Alegant Brian - The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola

Brian Alegant is professor of music theory at the Oberlin College Conservatory.

Cover image: The crucifix ideogram in Cinque canti, iii, Sugarmusic s.p.a. – Edizioni Suvini Zerboni, Milano (Italy). Background photo by Filtran. Cover design by Frank Gutbrod

Alegant_cover.indd 1

Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola

“Alegant’s sophisticated, accessible analyses deeply enrich our understanding of one of the most fascinating sound worlds from the twentieth century. The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallpiccola is a major achievement.” —Christoph Neidhöfer, associate professor (music theory), Schulich School of Music, McGill University

Alegant The

L

uigi Dallapiccola was one of twentieth century’s most accomplished and admired composers. His music incorporated many of the twelve-tone techniques developed by Arnold Schoenberg, Alban Berg, and Anton von Webern, but blended their expressionistic impulses with an Italianate sense of lyricism. Brian Alegant’s The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola traces the evolution of Dallapiccola’s compositional technique over a thirtyyear period (1942–74). Using both historical and music-analytical lenses, this book documents the influences of Webern and Schoenberg (many of which have not been previously disclosed), and highlights Dallapiccola’s innovative handling of harmony, form, and text setting. The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola sheds light on several works that have been virtually ignored and provides a long-needed account of Dallapiccola’s idiosyncratic approach to twelve-tone composition. The first part of the book builds a conceptual and theoretical framework for the analysis of his twelve-tone music. The second part provides a fuller picture of his harmonic language and his penchant for text setting. Alegant’s Dallapiccola book will be a crucial source of insights for readers— theorists, musicologists, composers, conductors, performers, pedagogues—who are interested in twentieth-century music in general and postwar Italian music and the Second Viennese School in particular.

Twelve-Tone Music of L uigi D allapiccola

The

2/4/10 12:19:52 PM

The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola

Alegant.indd i

4/5/2010 10:17:24 PM

Eastman Studies in Music Ralph P. Locke, Senior Editor Eastman School of Music Additional Titles on Music of the Twentieth Century Analyzing Atonal Music: Pitch-Class Set Theory and Its Contexts Michiel Schuijer Aspects of Unity in J. S. Bach’s Partitas and Suites: An Analytical Study David W. Beach August Halm: A Critical and Creative Life in Music Lee A. Rothfarb CageTalk: Dialogues with and about John Cage Edited By Peter Dickinson Concert Music, Rock, and Jazz Since 1945: Essays and Analytic Studies Edited by Elizabeth West Marvin and Richard Hermann Elliott Carter: Collected Essays and Lectures, 1937–1995 Edited by Jonathan W. Bernard György Kurtág: Three Interviews and Ligeti Homages Bálint András Varga In Search of New Scales: Prince Edmond de Polignac, Octatonic Explorer Sylvia Kahan Intimate Voices: The Twentieth-Century String Quartet, Volumes 1 and 2 Edited by Evan Jones

The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola Raymond Fearn Music Theory and Mathematics: Chords, Collections, and Transformations Edited by Jack Douthett, Martha M. Hyde, and Charles J. Smith Music Theory in Concept and Practice Edited by James M. Baker, David W. Beach, and Jonathan W. Bernard The Pleasure of Modernist Music: Listening, Meaning, Intention, Ideology Edited by Arved Ashby Ruth Crawford Seeger’s Worlds: Innovation and Tradition in Twentieth-Century American Music Edited by Ray Allen and Ellie M. Hisama The Sea on Fire: Jean Barraqué Paul Griffiths The Substance of Things Heard: Writings about Music Paul Griffiths Variations on the Canon: Essays on Music from Bach to Boulez in Honor of Charles Rosen on His Eightieth Birthday Edited by Robert Curry, David Gable, and Robert L. Marshall

A complete list of titles in the Eastman Studies in Music series may be found on the University of Rochester Press website: www.urpress.com

Alegant.indd ii

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola Brian Alegant

Alegant.indd iii

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

Copyright © 2010 Brian Alegant All rights reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation, no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded, or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. First published 2010 University of Rochester Press 668 Mt. Hope Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620, USA www.urpress.com and Boydell & Brewer Limited PO Box 9, Woodbridge, Suffolk IP12 3DF, UK www.boydellandbrewer.com ISBN-13: 978-1-58046-325-6 ISSN: 1071-9989 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Alegant, Brian, 1960– The twelve-tone music of Luigi Dallapiccola / Brian Alegant. p. cm.—(Eastman studies in music, ISSN 1071-9989 ; v. 76) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-58046-325-6 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Dallapiccola, Luigi, 1904–1975—Criticism and interpretation. I. Title. ML410.D138A78 2010 780.92—dc22 2009051096 A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. This publication is printed on acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America. Examples from the scores of Luigi Dallapiccola are reproduced by kind permission of Sugarmusic s.p.a. – Edizioni Suvini Zerboni, Milano (Italy). Arnold Schönberg, Variationen|für Orchester|op. 31 © Copyright 1929 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien/UE 12196. Klavierstück op. 33a|für Klavier|op. 33a © Copyright 1929 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien/UE 9773. Anton Webern, Konzert|für 9 Instrumente|op. 24 © Copyright 1948 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien/UE 34118. Variationen für Klavier|für Klavier|op. 27, UE 10881: © Copyright 1937 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien. UE 16845: © Copyright 1937, 1979 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien. 1. Kantate|für Sopran, gemischten Chor und Orchester|op. 29 © Copyright 1954 by Universal Edition A.G., Wien/UE 12197.

