Forma Textura La Varese

8/20/2019 Forma Textura La Varese

1/16

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gcmr20

Download by: [Anelis Plus Consortium 2015] Date: 31 October 2015, At: 06:5

Contemporary Music Review

ISSN: 0749-4467 (Print) 1477-2256 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gcmr20

“Melodic totality” and textural form in EdgardVarèse's intégrales: Aspects of modified traditionin early new music

Tomi Mäkelä

To cite this article: Tomi Mäkelä (1998) “Melodic totality” and textural form in Edgard Varèse's

intégrales: Aspects of modified tradition in early new music, Contemporary Music Review, 17:1,57-71, DOI: 10.1080/07494469800640031

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07494469800640031

Published online: 20 Aug 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 47

View related articles

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/07494469800640031http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/07494469800640031http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=gcmr20&page=instructionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=gcmr20&page=instructionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07494469800640031http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/07494469800640031http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gcmr20http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gcmr20


2/16

ontemporaryMusic Review

1998, Vol. 17, Part 1, pp. 57-71

Reprints available directly from th e publisher

Photocopying permitted by license only

9 1998 OPA (Oversea s Publishers Assoc iation)

Am sterdam B.V. Published und er licel~se

under the Harw ood Academic Publishers imprint,

part of The Gordon and Breach Publishing G roup.

Printed in India.

M e l o d i c t o t a li t y a n d t e x tu r a l f o r m i n

E dg ard Var se's

I n t d g r a l e s

A s p e c t s o f m o d i f i e d t r a d i t i o n i n e a r ly n e w m u s i c

T o m i M i k e l i

Universi ty of elsinki

E d g a r d V a r ~ s e' s Intggrales e x e m p l i f y a c o m p l e x a n d c h a r a c te r i s ti c s t r a t e g y o f t h e c o m p o s e r ,

w h o u s e s t e x t u r a l c o n s t e l l a t io n s w i t h a m o t i v i c f u n c t i o n a n d c r e a t e s h i s " m e l o d i c t o t a l i ty "

o u t o f a n e w k i n d o f d y n a m i c i n t e r p l a y o f v o i c e s . I n s t e a d o f f o l l o w i n g t h e i d e a o f o r g a n i z e d

v e r t i c a l s o u n d c o m p l e x e s , t h e a u t h o r a r g u e s f o r a p o l y l i n e a r r e a d i n g o f V a r ~ se ' s s c o r e - -

o r a t le a s t f o r a m e t h o d w h i c h i n t e r m e d i a t e s b e t w e e n t h e v e r t ic a l a n d h o r i z o n t a l r e a d i n g .

T h e t r a d i t i o n a l n a t u r e o f m o t i v i c a n d p o l y p h o n i c t h i n k i n g , a n d a b o v e a l l t h e f u n c t i o n a l

o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t e x tu r a l e l e m e n t s a n d c o n s t e l l a t i v e s e ct i o n s , m a k e s t h e a u t h o r c o n s i d e r

t h e c o m p o s e r o f Int~grales a s a k i n d o f t r a d i t io n a l i s t , w h o c o m b i n e s t e n d e n c i e s o f s o n a t a

f o r m a n d v a r i a t i o n f o r m . T h e g e n e r a t i v e " m o t i v i c " p r i n c i p l e o f m e l o d i c , c o n s t e l l a ti v e ,

a n d f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e s c o n s t i t u te s t h e d i a l e c t i c s o f " a c t i v i t y " a n d " s t a g n a t i o n " .

K E Y W O R D S P o l y l i n ea r i t y , c o ns t e l la t i o n s , v o i c e le a d i n g ; f o r m a l f u n c t i o n s , m u s i c a l

t r a d i t i o n .

Edgard Var~se is commonly seen as an inventor of new techniques of

composition and aesthetics which deal withsound as the basic structural material

of music. Because of this standard Var~se-interpretation it is unco mmon in

any sense to question the absolute modernity of his musical language even

in the case of his early works.

Var~se himself seems to have agreed with this approach:

E a c h o f m y w o r k s d i s c o v e r s it s o w n f o r m . I c o u l d n e v e r h a v e f i tt e d t h e m i n t o a n y o f t h e

h i s t o r i c a l c o n t a in e r s .. . . M y m u s i c c a n n o t b e m a d e t o f i t i n t o a n y o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l m u s i c

b o x e s .

Var~se, 1966, p . 16)


3/16

58 TomiMi~E4

B u t , a t l e a s t a c c o r d i n g t o H e l g a d e l a M o t t e - H a b e r , V a r ~s e d i d n o t i n f a c t

r e g a r d h i m s e l f a s a n a v a n t g a r d i s t e i t h e r :

Var~se hat sich niemals als Avantgardist v emtan den (diesen Ausdruck eh er abgelehnt).

Jedoch verw andelte e r die Tradition, so dat~ etwas Neuartiges entstand.

( D e l a M o t t e - H a b e r , 1 9 9 2 , p . 4 3 )

I n th e c a s e o f V a r ~ se t h e p r o b l e m o f t r a d i t i o n a n d i n n o v a t i o n i s n o t a t a l l

t r iv i a l a n d t h e i d e a o f a c o m p l e t e a b s e n c e o f tr a d i t io n a l c o d e s i s m o s t p r o b a b l y

a f a ll ac y . W e a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a f u n d a m e n t a l a e s t h e t i c a m b i v a l e n c e , w h i c h

i s v e r y t y p i c a l fo r t h e 1 92 0s : b e s i d e t h e b a s i c d i c h o t o m y o f (1 ) t r a d i t i o n v e r s u s

i n n o v a t i o n w e f i n d ( 2) f o r m a l c o n s t r u c t i o n v e r s u s f r e e f o r m a l f l u c t u a t i o n ,

( 3) l i n e a r c o u n t e r p o i n t v e r s u s s o u n d e f f e c ts , ( 4) e x t r a m u s i c a l p r o g r a m m e v e r s u s

p r o g r a m m e a s f o r m . In a ll t h e s e p a ir s w e h a v e b o t h a r a t h e r t r a d i t io n a l a n d

a v e r y m o d e r n c o m p o n e n t , a n d i t i s a s p e c i a l q u a l i t y i n V a r ~ s e 's m u s i c , t h a t

t h e d i c h o t o m i e s b e c o m e c o m p a t i b l e t h r o u g h m u l t i l e v e l c o m p o s i t i o n a l

t e c h n i q u e s .

