreground.
Conflicts
in
Mozart almost never
occur as
problems
posed;
within the
context
of
the
larger
periodic
unit
they
are,
in a
sense,
already
solved. The
unity,
the
autonomy
of
even
complex
periods
thus
emerges
from within
the
functional whole. The
rhythmic
complexity
of
Mozart's
music
is not based
on
a naked
opposition
of
divergent
forces.
Tensions arise between different
levels:
between the
barring
and the harmonic
cadential
metre;
between
the cadential
metre and the accentuation of
the
melody;
between
the
harmonic
logic
and the
autonomous
phrasing;
and
so
on. These
levels are
not, however,
in
opposition
to each other.
They
overlap,
and even
viewed
as
operative
factors are
only
artificially separable
from
each
other.
The
melody
cannot be
separated
from
the
harmony
and
in the
process
the
melodic
articulation
from the
cadential-
metric
emphases,
nor can
the cadential metre
claim
a
particular
and
definitive
metrical form, and maintain a complete independence from the barring.
Working
at
different
levels that cannot
actually
be
separated
from each
other,
Mozart's
rhythmic
conflicts
always
convey
themselves
implicitly.
They
are
held
in
check,
in a
classical balance.
Through
this
autonomy
and isolation
Mozart's blocks
of
material
preserve
an
openness
and a
formal
ambivalence.
They
are at
the
same
time
simple
and
complex.
This is
the
Janus-like
quality
of
Mozartian
form.
NOTES
1. A coherence which - as Charles Rosen has shown in The Classical Style - is only
Music
Analysis, 21/iii
(2002)
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
19/20
324 LUDWIG
HOLTMEIER
rarely
achieved in the
pre-classical
era and in the
early
works
of
Haydn
and
Mozart.
2. I attempt to pursue the other aspect in 'Versuch iiber Mozart. Juxtaposition und
analytische
Collage:
KV
332',
in Wilfried
Gruhn and Hartmut
Moller
(eds.),
Wahrnemung
und
Begriff
(Kassel:
Gustav Bosse
Verlag,
2000),
pp.
109-74.
3. This statement
idealises
the
situation:
it
requires qualification
according
to
Mozart's
compositional
development
and the
specific generic
context.
For
the
piano
and
violin sonatas it
is almost
unreservedly
valid
-
in
spite
of
the
fundamental
change
in
Mozart's harmonic
processes
from the
1780s
-
whereas
the
case
is
different
in
the
string quartets,
symphonies
and
concertos.
4.
Compare
Ulrich
Konrad,
Mozarts
Schaffensweise.
Studien
zu den
Werk-
autographen,
Skizzen und
Entwurfen
(Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck
&
Ruprecht,
1992).
5. This
analytical
procedure
is
especially
familiar
to
pianists,
who have to
retain
an
extensive
repertoire
in
their memories.
6.
Of
course,
this
is
not
intended as
a
reconstruction of the
composer's
decision-
making process (though
see n.
19).
7.
Indeed,
no other
aspect
of
analytical
methodology highlights
so
clearly
the
difference between the
practice
of
analysis
in
(German)
universities and
conservatories.
8. On the
problem
of oral
practices
in
music
theory,
see Michiel
C.
Schuijer,
'Muziektheorie in onderzoek', Tijdschriftvoor Muziektheorie, 2/iii (1997), p. 251
and
Ludwig
Holtmeier,
'Nicht Kunst? Nicht
Wissenschaft?
Zur
Lage
der
Musiktheorie',
Musik &
Asthetik,
1/ii
(1997),
pp.
119-36.
9.
On
the
topic
of cadential
metre,
see Friedrich
Neumann,
Die
Zeitgestalt:
eine
Lehre
vom
musikalischen
Rhythmus,
Vol.
2
(Vienna:
P.
Kaltschmid,
1959).
10. If
one
ignores
chromatic motion
in
diminished seventh chords. In
a literal sense
this
avoids
'parallel'
motion,
but because of the strict
simultaneity
of the linear
movement,
the
principle
of
independent
voices
disappears.
11. The
filling
out of the rest
creates
voice-leading
errors in the
texture. For
clarification,
see the
comments
following.
12.