Alegant.indd iv

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

To Marci and Jordan

Alegant.indd v

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

Alegant.indd vi

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

Contents Acknowledgments

ix

Introduction

1

Part One: Dallapiccola’s Serial Odyssey, 1942–1972 1

On the Twelve-Tone Road (1942–1950)

2

Aphorism and the Appropriation of Webernian Techniques (1950–1955)

29

The Apex of the Schoenbergian and Webernian Influence (1956–1960)

47

Consolidation and Synthesis (1960–1972)

84

3

4

9

Part Two: More Detailed Analyses 5

Dallapiccola’s Idiosyncratic Approach to “Octatonic Serialism”

109

6

An Mathilde: An Unsung Cantata

155

7

Parole di San Paolo: “A Performance under a Glass Bell”

226

Afterword

285

Notes

287

Selected Bibliography

311

Index

317

Alegant.indd vii

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

Alegant.indd viii

4/5/2010 10:17:51 PM

Acknowledgments I would like to express thanks and appreciation to: Sugarmusic s.p.a., Edizioni Suvini Zerboni, Milano (Italy), for the permission to include the Dallapiccola examples; Universal Editions for the permission to include the Schoenberg and Webern examples; Annalibera Dallapiccola and Gloria Manghetti for the permission to include the quotations and sketches from the Fondo Dallapiccola, Archivio Contemporaneo “Alessandro Bonsanti,” Gabinetto Vieusseux, Firenze; Fabio and Ilaria at the archives; and Blackwell Publishing, which printed an earlier version of chapter 5 in volume 25.1–2 of Music Analysis. The National Endowment for the Humanities, for a fellowship in the year 2000 that officially launched this project; the Mellon Foundation; the Society for Music Theory, for a subvention grant; and especially Oberlin College and Dean David Stull, for their generous support. The University of Rochester Press, Ralph Locke, Suzanne Guiod, the production staff, and the anonymous readers of an earlier draft.

Alegant.indd ix

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

Alegant.indd x

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

Introduction Most scholars would agree that twelve-tone composition is among the most important musical developments of the twentieth century. Evan a partial list of twentieth-century composers who embraced or experimented with serial procedures would be staggering, and would include such names as Babbitt, Barber, Bartók, Berg, Boulez, Britten, Carter, Crawford, Ligeti, Lutosławski, Mamloc, Martino, Mead, Morris, Nono, Perle, Schoenberg, Shostakovich, Sessions, Schnittke, Skalkattos, Stockhausen, Stravinsky, Webern, and Wuorinen. Most scholars would also agree that Luigi Dallapiccola (1904–75) is among the most accomplished and admired serial composers. His output includes ballets, choral music, concertos, film scores, piano pieces, song cycles, orchestral pieces, and operas. He enjoyed international fame as a lecturer, teacher, and author, and was a member of the national academies of arts in the US, France, and England. The scholarly literature on Dallapiccola is vast. It comprises a host of books and monographs, countless articles, and an ever-growing number of dissertations and theses. As a result, we know quite a bit about his music: his predilection for self-quotation and symbolism, his fondness for intricate counterpoint and systematic designs; his penchant for languages and text setting; his stylistic eclecticism and idiosyncratic procedures; and his appropriation of Anton Webern’s techniques. Yet many facets of Dallapiccola’s music await further explanation. The most comprehensive books on Dallapiccola in English are Rosemary Brown’s dissertation, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola (1977), and Raymond Fearn’s The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola (2003). Both authors focus on broad issues of style, and make it a point to discuss every one of Dallapiccola’s works, including the student efforts. Brown’s approach is parametric: she examines the composer’s output from the standpoint of individual techniques or characteristics. Thus, there are chapters on such topics as pedal points, symbolism, texture, and rhythm. It remains perhaps the best source of information on the composer’s stylistic uniformity and his fondness for symbolic self-quotation. However, it is not widely available, and it shies away from technical description. Fearn takes a chronological approach to Dallapiccola’s music, and paints with a wide brush. He discusses most of the compositions in a few pages each; a few works are covered in a single page. He, too, avoids technical descriptions, beyond the basic identification of twelve-tone rows and textures. The present book focuses on the analysis of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone music. Stated in simplest terms, it does not ask why Dallapiccola composed with twelve tones, but, rather, how he did. It reconsiders Dallapiccola’s serial repertory

Alegant.indd Sec2:1

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

2

introduction

through a technical lens, tracing the evolution of his praxis over a thirty-year period. It highlights facets of his music that have not been previously discussed, and sheds light on compositions that have been virtually ignored. Ultimately, it aims to complement the existing research in order to understand more fully his technique and language. I attempt in three ways to fill in some of the lacunae in the state of Dallapiccola research. First, I analyze several twelve-tone works that have been virtually ignored. Second, I make an effort to examine fewer works, but in much greater depth than previous authors, and in their entirety, so as to model their large-scale strategy. And third, I incorporate recent developments in posttonal theory by Allen Forte, David Lewin, Andrew Mead, Robert Morris, Joseph Straus, and myself. At this point I should say clearly what this book does not do. It does not talk about the preserial compositions at all, and it touches only briefly on many other works. (Thus, readers wishing for a detailed reading of, say, Ulisse or the Canti di prigionia will be disappointed.) Further, I do not attempt to review the voluminous literature on the composer’s life and aesthetic: I am happy to let others speak on the cultural, literary, metaphysical, philosophical, and stylistic influences that shaped Dallapiccola’s music. Nor do I attempt to situate or locate Dallapiccola’s music within a broader context of twentieth-century Italian or European music. To be clear: I do believe that these topics are important, and that a “full” understanding of Dallapiccola’s music—if such a thing were possible—would engage them. But I would argue that these topics have been covered extensively—and compellingly—by dozens of authors on both sides of the Atlantic. In my view, what is missing in the state of Dallapiccola research is an analytical and theoretical framework for his music, in particular his middleand late-period works. This book is intended for theorists and musicologists, composers, conductors, performers, and pedagogues who are interested in twentieth-century music in general and postwar Italian music and the Second Viennese School in particular. It attempts to make the technical discussions accessible enough to be read by generalists, so to speak, though readers will certainly benefit from some exposure to set theory. Still, I would hope that readers unversed in—or unconvinced by—such notions as set classes and axial symmetry will find much of value in this book, including frequent references to the composer’s writings and sketches, and close readings of numerous works.