A s i n s o m e o t h e r ( e v e n e a r li e r ) w o r k s b y V a r ~ se , it s e e m s t o b e p o s s i b l e

t o f in d a n o n - m u s i c a l p s e u d o - p r o g r a m m e b e h i n d t h e c o n s tr u c ti o n of Intdgrales

T h i s p r o g r a m , i f e x i s t i n g a t al l ( t h e c o m p o s e r ' s o w n n o t e s a r e i n t e r e s t i n g - -

s e e V a r e se , 1 9 83 , p p . 4 0 f t. ), is - - u n l i k e a n y r o m a n t i c o r p o s t r o m a n t i c

p r o g r a m m e - - f o r m a li s ti c , b u t n o t i n t h e s a m e s e n s e a s a n a ra b e s q u e , f o r

i n s ta n c e ; a n a r a b e s q u e t e n d s t o b e s t at ic w h e r e a s a m a t h e m a t i c a l i n t e g r a t io n

i s o b v i o u s l y processual The d i f f e r e n c e o f t h is k i n d o f a b s t r a c t , f o r m a l i s ti c

p r o g r a m m e f r o m a r o m a n t i c p r o g r a m m e , d e s c r i b in g f o r i n s ta n c e t h e s ta g e s

o f a s c e n d i n g a m o u n t a i n o r t h e d i m e n s i o n s o f a la n d s c a p e , i s s m a ll . I n th e

c a s e o f a n a b s t r ac t p r o g r a m m e t h e r e is n o w a y t o a v o i d f o r m a l a n a ly s is : t h e

a n a l y s i s o f t h e f o r m i s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e s e m a n t i c s a n d t h a t

o f t h e s ig n i f ic a t i o n . B e c a u s e o f t h e p r o c e s s u a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e p r o g r a m m e ,

t h e a n a l y s i s s h o u l d t r y t o b e p a r t i c u l a r l y c a r e f u l w i t h t h e p r o c e s s u a l a s p e c t s

o f t h e c o m p o s i t io n .

A s f a r a s t h e f o r m a l o r g a n i s a t i o n i s c o n c e r n e d i t i s t r u e , o f c o u r s e , t h a t a

p i e c e l i k e Int~grales c o u l d n o t f i t i n t o t h e b o x o f a s t a n d a r d s o n a t a f o r m ,

o r a n y t h i n g e q u i v a l e n t, b u t t h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t w e c a n n o t f i n d s o m e

tendencies o f so n a t a f o r m o r o f s o m e o t h e r f o r m a l c o n c e p ts w h i c h w e r e

c o m m o n l y u s e d i n th e p r e v i o u s d e c a d e s ( o n s o n a t a f o r m i n V a r~ se s e e P a rk s ,

1 9 7 4 , p p . 3 5 6 ff . , a n d S l o n i m s k y , 1 9 6 7 , p . 6 ) . S i n c e i t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t e v e n

o n e o f t h e m o s t r a d i c a l c o m p o s e r s o f t h e 2 0 s s t il l w a s a t l e a s t s u b c o n s c i o u s l y

i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m a l l a n g u a g e w h i c h i s b a s e d o n s p e c i f ic k i n d s

o f s y m m e t r i c a l a r r a n g e m e n t s , a n a n a l y s i s o f t h i s a s p e c t , to o , s h o u l d b e a

n e c e s s a r y c o n d i t i o n f o r a t ru e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f th e c o m p o s e r ' s w r i ti n g . T h i s

d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t t r a d i t io n a l c o d e s a r e c o n s i d e r e d a s p r i m a r i l y i m p o r t a n t


4/16

Melodic otality

59

but that they mu st a t least be considered. Obviously, categories like sonata

form ma y only fit in a ve ry abstract sense; as a name for a setting of elements,

for a specific archetype. Talking about tendencies of sonata form is thus based

on the idea of a composer's assimilating common codes and principles of

organisation from earlier music and Using them in a way which ma y seemingly

be quite free of all tradition. This process of assimilation does not even have

to be conscious. To use the word sonata for this kind of creative situation

is misleading only ff one has decided to use the term exclusively for the pre-

Beethovenian style. Once we have used i t for Beethoven we m ay use it for

Liszt as well as for Stravinsky or Schoenberg: all four cases are incorrect in

a strictly historical sense. The latest major contribution to this dile mma is

that of Joseph N. Straus (Straus, 1990), thoug h this wr iter does not discuss

Var~se at all.

Int~grales is one of the key works for ensemble by Varbse; first of all because

of its unusually monumental and complicated structure --

Hyp erp r i sm,

for

instance, is much more symmetrical. Another reason is that particularly

important styl istic changes take place in it (see De la Motte-Haber, 1990, p.

39). Even thou gh one ma y find some similarities with

Hyp erp r i sm, Oc ta n dre

and

Offrandes ~ in the

textural constellations at the beginning, for example

- - the similar elements always have a completely different formal fuction

in Int~grales.

This may be the main difficulty n understan ding Var~se's music:

formal organization - - whatever its general profile is like - - is based on

types of musical elements, like texture and sound, which have a subordinated

position in the more traditional mann er of composition. The function of these

elements, however, may be quite similar to the t raditional equivalents, which

means that we at least need the traditional codes of musical u n c t i o n s . T h i s

unusua l combination of substance and function is part of the ambivalence.