Growing
familiarity
with Mozart's
compositional
technique
(and
this
is
equally
true
of
Bach's
fugue
subjects)
does indeed make it
possible
to
anticipate
the
reworking
of the
exposition's
'troublespots'
in the
development
or
recapitulation.
I have
not
notated an
arpeggiated
C-major
chord
in this
example (bar
18,
beat
3)
as
Mozart
does
in
the
recapitulation
(bar
100)
because the resultant
doubling
of
the third would have created a
voice-leading
error of the kind
Mozart
avoids
by
altering
his
sequential
model,
from
which,
as
one
might expect,
the
duple
metre
of
the
right
hand also
disappears.
13.
This
became
apparent
to me
as
I
worked on
my
piano
interpretation.
Again
and
again
I
caught myself failing
to
acknowledge
the
notated
rest,
leaving
the left
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
This content downloaded from 193.144.2.35 on Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:40:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/9/2019 Reconstructing Mozart
20/20
Reconstructing Mozart
325
hand
sounding
through
it.
What
is
surprising
about this
is
that,
in
spite
of the
semitone clashes
in
bars 18 and
20,
there is no real
feeling
of dissonance.
14. The fact that a Bb and not a Bt] is implied here, depends on the laws of tonal
sequences
and
how
they
are
perceived
differently
from cadences. This is not the
place
to discuss in
detail
these
laws
and their
relationship
to
cadential
harmony.
'Cadence' and
'sequence'
are
the central
concepts required
for
a
description
ofthe
development
of
the harmonic
aspect
of
tonality.
Each
concept
can
be associated
with
particular
kinds of
composer.
Mozart's harmonic
discoveries
are almost
always
found
within
the context of his
sequential processes.
Here
he
becomes
the
harmonic
experimenter
and
frontiersman of his
time in
contrast
to
Haydn
and
Beethoven,
whose innovations are
to
be found
above
all in cadential harmonic
processes.
15. This
produces
a
regular sequence
of
IV-V-I/II-V-I
cadences.
16. 'Ninth' is intended in Rameau's sense here.
17. To be
more
precise:
in
order
to
avoid
the
progression
from a diminished fifth o a
perfect
fifth,
a
progression
that is
only
allowed in
a
single
harmonic
relationship
in
pre-classical
harmonic
language
-
from the dominant sixth chord
on
the second
degree
[|],
the
oldest dominant
form of
all,
upwards
to a 'tonic' sixth chord
[3]
-
and there
only
as a formula in a
restricted
context.
18.
This
is
only
the
case
in
those instances
where the notion of strict
four-part
motion
is
adhered
to. The
'unacceptable' leap
(Ex.
18b)
is a common
phenomenon
in
the
chordal
writing
of the classical
(and
pre-classical) style
(see,
for
example,
the
Menuetto I from the Piano Sonata in Eb, K. 282, upbeat to bar 13). This case is
not
only
about the
illusion
of strict
four-part
motion,
but
also about the notion
of
total
chromaticism,
which
would
be
destroyed by
this
leap (compare
also Ex.
19,
which in
classical
compositional
terms
is
certainly
'correct').
19.
At
this
point
in
the
analysis
it
seems
to me
that the
problem
mentioned above
-
how
appropriate
the
relationship
is
between the effort
required
in
formulating
the
analysis
in words and the musical
phenomenon
under
investigation
-
is
particularly
acute.
This
may
be
because,
by implication,
every
analysis
claims
to
describe
the
technical
procedure
of
the
composer.
No
analysis
can
completely
free itself from
this
pretension
-
however much
it
might
claim
to do
so.
Uneasiness
with the
analytical description
often arises from
the claim
that
the
time and effort
required
for it are identical or at least
comparable
with the time
and
effort
required
for
the
conceiving
of the
compositional
idea. Mozart
could
have
developed
the idea
for
this
particular sequence
in a
single
instant. It owes its
existence to
the
fundamentals of
compositional
handicraft.
The
compositional
models
employed
here and
the
voice-leading problems
they
contain were familiar
to him
from
an
early
age
and
had become second
nature. Musical
analysis
is not
only
there
to
reconstruct how the
object
has been
put
together technically
and its
context,
but also to describe its
effect,
which
is not
exhausted
by
the
poetic
concept.
Music
Analysis,
21/iii
(2002)
? Blackwell
Publishing
Ltd. 2002