*

*

*

As an aid to readers, I would like to sketch out the contents of the book in somewhat greater detail. The first part traces the evolution of Dallapiccola’s language between 1942 and 1972—arguably the high point of serialism. These years parallel

Alegant.indd Sec2:2

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

introduction 3 a significant period in the development of serialism that includes not only the crowning achievements of the Second Viennese School but also works by many other composers who (as mentioned at the outset of this Introduction) embraced or dabbled with the twelve-tone system. Part 1 documents the slow shift in Dallapiccola’s musical language from a “Webernian” conception to a “Schoenbergian” one (as I define them). These chapters show that Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone constructions become freer and less dependent on linear organization, that his rhythmic organization becomes increasingly “floating,” and that his partitioning strategies and resultant soundscapes become more variegated, more expressive, and more sophisticated. They also explore works that have not been previously examined, and identify Webernian and Schoenbergian influences that have not been previously found. And it is my hope that they can provide a theoretical and conceptual framework for the analysis of not only Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone music but, potentially, that of other composers as well (see Afterword). The first portion of chapter 1 lays a foundation for dividing Dallapiccola’s output into four discrete periods or phases. This is supported on the one hand by a consideration of the underlying techniques, procedures, and row characteristics of the works in each phase, and on the other by the composer’s own ruminations on what he referred to as his tonal translations, namely the Sonatina canonica (1943); Tartiniana (1951); and Tartiniana seconda (1956). About these works he writes: “Without a doubt after each of these tonal experiences, I took a noteworthy step forward along the path of twelve-tone music; a fact too complicated to be explained here, but which is incontestably true and which has been noted by all those who have thoroughly studied my music.”1 This chapter then explores the salient procedures in the first phase by analyzing movements from one of the earliest works, Sex carmina alcaei (1942), and a later one, the second of the Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado (1948). It also identifies and contextualizes what I consider to be perhaps the single most important construct in Dallapiccola’s serial praxis: the cross partition. Subsequent chapters demonstrate that cross partitions permeate the works of all four phases (indeed, they appear in nearly every one of his twelve-tone pieces) and argue that they represent a crucial aspect of his twelve-tone language. The following quotation, from “On the Twelve-Note Road,” suggests how the cross partition illuminates the composer’s harmonic and artistic mind-set: In music based on a series, instead of finding ourselves faced with a character rhythmically and melodically defined at the outset, we have to wait a long time: exactly as we had to wait a long time for the rhythmic and melodic definition of Albertine. . . .Before reaching this rhythmic and melodic definition of the series, we may find it compressed into a single chord of twelve notes, two chords of six notes, three of four notes, four of three notes, or even six twonote chords . . . to speak only of the most elementary possibilities (329).

Alegant.indd Sec2:3

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

4

introduction

The remaining chapters of part 1 explore in turn the structural characteristics of the other serial phases, documenting the assimilation of Webernian and Schoenbergian techniques and Dallapiccola’s pitch, rhythmic, and formal explorations. Chapter 2 reviews the salient characteristics of the aphoristic works of 1950–55 through a cursory examination of the Quaderno musicale di Annalibera and the Goethe-Lieder, which are among Dallapiccola’s best-known efforts. The analyses trace the advent of two particular Webernian characteristics that remain crucial components of his writing (axial symmetry and trichordal derivation), and uncover the first glimmers of Schoenbergian influences (irregular partitions and BACH derivations). Chapter 3 discusses the pieces written between 1955 and 1960. It documents the technical acquisitions in the Cinque canti, the inaugural work of the phase, and two more extensive works, Requiescant, for chorus and orchestra, and Dialoghi, a cello concerto. The analyses uncover a host of new procedures, including retrograde-symmetrical rows, ideograms, four-row arrays, palindromes on the small and large scales, multidimensional set presentations, leitrhythms, and a procedure I refer to as rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie. Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the chapter is the strong structural and sonic similarities between Requiescant and Webern’s Op. 29 Cantata, which, in my estimation, settle once and for all the argument over Webern’s influence on Dallapiccola’s music. Chapter 4 explores the characteristics of the last phase (1960–72). Passages from Preghiere (1962) and Commiato (1972) reveal an idiosyncratic application of inversional combinatoriality (the quintessential Schoenbergian construct) and acerbic and strident soundscapes that could hardly contrast more with what Raymond Fearn describes as the “limpid lyricism” of the first-phase works. This chapter also reviews Rosemary Brown’s observations on Dallapiccola’s penchant for symbolic self-quotation, and documents other unrecognized Schoenbergian influences.2 The three chapters in part 2 are designed to amplify the analytical and theoretical aspects of part 1 and to broaden the repertoire covered. Chapter 5 focuses exclusively on Dallapiccola’s novel octatonic praxis, building upon the work of Roman Vlad, Michael Eckert, and Dana Richardson. However, it examines the octatonic surfaces through a six-note filter rather than an eight-note one, exploring the diverse ways in which Dallapiccola uses two hexachordal sonorities (set classes 6–27[013469] and 6–30[013679]) through analysis of works from each of the four serial phases, including the second of the Quattro liriche di Machado, Il prigioniero, the “Intermezzo” from the Ciaccona, Intermezzo, e Adagio for solo cello, An Mathilde, Ulisse, Tempus Destruendi, and Commiato. Ultimately, it affirms that octatonic writing and hexachordal structuring are vital aspects of Dallapiccola’s serial language. Chapter 6 offers a close reading of An Mathilde (1954), a sorely neglected cantata for voice and orchestra. The analysis extends the work of previous chapters, highlights the influences and interpenetration of Webernian and Schoenberg

Alegant.indd Sec2:4

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

introduction 5 techniques, models the kaleidoscopic partitioning strategies used (including a wealth of cross partitions, four-row arrays, intricate polyphonic designs, and references to the music of Bach and Wagner), and explores the composer’s penchant for text setting. The final chapter offers a still closer analysis of Parole di San Paolo (1964) that brings together many of the theoretical and analytical topics in the book. The analysis highlights, among other things, the various roles played by cross partitions, trichordal derivation, four-voice array structures, axial symmetry, and other sophisticated and irregular partitioning strategies. But perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Parole is its anachronistic construction, which is to say that it appears deliberately to shun many of the features of the surrounding works like Preghiere and Ulisse. I would surmise that the motivation behind this lies in the genesis of Ulisse. By way of explanation, for most of his creative life Dallapiccola (like Schoenberg) completed on average one work a year. The one prominent exception was Ulisse, which proved a mammoth undertaking, owing to its extended size; its sophisticated network of rows, partitioning schemes, and leitmotives; and the fact that the composer compiled the libretto from a variety of sources. As a result, he toiled on his magnum opus for more than eight years. Parole was completed in 1964, halfway through the composition of Ulisse. I would conjecture that Parole afforded not only a welcome diversion, but an opportunity to embrace alternative techniques and forms of expression. Perhaps this is why he chose the 34 cross partition as the primary generator of the motivic and harmonic material for this exquisite miniature.