I . O n m e l o d i c t o t a l i t y

As Helga de la Motte-Haber

~ c e n t l y p u t i t

die Instrumentationeines Werkes

wird wesentlich zu dessen Struktur. Die Farben und ihre Kombinationen,

die Qualithten eines Klanges sind nicht akzidentiell, sondern

formkonsti tuieren d (De la Motte-Haber, 1992, p. 42). Var~se did not only

follow the nineteenth-century tradition of constructive instrumentation but

he gave soun d a similar function in his compositions to that of motives and

harmonies in traditional styles. In one of his latest speeches (Var~se, 1966,

p. 16) Var~se intro duced the idea of crystallization according to which the

musical forms are a result of an in teraction of tensions. As early as 1936 Var~se

discussed the zones of intensities which give musical colour a new meaning


5/16

60 TomiMi~keltl

a s a n a g e n t o f d e l in e a t i o n li k e t h e d i f f er e n t c o l o u r s o n a m a p s e p a r a t i n g

d i f f e r e n t a re a s , a n d a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f f o r m ( V ar ~ se , 19 6 6 , p . 1 1 ). T h e z o n e s

o f In tggra le s h a v e a h i g h d e g r e e o f c o h e r e n c e a n d a n a n a l y si s h a s t o d e a l w i t h

a l m o s t n o d i f f ic u l t ie s o f p e r i o d i z a t i o n . I t is n o t q u i t e s o e a s y t o g r o u p t h e

p e r i o d s , h o w e v e r , i f w e t e n d t o s e e a tr i p a r t i t e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l

f o r m w i t h e q u i v a l e n t l e n g t h f o r e a c h g r o u p . 1 E v e n t h o u g h s u c h a t r i p a r ti t e

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m a y b e c o r r e c t w e s ti ll n e e d c o n c e p t s w h i c h e x p l a i n t h e

p r o g r e s s i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l z o n e s , o n w h i c h t h e u n i t s a r e b a s e d . W e h a v e

t o s t u d y t h e l o g i c o f th e s y n t a x . M e l o d i c o r r h y t h m i c s u b j e c t s , o r m o t i v e s

i n a n y t r a d i ti o n a l s e n s e , a r e o b v i o u s l y n o t v e r y i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e c o n s t r u c ti o n ,

a n d t h e p a t h t o w a r d s a tr u e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e w o r k d o e s n o t s e e m t o

l e a d t h r o u g h t h e h a r m o n i c d i m e n s i o n e i th e r . I n s t e a d o f t h e s e , t h e t e x t u r a l

a n d i n t e r a c t i v e c h a r a c t e r s , t h e c o n s t e l l a ti o n s , a r e r e c o g n i z a b l e a n d f l ex i b le ,

l i k e w e l l - d e s i g n e d c l a ss i c al f u g a l s u b j e c ts .

A m a j o r p r o b l e m i n a n a l y s in g V a r ~ e ' s m u s i c a s a p r o g r e s s i o n o f c o n s te l la t io n s

w h i c h c o n s is t s o f i n d i v i d u a l v o i c e s , is t h e s t a n d a r d d i c h o t o m y o f p o l y p h o n y

a n d s o u n d e f fe c ts w a n d V a r~ se s e e m s t o h a v e p r o c l a i m e d a f l u c t u a ti o n o f

s o u n d s a n d a c o u n t e r p o i n t o f f ie l d s. A s a m a t t e r o f f ac t t h e r e i s n o r e a l

c o n t r a d i c t i o n s in c e i t is p e r f e c t l y p o s s i b l e t o r e g a r d i n d i v i d u a l v o i c e s a s m i n i m a l

f ie ld s . T h is i s a n i m p o r t a n t i d e a i n a n a l y z i n g p o l y p h o n i c w r i t in g i n a l l n e w

m u s i c ; a v o i c e is n o t d e f i n e d b y a t h e m a t i c s u b j e c t o r b y m o t i v e s , b u t p r i m a r i l y

b y t s d y n a m i c i n d i v i d u a l i t y a s a s o u n d . T h e c o u n t e r p o i n t o f t h e s e p r i m a r y

s o u n d s m a k e s t h e c o n s te l l at i o n s o r z o n e s , w h i c h m a k e t h e o v e r a ll f o r m o f

a c o m p o s i ti o n . A n a n a l y s i s o f th e p r i m a l s o u n d s e n a b l e s u s t o a n a l y z e t h e

s y n t a x o f t h e z o n e s , a n d i t i s s t r o n g l y m o t i v a t e d b y t h e f i n a l g o a l o f t h e a n a l y s is ,

e v e n t h o u g h w e s h o u l d a c c e p t th e a e s th e t ic p r i m a c y o f t h e z o n e s .

W h e r e a s m o s t a u t h o r s c o n s i d e r t e x t u r e in V ar ~ se - - a n d i n o t h e r c o m p o s e r s

m u s i c , t o o - - f r o m t h e p o i n t o f v i e w o f s o u n d , m y k e y p h r a s e i n a n a l y z i n g

t e x t u r e a s a f o r m a l f o r c e is l i n e a r p r o c e s s u a l i t y I n s t e a d o f c a ll i n g o n e v e r t i c a l

s l ic e o f t h e s c o r e t e x t u r e I r e g a r d i t a s a m i n i m a l t e x t u r a l e v e n t w h i c h a c t u a l l y

o n l y b e c o m e s t e x t u r a l in t h e p r o c e s s u a l c o n t e x t o f a c o m p o s i t i o n . T h e a l t e r n a t i v e

a p p r o a c h i s , I t h i n k , a t o m i s t ic a n d h a r d l y e f f e c t iv e i f w e w i s h t o u n d e r s t a n d

t h e f o r m a l f u n c t i o n o f t e x tu r e i n t h e c o m p o s i t io n a l p r o c e s s. I n a n a l y z i n g t h e

s c o r e a s a w e b o r n e t w o r k o f m u s i c a l f i la m e n t s , t h e f i r st g o a l m u s t b e t o

s h o w w h e t h e r t h e s e f i la m e n t s s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d p r i m a r i l y i n a v e r ti c a l

o r h o r i z o n t a l f u n c t i o n . I n t h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e o f V a r ~s e i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o

n o t i c e h o w h e u s e s t h e p h r a s e m e l o d i c t o ta l it y : h e c l e a r ly e m p h a s i s e s th e

l i n e a r p r o c e s s e s, w h i c h h a v e c e r t a i n si m i l a r c h a r a c t er i s ti c s t o t r a d i t i o n a l m e l o d y :