*

*

*

I offer this book with the hope that it will continue the conversation on Dallapiccola’s music. I find his music aesthetically beautiful, highly expressive, and wonderfully crafted, and I believe that it deserves to be heard, studied, and talked about.

Alegant.indd Sec2:5

4/5/2010 10:17:52 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:6

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

Part One

Dallapiccola’s Serial Odyssey, 1942–1972

Alegant.indd Sec2:7

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:8

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

Chapter One

On the Twelve-Tone Road (1942–1950) Is the twelve-note system a language or a technique? To my way of thinking, it is even a state of mind. Luigi Dallapiccola, “Sulla strada della dodecafonia”

Much has been written about Luigi Dallapiccola’s acquisition of the twelvetone method. The composer, in his writings, frequently lamented the fact that he had had no direct study with any of the “masters,” and that his knowledge of the twelve-tone technique came only through “long and careful” study of the music of Webern and Schoenberg.1 Some musicologists, such as Christopher Wilkinson, deny the influence of Webern altogether; others, like Giordano Montecchi, argue that Dallapiccola was predisposed to formal rigor and intricate counterpoint long before he embraced the twelve-tone system, and that he came independently to Webernian features.2 Michael Eckert asserts another viewpoint: “In any case, it is difficult to make a case for much of Dallapiccola’s music having been directly influenced by that of other composers. . . . Rather, it was Dallapiccola’s thinking about music that was influenced by Schoenberg, Busoni, Malipiero, and, to a lesser extent, Webern, as well as by the authors Joyce, Proust, and Thomas Mann.”3 In this and the subsequent chapters I argue to the contrary, and attempt to demonstrate convincingly the influence of both Schoenberg and Webern. Figure 1.1 lists several fundamental characteristics that I identify as Webernian or Schoenbergian.4 The former characteristics are distilled from Webern’s socalled “late period,” which encompasses the works from the Symphony, Op. 21 to the second cantata, Op. 31. The Schoenbergian traits are primarily drawn from the extended “American period” efforts, principally the Violin Concerto (Op. 36), the Fourth Quartet (Op. 37), the Piano Concerto (Op. 42), and the Phantasy for Violin and Piano (Op. 47). (Sprechstimme, of course, is an earlier, preserial device.) Webernian features include a preference for ordered rows, which tend to unfold in a linear fashion (most often in one-through-twelve presentations); polyphonic textures; relatively sparse orchestrations; rows that possess symmetrical properties; and axial symmetries that involve the disposition of lines about a

Alegant.indd Sec2:9

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

10

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 1.1. Webernian and Schoenbergian features Webernian traits Composing with rows Linear presentations Symmetrical rows Axial symmetry, with even index numbers Derived aggregates Sparser orchestration Four-voice designs (arrays)

Schoenbergian traits Composing with rows and with aggregates Unordered presentations Hexachordal structuring Semicombinatorial rows Axial symmetry, with odd index numbers Cross partitions Denser orchestration Klangfarbenmelodie Multidimensional sets (nested presentations)

single pitch (or pitch class). In contrast, Schoenbergian characteristics include a preference for unordered row presentations and hexachordal structuring; homophonic textures; denser orchestrations; rows whose constituent hexachords can be grouped into regions or quartets; and the use of Klangfarbenmelodie. (These procedures are defined as we encounter them.) By “unordered row presentations” I mean Dallapiccola’s penchant—especially in the later works—for repeating row segments, circling back to earlier notes, and omitting notes and portions of rows altogether, rare in Webern’s music. In the broadest sense, one could argue that Webern was more concerned with the order of a row’s pitch classes than Schoenberg was, and that he tended to manipulate rows whereas Schoenberg tended to manipulate aggregates. The dichotomy between Webernian and Schoenbergian characteristics is not absolute. It serves merely as a point of departure—a set of working definitions. Both composers used techniques from the other’s list: Webern occasionally employs unordered rows or segments, six- or more-voiced chords, homophonic textures, and relatively thick scoring, and Schoenberg frequently employs ordered rows, imitation and canon, and sparse textures. One could also question whether these characteristics are unique to Webern or Schoneberg, or why we exclude, say, Alban Berg, Vito Frazzi, Francesco Malipiero, or Wladimir Vogel. Still, I maintain that these Webernian and Schoenbergian templates are useful for understanding Dallapiccola’s development over a thirty-year period. Figure 1.2 divides Dallapiccola’s oeuvre into five stages. The list is not exhaustive, as it omits student compositions and incidental works such as transcriptions, arrangements, and film scores. The preserial period contains a handful of unpublished works and approximately ten published compositions; it culminates with the Canti di prigionia and Volo di notte, a one-act opera.5 Phase 1,

Alegant.indd Sec2:10

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:11

4/5/2010 10:17:53 PM

Phase 1 (1942–50) Liriche greche Ciaccona, intermezzo e adagio Rencesvals Due studi, Due pezzi Il prigioniero Quattro liriche di Machado Tre poemi Job Tartiniana (1951) Experimentation Some Webern Less Schoenberg

Preserial (to 1942)

Tre laudi Volo di notte Canti di prigionia Piccolo concerto . . .

Sonatina canonica (1942) Diatonicism fused with twelve-tone elements

Figure 1.2. Overview of the five phases

Tartiniana seconda (1956) Further experimentation More Webern More Schoenberg

Quaderno musicale … Variations for Orchestra Goethe-Lieder Canti di liberazione Piccola musica nottorno An Mathilde

Phase 2 (1950–55)

Thorough assimilation of Webern Refinement of Schoenberg Rhythmic and timbral innovations

Cinque canti Concerto per la notte di Natale . . . Requiescant Dialoghi (1960)

Phase 3 (1956–60)

Turning away from Webern Through assimilation of Schoenberg Synthesis

Preghiere (1962) Three Questions with Two Answers Ulisse (1960–68) Parole di San Paolo (1964) Sicut Umbra (1970) Tempus destruendi–Tempus aedificandi (1970–71) Commiato (1972)

Phase 4 (1960–72)

12

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

the first serial period, includes the works written from 1942 to 1950. Dallapiccola used a diverse set of techniques in this period, which evokes Berg, Webern, and his Italian contemporaries. The next decade is split into two periods. Phase 2 is marked by a refinement of Webernian techniques, the initial explorations of Schoenbergian procedures, and several of Dallapiccola’s own innovations. (Throughout this book, “technique” and “procedure,” and “phase” and “period,” are used interchangeably.) The works of phase 3 rely more heavily on Webernian and Schoenbergian procedures, and introduce a number of rhythmic and timbral innovations. The works of the fourth phase recall the techniques and textures of earlier phases, but arrange them in novel ways.6 Three compositions are highlighted in figure 1.2: Sonatina canonica in E-flat Major for piano (1943); Tartiniana (1951), a divertimento for violin and chamber orchestra based on themes by Tartini (who, like Dallapiccola, was a native of Istria); and Tartiniana seconda (1956), a sequel. Dallapiccola calls these his “tonal translations”: These three tonal works have in common the use of canonic devices, each one very different from the other. Without a doubt after each of these tonal experiences, I took a noteworthy step forward along the path of twelve-tone music; a fact too complicated to be explained here, but which is incontestably true and which has been noted by all those who have thoroughly studied my music.7

Indeed, each “tonal translation” initiated a period of experimentation and technical reorientation. After the Sonatina canonica, Dallapiccola embraced the twelve-tone technique as the primary vehicle of expression.8 Tartiniana ushered in a new set of compositional procedures, chief among them axial symmetry, floating rhythm, and irregular canons. These are clearly manifested in the Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, Goethe-Lieder, and An Mathilde. The third translation, Tartiniana seconda, heralded a radically new approach to row construction and design, including the use of palindromic or derived rows, four-voice arrays, and large-scale arch forms. The first fruit of this period was the Cinque canti (1955), which Dallapiccola frequently referred to as his most advanced composition. (He was no doubt thinking of the novel partitioning strategies that helped him to forge a more expressive setting of the text.) This five-year period is characterized by a thorough assimilation of the elements of Webern’s compositions for voice, chorus, and orchestra (namely Das Augenlicht, Op. 26, and the cantatas, Opp. 29 and 31). After Dialoghi, Dallapiccola abandoned four-row arrays and retrograde-symmetrical rows, and began to turn away from a Webernian conception. While the compositions of the last period synthesize the characteristics of the previous phases, they remain indelibly marked by Schoenbergian features. The four phases are not neatly separated. For instance, the Canti di prigionia, which contains several twelve-tone canonic passages, and Cinque frammenti di Saffo, were composed before Sonatina canonica, whereas Marsia, which is not

Alegant.indd Sec2:12

4/5/2010 10:17:54 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 13 a twelve-tone work, was completed afterward. Concerning the second boundary, Dallapiccola worked simultaneously on Tartiniana and the Canti di liberazione; and, although An Mathilde precedes Tartiana seconda, it anticipates many features native to the third phase; thus, in many respects An Mathilde belongs with Cinque canti and the other works of the second half of the decade of 1950s. Finally, the fourth phase is not ushered in by a “tonal translation”; accordingly, one could question the separation between Dialoghi and Preghiere. Nevertheless, while the divisions between phases might not be neat, I will show that the compositions of each phase are linked by a host of procedures, formal devices, compositional strategies, and, most importantly, their sonic characteristics—their soundscapes. I will also argue that a four-fold division of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone output provides a valuable framework for listening to and analyzing his music.9

Phase 1 (1942–50) Dallapiccola’s early serial compositions are primarily linear in terms of pitch organization. They are characterized by a similar approach to the parameters of texture, row handling, rhythm, and soundscape.10 The textures of the firstphase works are primarily polyphonic, and abound in such time-honored canonic devices as inversion, retrogression, augmentation, and diminution. These polyphonic sections are occasionally interrupted by brief monophonic and homophonic excursions, which tend to function as interludes. Shortly after the completion of Due studi, Dallapiccola wrote on the topics of serialism and polyphony. In an essay entitled “On the Twelve-Note Road,” he echoed the sentiments Busoni made in 1923: Even today it is still possible to write fugues, using traditional or even modern and atonal methods, yet to every such fugue there will always cling an antiquated character, for fugue is a “form,” and as such, time-bound, mortal. On the other hand, polyphony is not a form, but a principle; as such it is timeless and, just as long as music continues to be created, “immortal.” Is it necessary to emphasize that canon, which occupies such an important place in the twelvetone dialectic, is not a form, but part of the principle of polyphony?11

Dallapiccola had not yet settled on the practice of using just one source row in each composition. Several works use different rows in different movements; a few works use two rows in a movement.12 These compositions are typically saturated with pedal points and octave doublings, which provide a semblance of harmonic grounding.13 Rhythmically, the surfaces are marked by symmetrical phrases, periodic structures, and straightforward, relatively “square” metrical presentations, with frequent downbeat attacks and a consistent harmonic