There will no longer be the old conception of melody o r interplay of melodies. The entire

wo rk will be a melodic totali ty. The entire w ork will f low as a rive r flows.

( Var ~ se , 1966 , p . 1 ) .


6/16

elodic otality 61

In any traditional sense the mel ody does not seem to have been particularly

important for Var~se but the funct ion of melody and its general linear or

'qaorizontal qualities make him describe his texture as melodic totality. Melody,

like texture, is not just a syntax of so und effects; melo dy is continuous and

it has it s own linear logic in the context of other linear e lements. In Var~se's

music this linear logic has a broader, more total meaning than in more

traditional styles, in which the context of melody is harmony.

Here again we have to ask whethe r Var~se's concept of melodic totality

necessarily means a complete flow without any nternal interplay of melodies .

It would, obviously, not be correct to define the melodic totality as a highly

developed form of polyphony, even thoug h it should be noticed, too, how

important the continui ty of indivi dual instrumental lines in Var~se's texture

is. The proper way of approaching Var~se's texture, I think, is throug h the

concept of polyp hony with a n emphasis on the totality of sound instead of

on counterpoint; we sh ould not underest imate the possibilities of going into

the details of the melodic totality from the polyphonic point of view which

permits a better understanding of the formal syntactic progression of the

unities. A broader discussion of melody (though not so much of melodic

totality) in Varese's music is offered by Albrecht Riethm~ller (in de la Motte-

Haber, 1992, pp. 64 ff.).

T h e f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b l em s o f a n a l y z i n g t e x t u r a l s y n t a x

When analyz ing tonality or the motivic dimension of a composition it is taken

for granted that a description of single chords or melodic patterns is only

the very first task and not yet an analytic act. In textural analysis, too, the

difficulties start wh en we try to find the overall funct ion of textural sections

and to make clear the hidd en principles of textural syntax. Syntax is the main

problem for a post-tonal and particularly a post-melodic composer even

today, as those composers report who use the mos t advanced technology of

sound analysis -- like spectral analysis - - as a tool in orchestration (as Magnus

Lindberg admits in M/ikel~, 1992, p. 45). The computer may show which

instruments are needed if certain sounds are to be produced, but there is no

automatic method of deciding which sounds should be connected in the linear

dimension in order to create musical forms. If a composition is supposed to

have a monumental form -- and not only a kind of variation of one sound

complex -- the problem has to be solved.

Existing approaches of textural analysis may be su mmarise d as follows:

1. The most traditional approach, which discusses texture in terms of its

polyphonic, homophonic, mono phonic (etc.) appearance


7/16

62 TomiM~kel/i

2. The methodologically most advanced approach, which uses computer

or sonographic analysis (an example, applied to Var~se, may be found in

Cogan, 1984, pp. 73 ff.)

3. The approach of the so-called quantitati ve analysis of instrumentat ion ,

which is based on the capabilities of the computer to analyze huge amo unts

of single vertical segment s in a score, e.g. in terms of their probability (see

Sch~ifer, 1982)

4. The general analytic approach emphasising textural elements like

instrumentationand orchestration n a hermeneutic context with various grades

of emphasis and terminological sensitivity.

Whereas most writers on texture use the

vertical soun d complex

as their basic

category I prefer the idea of horizontal individualities Because of this emphasis,

I have fo und some of Edward T. Cone's ideas extraordinarily sympathetic,

even though I cannot accept his consistently semantic interpretation of music

and h is lack of under sta nding of more formalistic approaches (Cone, 1974).

More formal in its approach is, of course, Cone's famous analysis of

stratification in Igor Stravinsky's music, which particularly in the case of

Mouvemen t s becomes a primarily textural dimension (Cone, 1962, pp. 18-

26). Rudolf Stephan has claimed that Var~se was a composer wh o developed

furthe r some important innovations of Stravinsky (Stephan, 1972), and Cone's

meth od -- and textural analysis in general D should make it possible to

prove this interesting hypothesis.

Besides the linear emphasis, I try in this paper to look for moment s of

textural thinking with the closest possible connection with other ma tters of

composition. It will be shown, for instance, how textural processes and

particul arly constellations are used with the u nctio n of tradit ional motives; w it h

the impor tant consequence that they create an overall form which is related

to the tradition of sonata form on the one hand and variation form on the

other D this being a combination which was quite influential in the mid-

20s (consider the

Chamber Concerto

by A lban Berg). The idea of

polyphonic

sound which is used to describe Var~se's style should m ean that we do no t

primaril y look at sound in Var~se as an orchestral complex of overtones. In

any case, we sh ould rath er take notice of the still primarily

linear

texture of

Var~se, which makes it possible to stud y the formal overall sequence and

syntax of Var~se's works as based on linear elements in polyphonic

constellations; according to this approach, sou nd complexes are explained

as mome nts in the linear progression rather than as effects. This emphasis

is based on the comm onidea that Var~se first of all was apolyp honic composer,

thoug h at the same time extremely interested in the result of polyp hony

the sound ~ and i n new ways of defining polyphony. In a certain sense

Var~se solves the same prob lem as A nton Webern: both found a v ery personal

way of redefining musical dimensions. Gyorgy Ligeti has d eman ded that


8/16

Melodic otality

63

Webem should be heard q u e r ("obl iquely" or "crosswise"; see Ligeti, 1966,

p. 117) and a similar third dimension of musical perception has to be found

if we wish to u nders tand Var~se, too. In the particular case of Int~grales th i s

"crosswise" perception means that we not only reject the tradi tional dimension

of textural perception but t hat we also question the functional order of

traditional music: a sound is here a motive and a motive is a sound b with

all the consequences.

T h e i d e n t i t y o f v o i c e s

I do n ot see any necessary reason to reject the idea of the ident ity of linear

roles even in pieces like

Int~grales,

though o ther compositions for truly soloistic

ensembles, of course, may be more suited to the method of consteUative analysis.

In my reading, a score is basically like a map of a forest with a certain number

of continuous and interrupted pathwa ys with

cer taindirect ions , cer tain u nct ions

and certain

overal l organizat ion.

Even though I consider vertical analysis of

Var~se important, I also think that a polyphon ic point of view has a hi gh

degree of relevance. We should not forget that Varbse studie d with three

truly great b and ver y different -- masters of late nineteenth-century

poly phony: Vincent d'Ind3~ Charles-Marie Widor and Ferruccio Busoni. At

least in the 20s, the traditional polypho nic approach seems to have been an

integral part of Var~se's compositional techniques.

I n I n t~ gr a le s t he

idea of linear individualities is particularly impor tant on

the most foreground level of the composition and from the very beginning:

the degree of soloistic identi ty is used as a formal el ement of composition.

It is also important tha t the characteristicallyfluent changing of the instrument

playing a linear role in

H yper pr i s m and O f f r andes i s

only seldom a feature

of Int~grales Instead of trying out the possibilities of agogic shadows in

instrumental phrasing, Var~se uses the identi ty of an instrument as a significant

formal element. This means that the same principles of organization which

control the formal syntax might influence the identity of ins truments in the

voice leading, too. In case of the framing

A

parts (see below) we should

find variations of the idea of stagnation. If we follow the voice of the high

clarinet in the first section, we easily see how its ident ity is carefully and

gradua lly put into question by the orchestral sound; after measure 10 also

by using instruments with related sonorities, like muted tru mpet and oboe

in the same functio n as the cla rinet just before. The detail.q of the orchest ral

complexes enable various different versions of the stagnation process by

including differentpercussive accents and different degrees of gestural identity.

In the first section, we find a process of stagnation-activation-stagnation; he

identi ty of the clarinet seems to get reconstructed (or activated) only in measures


9/16

64 TomiM~keli~

14-17 and finally in measure 22, but the last section with a coherent tut ti (in

measures 27ff.) completes the stagnation of its identity. First of all t here is

a typical, rather integrated soloistic sound pl ayed by three different kinds

of instruments against the tutti i n the first section (A1), but there is also a

formal logic behind the choice of a particular ins trument in a particular section.

This logic is a general logic with plenty of applications with in the composition.

In the second section (A2) the question of soloistic identity is simpler, as

the main soloist remains the same all the time. The constellative variation

of identity centres on variation in the linear ident ity of the rest of the ensemble,

which is even more the case in the third section (A3). This is one of the aspects

of the

s tagnat ion

of the soloist and the

activation

of the orchestra. Just as Var~se

employs the repetit ion of a tone as a means of melodic stagnation, he also

employs the frequent, monotonic use of an ins trume nt in order to decrease

its rela t ive ind ividual i ty - - its informative power. An originally individual

element becomes an integral part of the complex whole. As we see, the concept

of individual parts is necessary for understan ding the formal processes.

I I . T h e t r a d i t i o n o f s o n a t a f o r m

nd t h e

c o n s t e l l a t i v e s e q u e n c e

It has commonly been realised that no rmal analytic concepts as such do not

fit Var~se's music, and the solu tion has bee n so far to abandon all kinds of

traditional thinking. Grete Wehmeyer, for instance, is critical of Ann Parks's

Cornell dissertation: when discussing

H y p e r p r i s m

which in Parks's

interpretation has a lot to do wit h sonata form, Wehmeyer argues that the

sonata concept does not tell us anything about the counterpoint of instrumental

groups (Wehmeyer, 1977, p. 99). I of course agree with Wehmeyer in her

emphasis on the counterpoint of instrumental groups, but her critique is odd

since 1) she (Wehmeyer) does not deal with instrumental counterpoint in

Hyperprism either and 2) I do not think Parks considers that sonata form

gives a sufficient and comprehensive answer to all questions in Hyperprism;

on the contrary, she just considers the possibility of some influence of sonata

form in that particular piece (Parks, 1974, p. 366). A constructive critique

should include a precise counter-argumentation; a demonstration of the

importance of novel principles does not disqualify he discussion of traditional

formal tendencies. Another verdict of Wehmeyer - - this time on

Int~grales

- - may exemplify how selfconsciously he no-tradition paradigm is applied:

Zweifellos gibt es keine traditionelle Formbest immung mit der man diesem

Sachverhalt beik~ime [Without any doubt, there is no tradi tional formal

principle with which one may deal with this matter] (Wehmeyer, 1977,

p. 113). The opposite extreme is, admittedly, the general norm; t he major

part of analytic literature deals with thematic and harmonic processes of a


10/16

Melodic total i ty 65

more traditional kind, and we have to show why this is not enough. In order

to make my own position absolutely clear I must emphasize that I do not

believe in the analytic power of traditional methods alone in the analysis of

Var~se, but I cannot see why they have to be rejected en masse wh en they

have beensuccesfullyused in studies o f composers like Mahler, Strauss, Busoni

or Stravinsky. Var~se's music makes us re-think our aesthetics, but nevertheless

Var~se was no Cage.