Alegant.indd Sec2:13

4/5/2010 10:17:54 PM

14

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

rhythm. Even when we encounter shifts of meter, the downbeat attacks are rarely threatened or undermined. The majority of first-phase compositions are vocal, and set texts in various languages by such authors as Joyce, Machado, and Michelangelo. The vocal lines are invariably cantabile and demanding, with large leaps, dynamic contrasts, and flexible rhythms; they are typically marked espressivo or molto espressivo. The soundscapes of this phase are marked by ethereal orchestrations that are softer and more atmospheric than the atonal or serial works of Schoenberg or Webern. Many authors have noted the Italianate lyricism of Dallapiccola’s early compositions, with their idiosyncratic blending of bel canto and expressionistic elements. Selected passages from the Sex carmina alcaei, an early work, and Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, a later work, serve to illustrate the salient characteristics of this phase. The thirteen relatively short pieces of the Liriche greche are arranged into three groups: Cinque frammenti di Saffo (1942–43), Sex carmina alcaei (1943), and Due liriche di Anacreonte (1945).14 Example 1.1 provides a reduction of the first movement of Sex carmina alcaei, “Expositio.” Even a cursory glance at the score reveals the linear row presentations and the ethereal atmosphere evoked by soft dynamics and markings of molto sostenuto, quasi lento, and molto espressivo. (I should point out that the single-row texture of the opening is peculiar for the phase.) “Expositio” unfolds two unaccompanied rows, labeled P-1 and R-2, which are followed by a two-measure recollection of the last movement of the Cinque frammenti di Saffo.15 Each aggregate, or total chromatic, is clearly delineated and coincides with—or, rather, articulates—the end of a phrase. The free-floating vocal line and the slow tempo make it difficult if not impossible to discern a steady pulse. Still, hairpin dynamics and tenuto markings emphasize the regular text accents on vi-ol-e, ridente, and Saf-fo. These accents emphasize the downbeats of the third and sixth measures, thereby suggesting a three-measure hypermetric grouping. Pitch class C♯ is quite prominent insofar as it initiates rows P-1 and R-2 and frames the right-hand piano part. It is worth noting that, from about 1950 onwards, Dallapiccola always included some kind of accidental before each and every new note. Even when sketching in haste he always took care to include a sharp, flat, or natural before every notated pitch. However, for the sake of simplicity and legibility, I will not add cautionary accidentals to the musical examples in this book. It is also worth noting that Dallapiccola invariably accents syllables according to the way they would be spoken. (This is hardly the case with the contemporaneous works of Boulez, by comparison, who reputedly said that anyone interested in the actual text could always go and read the text.) The pitches of “Expositio” are organized symmetrically. Example 1.2 orders the pitches of the two opening phrases from low to high register. The ambitus of the first phrase, shown in (a), spans C♯4 to D5. (By convention, C4 is middle C). Every note in between is present save for D4 and D♭5, which are “marked” in the second phrase, shown in (b), which begins by repeating D♭5 on “dolce”

Alegant.indd Sec2:14

4/5/2010 10:17:54 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 15

Example 1.1. Sex carmina alcaei, i and ends with D4 on “Saf-fo.” The pitches of the first row are positioned around the axis G4/G♯4 while those in the second row are oriented about G♯4/A4.16 Furthermore, as (c) reveals, the presentation of the second row is RT1-related to that of the first row with respect to pitch and temporal realization. Thus, the entire 24-note succession forms a mirror around the two quarter-note rests separating the phrases. “Canon perpetuus” features the characteristic polyphonic writing and periodic structuring of the first phase. The annotated reduction in example 1.3 highlights the five row forms that appear in the movement. The reduction places each row on a single staff, making it easier to trace the unfolding of the polyphonic design. P-4 is assigned to the voice and I-t is given to the piano and harp.

Alegant.indd Sec2:15

4/5/2010 10:17:54 PM

16

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 1.2. The first two vocal phrases of Sex carmina alcaei, i

These slowly unfolding rows are related by strict inversion in pitch space. Three faster-moving rows are divided among the remaining instruments, which project rows I-1, I-2, and I-3 in canon. Contour inversion helps to emphasize the vocal part: the voice ascends when the remaining instruments descend, and vice versa. Like the first movement, the rhythmic presentation here is uniform, with periodic two-measure groups of 3/2 in the vocal line. The texture is similarly transparent, too, despite as many as five simultaneous sounding lines and many octave doublings. One of the more striking elements of the writing is the interplay of the vertical sonorities, which offset triads and diminished-seventh chords with octatonic or quartal sonorities. Figure 1.3 details the row distribution of “Expositio.” It shows that the trio of faster-moving rows (I-1, I-2, I-3) serves as a ground or ostinato against which the voice and piano/harp lines are set into relief. It also shows that the timbre becomes more uniform as the movement unfolds: the faster-moving rows are played first by three different instruments, then by two, and finally by one. Thus, in the first iteration of I-1 the first five notes are taken by the bassoon, the next three by the horn, and the last four by the flute. In the second iteration, the horn has eight notes and the bassoon four. In the third iteration, the cello plays the entire row. The cyclic structure is unmistakable, as each row projects the same pitches with identical rhythms and articulations. A poco ritardando and diminuendo prepare the canonic outburst that initiates the next movement. The lack of accompaniment, slow tempo, natural text setting, and constrained ambitus emphasize the intervallic succession and set-class

Alegant.indd Sec2:16

4/5/2010 10:17:56 PM

Example 1.3. Sex carmina alcaei, ii (“canon perpetuus”)

Alegant.indd Sec2:17

4/5/2010 10:17:56 PM

Example 1.3. Sex carmina alcaei, ii (“canon perpetuus”)—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:18

4/5/2010 10:17:59 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 19

Example 1.4. Set class and intervallic properties of the row of Sex carmina alcaei content of these rows, especially the slow-moving ones. Example 1.4 reproduces the pitches of the opening rows but normalizes the rhythms. Four set classes stand out in P-1 and its counterpart R-2. The opening tetrachord of P-1, which begins on C♯4 and rises to G4, is a member of set class 4–13[0136]. The top note of this tetrachord becomes an anchor for a 3–11[037], which appears as a “major triad” in close position. The last note of this triad initiates a descending three-note chromatic descent, a 3–1[012]. The repeated A♭ launches a member of set class 4–28[0369] (a “diminished-seventh chord”) whose last note rises a semitone and completes the row.17 Dallapiccola steadfastly maintains the contour of the initial realization of P1 throughout the movement and the work as a whole. As a result, most of the linear rows are realized as contour replicas of the original. I use the word “strict” to describe row presentations that faithfully preserve the ordered pitch intervals of the original row, and “loose” to describe presentations that deviate from it. Strict P transforms begin with this ordered succession of pitch intervals: < +3, +2, +1, -4, +7, . . . >; strict I forms begin with < -3, -2, -1, +4, -7, . . . >; strict R forms, < -1, +3, -9, +3, +1, . . . >; and strict RI forms, < +1, -3, +9, -3, -1, . . . >. Most of the presentations in this composition are strict; only two episodes are loose.18 Careful attention to pitch contour has important implications for listening as well as

Alegant.indd Sec2:19

4/5/2010 10:18:01 PM

20

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 1.3. Row structure of “Canon perpetuus” of Sex carmina alcaei m.

1

Voice

P-4

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

—

—

—

—

I-2

—

—

Tpt. Ob.

Vln.

—

—

—

—

Pno., Harp I-t High

I-2

—

Ob. Tpt. Cl. Medium

I-3 Vln. Vcl. Vla.

Low

I-1 Bn. Hn. Fl.

—

I-2

—

I-3 Vla.

I-1 Hn.

Cl. —

Bn.

I-1

I-3

—

Vla. —

—

—

Vcl.

for analysis. For one thing, the set classes identified in example 1.4 can help us navigate the maze of individual rows. For instance, strict P and R rows project tightly packed major triads whereas strict I and RI rows project tightly packed minor triads. Similarly, the chromatic segments in strict P and RI rows descend in pitch while those in I and R rows ascend. From another perspective, these set classes and intervallic patterns tell us where we are in a given row (namely, at the beginning, middle, or end). Once we are able to identify the the pitch realizations of set-classes [012], [037], and [0369], we can then begin to associate them. To illustrate one associative chain, let us return to example 1.3. We can easily connect the chromatic trichord in the horn (mm. 12–13) to the trichord in the cello (mm. 14–15). Similarly, two measures later, we can link the horn’s to the viola’s . These associations suggest the care with which the canonic framework is realized.19

Cross Partitions Dallapiccola uses monophonic or homophonic textures to vary the polyphony that tends to dominate the early works. Many homophonic passages use what I call a cross partition.20 In simplest terms, a cross partition arranges the pitch classes of an aggregate (or a row) into a rectangular design. Typically, the vertical columns of a cross partition are derived from the source row’s segments, whereas the horizontal rows of a cross partition contain non-adjacent elements of the source row. The vertical pitch classes are typically realized as chords, and the horizontal pitch classes are differentiated from one

Alegant.indd Sec2:20

4/5/2010 10:18:02 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 21 another by registral, timbral, or other means. Figure 1.4(a) shows the most common shapes of “even” cross partitions, which I designate 62, 43, 34, and 26 respectively. The first integer specifies the number of vertical elements, while the exponent specifies the number of horizontal elements. Thus, a 62 cross partition is essentially a presentation of two simultaneous hexachords. While many other, irregular configurations are possible, Dallapiccola gravitates to just these four. Figure 1.4(b) illustrates a configuration of order numbers for a hypothetical 34 cross partition. Using Andrew Mead’s convention, the order numbers are labeled 0–e and italicized.21 The pitch classes in the columns of the cross partition can be permuted (as if they were subjected to “slot-machine” transformations). Thus, every configuration in figure 1.4(c) maintains in its columns the order-number collections {012}, {345}, {678}, and {9te}. Slot-machine permutations effectively preserve the elements in the vertical dimension while varying the material in the horizontal dimension; in a sense, they maintain the original row’s “harmonies” and generate different “melodies.” In Dallapiccola’s hands cross partitions are extremely versatile, and they become one of his favorite twelve-tone devices. Cross partitions in the first phase assume a variety of roles: they open and close works, they serve as punctuation for sections and movements, and they occasionally appear at climaxes. Indeed, several movements written during this phase are based exclusively on a specific configuration of a cross partition.22 Figure 1.4. Even cross partitions and slot-machine transformations (a) even configurations of cross partitions 62 ** ** ** ** ** **

43 *** *** *** ***

34 **** **** ****

26 ****** ******

(b) order numbers in a hypothetical 34 cross partition 0 3 6 9 1 4 7 t 2 5 8 e (c) four variants of the 34 configuration in (b) 0 3 6 9 1 4 7 t 2 5 8 e

Alegant.indd Sec2:21

0 5 6 e 2 3 7 t 1 4 8 9

2 4 7 9 0 3 6 t 1 5 8 e

1 3 6 t 2 5 7 9 0 4 8 e

4/5/2010 10:18:02 PM

Example 1.5. Cross partitions in Schoenberg’s Op. 33a Klavierstück

Alegant.indd Sec2:22

4/5/2010 10:18:02 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 23 Dallapiccola’s fascination with cross partitions is especially intriguing, given his thoughts on the analogy between character development in literature and thematic development in music. Several passages in Dallapiccola’s “On the Twelve-Note Road” are devoted to analyses of texts by James Joyce and Marcel Proust. After discussing at length the ways in which Joyce exploits the name of Lynch in Ulysses, he writes: My observations on Joyce’s prose encouraged me and showed me that, at bottom, the problem of all the arts is a single problem. The assonances I had noticed in Joyce had led me to realize that, in the use of a twelve-note series, the most careful and conscientious effort must be devoted to its arrangement; contact with Marcel Proust gave me the opportunity of getting a definitive outlook on the new dialectic and new constructive method of the twelve-note system.23

Later, when considering the development of Albertine’s character in the first book of Proust’s A l’ombre des jeunes filles en fleur, Dallapiccola remarks: In music based on a series, instead of finding ourselves faced with a character rhythmically and melodically defined at the outset, we have to wait a long time: exactly as we had to wait a long time for the rhythmic and melodic definition of Albertine. . . .Before reaching this rhythmic and melodic definition of the series, we may find it compressed into a single chord of twelve notes, two chords of six notes, three of four notes, four of three notes, or even six twonote chords . . . to speak only of the most elementary possibilities (329).