One of the most recent and mos t interesting analyses of

I n t ~ g r a l e s w h i c h

asks and answers questions of periodic syntax, is by Hermann Danuser

(Danuser, 992). Danuser regards measures 1-31 as the first formal section2,

measures 32-52 as the second section and measures 53-92 as the third section,

where his analysis ends. The very first measures have in my opinion an

introductory character, and for this reason I would prefer to consider measures

29-31, too, rather as an introduction o the fol lowing section, whereas measures

53-59 seem to me an extension of the previous section, but these details are

no reason for any argume nt with Danuser's sections in general. It is, on the

other hand, a pity that he does not continue the description of the periods

until the end, since the periodizationbecomes increasinglycomplicated towards

the end. The overall form, which in my opinion has many important and

interesting similarities with the formal progression of sonata form (in par~cular

that which is often used in concertos), may be described as follows:

{A1 (mm. 1-29) - - A2 (29-59)}

transition 1 6 0 - 9 2 )

B 9 3 - 1 0 0 )

A3 (101-117)

transition 2 (117-154)

C (development of A and B) (155-198)

A4 (198-224)

The first repetition of A resembles the repetition of the expo sitio nin sonata

form, developed, altered bu t recognizable without any difficulty.The transition

uses elements of the expositionbut does not repeat them; the transition above

all leads to the n ew subject, which is characteristically new even tho ugh i t

may be reg arded as a motivic variation of the first subject. The following

repetition of A has its equivalent in the concerto tradition, particularl y in

Mozart. The second transition concludes the exposition and prepares the

development, which combines different elements of A with some of B in

many ways and brings the composition to the highest synthetic culmination,

especially as far as energetic mobility is concerned. The recapitulation is

radically altered, as so of ten in the classic-romantic traditio n, but it is stiff

clearly recognizable after the culmination of the de velopment section. There

is even a concluding pedal tone at the en d of the development: e fiat and

e 1of the trombones inmm . 195ff. - - a common clich~ in the classic tradition.


11/16

TomiM~celii

A basic feature in In t~grales i s th e close correlation between the constellative

organization of the different versions of a particular section of music. The

foreground example for this is the repetition of the constellatively almost

identica l sections with in the A-sections (A1, A2, A3 and A4). Each of these

consists of several constellations, and a dialogue between soli and tutti is the

surface principl e of the constellative progression . The essence of this surface,

which has also been visualized as a projection of a line against a background,

is obviouslynot the tradi tional confrontationof main voice and accompaniment.

Inh is essay Danuser looks at the first 92 measures as a process of increasing

sound qualities - - a process in which the instr umentat ion becomes at least

partly responsible for the form (Danuser, 1992, pp. 91 ff.). According to Danuser

the first 27 measures lead towards a goal, an eleven-tone complex. The

preparatory events are uni ts consisting of a central tone (b2) and a chord of

six tones (a2, efla~, b a / c, e, c sharp 1) wit h rhythmic variation, which is not

linear in its teleology, like the more tradit ional forms of cluster genesis.

The second formal section is a variation with a central tone g and there are

no phases of mutation. The complementary harmony is extended through

rhyth m and instrumental constellation, thanks to the high trombone, which

gives birth to a twelve-tone chord in measure 36. In the third section there

is a greater difference of construction , since the central tone is replaced

by homophonic modulations of the chord ( Klangk6rper'). My problems

with this interpretation are:

1. In what way s does the process of growth continue till measure 92? It

seems to me that the definitive culmination takes place in measure 52 and

that the same level is not reached after that.

2. The extension of the chromatic universe from one-tone over six- and

eleven-tone chords to the twelve tone complex in measure 36 is an interesting

fact, but if Var~se used it as his main principle of construction, why did he

not follow it any futher (or delay the twelve-tone complex until measure 92)

and realise it in a more obvious way?

3. What exactly is the role of the percussion in the process of sound extension?

If the rhyt hms and colours of the percussion are in no way foreign to the

sound complex, but one of its genuine constituents (Danuser, 1992, p. 92),

how could we analyze them?

C o n s t e l l a t i v e v a r i a t i o n

if we t y to find another w ay of treating the traditional dichotomy of an

individual main voice against a collective accompaniment, which Danuser

legitimately dislikes but which I would not wish to reject completely, we

end up describing the progression of the ind ividual constellations in terms


12/16

elodic totality 67

of their constant and marked variation. In the first part (A1) none of the

constellations is iden tic al even t hough the basic constellative principle - -

the confrontationof solo and tu tt i- - remains always the same. In this section

constellative variation mainly concerns the percussion, which changes its

profile completely in each constellation, whereas the wi nd - - clearly divid ed

into woodwind and brass (or more specifically rombone) - - hard ly changes

at all; only the in strum ent with a soloistic role changes a few times. This

contrast of stagnationand dynamism correlates in an abstract but still important

way wit h the idea of variation; in both of them there is an inborn, essential

tension between con stancy and change. In classical variations this tension

manifests itself horizontally, always referring to the st arting point, whereas

here the two tendencies are present simultaneously. The second part (A2)

includes in the end three repetitions of exactly the same constell ati on~ even

as far as the percussion is concerned -- and the variation within the third

part (A3 after B) is still less important. In the latter the change of soli and

tutti is much more rigid ~ or formal in the pejorative sense ~ than usual;

the constellations are almost alike. Even the very melodic beginning of the

second part is already less varied than the equivalent passage in the first

section. The decreasing power of the principle of variation s easy to exemplify.

In all cases the essence of the variations is primarily constellative, whereas

the melodic dimensionof both constellative elements has always ust a relatively

plain signal character with unimp orta nt motivic differences. Between the A

sections, however, we may find some variation which is based on the melodic

aspect, too; in A1 most of the soli are based on three melodic pitches only

and all the tuttis on the chord (c-e-c sharpl-e flat3-b fiat2 [solo voice]-al-b3)

which, of course, is performed in a f ew different rhythmic versions. In the

section A2 the melodic flexibility of the first solo - - but only the first ~ is

somewhat greater than the corresponding solo in A1, whereas the difference

between the tuttis is very important: the shor t melodic figures of the tuttis

in A2, for instance, cannot be fou nd in A1, where the rhythmic profile of the

tuttis is still rather rigid. The soli of A3, consequently, are much less free

than in A2 and A 1. In A4 most of the tutti in struments have a melodic profile,

whereas the soli only play one single tone (a~). As we see, two contradictory

tendencies may be found in the melody of the A sections, too: (1) the consequent

stagnation of the soli during the formal process and (2) the act ivat ion of the

tutti from the beginnin g till the end. Even the individual constellations of

the first t wo A sections are influenced by a process of activation-stagnation-

c

activation of the melody.

The idea of double variat ion helps us in explaining the strategy behind these

formal tactics based on seemingly contradictory endencies of gradually shifting

importance from soli to tutti and thus creating a tight syntax of periods;

there is a variation going on from one single constellative subsection to another,


13/16

68 TomiM~ ellt

b u t a t t h e s a m e t i m e a l s o a v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n A 1 - A 2 - A 3 - ( et c .) ta k e s p l a c e ,

r e g a r d le s s o f t h e i n t e r r u p t i o n b y t h e B - s e ct io n a n d t h e t r a n s i ti o n s :

S ec t ions : S ubsec t ions :

A1 =

al-a2-a3-a4-a5-a6-a7

A2 = a'l-a'2-a'3-a'4-a'5-a'6-a'7-a'8-a'9-a'lO

A 3 =

a ' l -a '2 -a 3 -a '4 -a '5

(etc.)

A s t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l a n d f o r m a l d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e f i r s t , h i e r a r c h i c a l l y

f u n d a m e n t a l i n it ia l

al-

s u b s e c t i o n i n c r e a s e s a n d n e w f o r m s f o r th e s e

c o n s t e l l a ti o n s h a v e t o b e f o u n d , t h e p r o c e s s o f v a r i a t i o n w i t h i n t h e s e c t io n s

( A 1, A 2 a n d A 3 ) b e c o m e s l e s s i m p o r t a n t ; t h i s f e a t u r e s t r o n g l y e m p h a z i s e s

t h e c o h e r e n c e o f t h e f o r m . T h e p r o c e s s h a s a l t o g e t h e r a s t a g n a t i n g p r o f i l e

s i n ce t h e v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e A s e c t io n s i s m u c h m o r e d i f f ic u l t t o h e a r

t h a n t h e d y n a m i c s o f t h e i n t e r n a l v a r i a t i o n w i t h i n t h e m . T h e r e s t o f t h e A

f r a g m e n t s ( a l t o g e t h e r f iv e ) c o n t i n u e w i t h i n t h e f r a m e s o f t h e s a m e l o g i c , s i n c e

a l l o f t h e f r a g m e n t s a r e s i n g u l a r c h a r a c t er i st i c c a se s w i t h e x t r e m e l y c o m p r e s s e d

v a r i a t i o n c h a ra c t er . A n d t h e f i n a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e A - s e c t i o n is l i k e o n e

o f t h e c o n s t e l l a t io n s i n A 2 w i t h o u t p e r c u s s io n ; t h i s l a s t m o m e n t o f v a r i a ti o n

m . 4 6

I .... I

9

t

7 ::~ 11

a~ 6

~mb

Figure


14/16

Melodic otality 69

is a reminiscence giving the variation as a whole a classicaUy symmetrical

appearance. The tuttis of section A2 are constellativelyparticularly interesting

since they always start a new process of stagnation just after the soloist has

stagnated. In the first A section the tut tis ~vere primari ly sonorous accents

of the last tone of the solo.

This change in the degree of activity of the tu tti is part of the overall activation

of the tuttis, which continues gradual ly till the end, or at least till measures

195ff., the end of the formal section with a developing character. In the t hird

A section we f ind the percussion dearl y emphasizing the process of stagnation.

Altogether the percussional complexes are to a certain degree influenced by

the process of activation and stagnation but less so than other constellative

motives. It is altogether a speciality o f In t~grales that the same idea, the same

principle connects various aspects of the composit ion so closelyby influencing

them all - - even aspects which are only seldom closely connected with each

other in a traditional composition, like motives and textural constellations.

In a sense, this idea integrates the formal sections as well as all other different

elements of the composition.

The idea of s t a g n a t i o n may be appl ied elsewhere than to the A sections,

too, and n ot only to the greater formal sections, but also to melodic phrases;

and some less extended constellative processes are influenced by it as the

main principle of organization. The very first motive of the clarinet has clearly

a stagnating melodic profile measures 1-3). Since each stagna tion s followed

by a n ew Start we are dealing with the dialectics of the two forces:

s t a g n a t i o n

a n d a c ti v it y T h e

melodic composition in particular is dominat ed by the

manneri sm of starting a gesture and letting it stagnate at once, so that the

organizing idea of the whol e work may be seen crystallized within the very

first mofivic gestures.

igure 2

o n c l u s i o n

1 have tried to show how

In t~grales

by Var~se exemplifies a complex and

characteristic strategy of the composer, who uses textural constellations in


15/16

70

TomiMitkeli~

a m o t i v i c f u n c t i o n a n d c r e a te s h i s l i n e a r m e l o d i c t o t a li t y o u t o f a n e w k i n d

o f d y n a m i c i n t e r p l a y o f v o ic e s . B e c au s e o f t h e t r a d i t io n a l n a t u r e o f m o t i v i c

f u n c t i o n s a n d t h e f u n d a m e n t a l c o n c e p t o f p o l y p h o n y , i t d o e s n o t s e e m t o b e

t h e w h o l e t r u t h t h a t m a s V ar ~ se h i m s e l f s a i d - - h i s m u s i c d o e s n o t

f i t

i n t o

a n y o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l m u s i c b o x e s . I n th e c a s e o f V ar ~ se i t i s, o f c o u r s e , m o r e

t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l n a t u r e o f

t h e u n c t io n s

t h a n t h a t o f t h e m a t e r i a l .

B u t to b e e xa c t, e v e n t h e s o - c al le d tr a d i ti o n a l fo r m a l m u s i c b o x e s a r e m a d e

o u t o f f u n c t i o n s r a t h e r t h a n o u t o f m a t e r i a l. I n t h is r e s p e c t t h e V a r ~s e o f t h e

m i d - 2 0 s m u s t b e c o n s i d e r e d a t r a d i t i o n a l i s t - - a n a r ti s t u s i n g t r a d i t i o n a l c o d e s

e v e n i f h e d o e s s o i n a m a n n e r w h i c h i s a n y t h i n g b u t t r a d i ti o n a l; h e r e s t o r e s

t h e f u n c t io n s a n d f il ls th e m u p w i t h c o m p l e t e l y u n c o m m o n m a t e ri a l . If w e

d o n o t u n d e r s t a n d b o t h m t h e m a t e ri a l a s w e l l as t h e fu n c t io n s - - w e

m i s u n d e r s t a n d t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f th e a r t i st 's e x p r e s s i o n a n d a r e l e d a s t r a y

b y h i s p a m p h l e t s .

N o t e s

1. This idea of tr ipar t ite form was ex posed by Helga de la Mot te-Haber in a di scussion.

I do n o t wan t t o pur sue i t any fu r t he r he r e.

2. T . 1-21 mu st be a mispr int .

R e f e r e n c e s

C o g a n , R o b e r t (1 9 8 4 )N e w

images of musical sound.

C a m b r i d g e , M a s s. : H a r v a r d

U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s

C o n e , E d w a r d T . ( 19 6 2) S t r a v i n s k y : t h e p r o g r e s s o f a m e t h o d .

Perspect ives o f

New Mus i c , 1 ,

p p . 1 8 - 2 6

C o n e , E d w a r d T . ( 1 9 74 ) T h e composer's voice. B e r k e le y : U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l if o r n i a

P r e s s

D a n u s e T , H e r m a n n ( 1 9 92 ) M u s i k j e n s e i ts d e r N a r r a t iv i t i it ? O b e r E d g a r d V a r ~s e s

Int~grales. I n H . d e l a M o t t e - H a b e r ( e d .) Edg ard Var~se: Die Befre iung des

Klanges. H o f h e i m : W o l k e , p p . 8 1 - 1 0 5

D e l a M o t t e -H a b e r , H e l g a ( 1 99 0) S i m u l ta n e K l a n g k o r p e r u n d k o n t r a p u n k t i s c h e

D y n a m i k . I n H . d e l a M o t t e - H a b e r & K l a u s A n g e r m a n n ( e ds .)

Edga rd Var~se

1883-1963 . Dokumente zu Leben und W erk .

F r a n k f u r t a m M a i n : L a n g

e l a M o t t e - H a b e r , H e l g a ( e d . ) ( 1 9 92 ) Edga rd Var~se:Die B efreiung des Klanges.

H o f h e i m : W o l k e


16/16

Melodic otality 71

Lige t i, Gyorg y (1966) Weberns M elodik . Melos, 33, pp. 117-118

M~ke l~ , Tom i (1992) Ta lks abo ut tex ture . Finnish M usic Quarter ly , 3 , pp . 40--

45

Parks , Ann (1974) Freedom, form , and process in Var~se. A s tudy o f Var~se s

musical ideas, their sources, their development, a nd their use in his works. P h D

disse r ta t ion , CorneU Un ive rs i ty

Riethmfiller, Albre cht (1992) M elodie bei Edgar d Var~se? Zw ische n

Offrandes

und Hyperprism. In H. de la Mot te -H aber ( ed .) Edgard Var~se: Die Befreiung

des Klanges. Hofl~eim:~Wolke , pp . 64-80

Schafer, Wolf D. (1982) En tw ur f einer quantitativen Instrumentationsanalyse.

F r a n k f u r t a m Ma in : L a n g

Slonimsky, Nicolas (1967)Preface o Edgard Var~se, on isation. Ne w York:Colfranc

S te p h a n , R u d o lp h ( 19 7 2) A u s I g o r S t r a w in sk y s S p i e l z eu g sc h a c h t e l. I n L a r s

U . A b r a h a m ( ed . ) Erich Doflein. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag. Mainz : Schot t ,

p p . 2 7 - 30

Straus , Joseph N. (1990) Rem a kin g th e p a s t . Mu s ica l m o d ern ism a n d th e

influence o f the tonal tradition. C a m b r id g e , Ma ss .: H a r v a r d U n iv e r s i t y P re s s

V a r~ se , E d g a r d ( 19 6 6) R h y th m, f o r m a n d c o n t e n t ( 19 5 9) . C h o u W e n - C h u n g

(ed.)

Perspectives o f New Music , 5 ,

pp. 15-16

Var~se, Ed gar d (1983) ~crits. Textes r~unis e t p r~sent~s pa r Louise H irbour .

Par is: Bourgois

V a r~ se , E d g a r d ( 19 6 6) T h e l i b e r a t i o n o f so u n d ( 1 9 36 ) . C h o u W e n - C h u n g

(ed .)Perspectives o f N ew Mu sic , 5 ,

pp . 11-12

Wehm eyer , Gre te (1977) Edgard Var~se.R e g e n sb u r g : Bo s s e

Documents

Forma Textura La Varese