It is likely that Dallapiccola’s initial exposure to cross partitions came through the study of Schoenberg’s twelve-tone works, especially the Op. 33a Klavierstück. Example 1.5(a) replicates the initial pitch realizations of P-t and I-3, two of the rows in the “home” region, or quartet. The rows are divided into tetrachords, which are labeled a, b, c in row P-t and a,’ b,’ c’ in row I-3. The tetrachords represent set classes 4–6[0127], 4–27[0258], and 4–z15[0146] respectively.24 Example 1.5(b) shows the back-to-back 43 cross partitions that come after the initial quarter-note rest. The hairpin dynamics, crescendo, and rising pitch realization all reinforce the arch shape of the initial gesture. Cross partitions return in measures 10 and 11, which are shown in example 1.5(c). Here, the right-hand and left-hand cross partitions present their tetrachords in a syncopated retrograde. Each hand, and each measure, completes a double aggregate. Toward the conclusion of the Klavierstück the 43 configurations are unraveled, as example 1.5(d) reveals. Here, finally, the intervallic profile of the row is laid bare. In a sense, then, the openings of Op. 33a and Sex carmina alcaei are mirror images of each other: Schoenberg begins with cross partitions, and slowly unpacks them in order to reveal the row’s linear profile, whereas Dallapiccola begins with a single unadorned row and then arranges it into a variety of configurations.

Alegant.indd Sec2:23

4/5/2010 10:18:04 PM

24

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter whether Dallapiccola came to cross partitions on his own or whether he appropriated them from Schoenberg, Berg, or another composer. What is significant is that the cross partition becomes one of his favorite twelve-tone devices—so much so that he uses it more than any other twelvetone composer does.

Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado Example 1.6 provides an annotated score for the second of the Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado. This exquisitely constructed and expressive song has much in common with the first two movements of the Sex carmina alcaei: pianissimo dynamics, thin textures and a translucent scoring, a high tessitura, periodic phrase structures, and a steady meter with accented downbeats. The text of this song evokes a dream-inspired fantasy: “Ayer soñé que veía a Dios y que a Dios hablaba; y soñé que Dios me oía. . . .Después soñé soñaba,” which I translate as “Yesterday I dreamt I saw God and spoke to God. And I dreamt God heard me. . . . Then I dreamt I was dreaming.” The song divides texturally and formally into a three-part, a–b–a design, with four-voiced homophonic passages flanking a brief canonic episode. (In this respect “Ayer soñé” resembles a negative image of a stereotypical first-phase composition, in which brief homophonic passages offer a respite from polyphonic frameworks.) Several different procedures appear in this short song: unaccompanied (monophonic) linear row presentations, an abundance of 43 cross partitions, and a three-voice stretto. The first section (mm. 43–52) presents three cross partitions, which I designate P-0, R-6, and P-t, plus two vocal rows, labeled P-e and I-6. The middle section incorporates a stretto that pushes the tessitura upwards to “ñé que Dios” (m. 54), at which point 43 cross partitions return. Measures 56–57 constitute a kind of structural frame: they retrace the voice’s initial row and re-present the initial cross partition at its original pitch level, framing the song melodically and harmonically.25 Example 1.7 examines the cross partitions more closely. Example 1.7(a) gives a pitch realization of the row along with its order numbers from 0 to e.26 Dallapiccola manipulates the elements of this row into a 43 cross partition in a way that is unusual for him: the contiguous notes of the row appear horizontally instead of vertically.27 Further, the last two chords exchange the notes in the “soprano” and “alto” lines; this is shown in (b). As a result, the vertical sonorities belong to set classes 4–27[0258], 4–25[0268], and 4–16[0157]. (These resemble half-diminished 7th, French augmented-6th, and “Viennese fourth” chords.) The tetrachordal harmonies are obtained by applying the order number partition {0, 3, 6, 9}, {1, 4, 7, t}, {2, 5, 8, e} to the row, so that every row fields a unique collection of pitch-class sets. For these reasons, I identify these 43 configurations by their source rows.

Alegant.indd Sec2:24

4/5/2010 10:18:04 PM

Example 1.6. Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, ii

Alegant.indd Sec2:25

4/5/2010 10:18:04 PM

Example 1.6. Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, ii—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:26

4/5/2010 10:18:06 PM

on the twelve-tone road (1942–1950) 27

Example 1.7. Summary of cross partitions in Machado, ii

Example 1.7(c) summarizes the cross partitions in the song. All of the tetrachords in the “chorales” of cross partitions are realized with wide spacing; this, coupled with soft dynamics and a very slow tempo, creates an atmosphere that is intimate and delicate, tentative and weightless. Other features emerge from the chorale when one plays through the example. First, the P-0 configuration in measures 43–44 is an exact T2 transposition of P-t in measures 51–52. Second, the chorale contains two different recollections of cross partitions: measure 57 restates the opening design at pitch, and measures 58–59 retrograde the sonorities of the design in measure 54.28 Further inspection reveals other subtle variations in the melodic strands that sit atop the tetrachords, too.

Alegant.indd Sec2:27

4/5/2010 10:18:08 PM

28

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

A few other details are worth noting. The opening vocal row, P-e, rises steadily from B3 to G5; it is one of a handful of rows that are realized in a single melodic sweep. In a similar fashion, R-3 traverses C♭6 to D♯4 beginning with the downbeat of measure 54; P-e travels from B3 to G5 in measures 59–60; and I-6 plummets twice from G♭5 to B♭3, the lowest note. The doublings between the voice and the accompaniment are striking, in particular the moments of intersection between the voice’s D♭5 and B♭5 on “ha-bla-ba” and the timidamente chord in measure 53. One last detail is the final pppp B♭3 in the accompaniment, which merges with the voice and gives the impression that the final “o” extends indefinitely.29 Overall, save for Due studi and the second of the Tre poemi, the first-phase works tend to be aphoristic, intricately woven, and hyper-expressive. Formally, they are rather transparent, with periodic repetitions, thin textures, clearly articulated row presentations that are frequently realized with canonic devices, and few transitions, save for held pitches that link one movement to the next.30 Even Il prigioniero, the most extensive work of the period, is for all intents and purposes a number opera, with self-contained scenes and block-like repetitions of entire sections. There is of course much more to say about the compositions of this phase, both individually and collectively. Let it suffice to say that this phase remains extremely fertile ground for theorists and analysts alike.

Alegant.indd Sec2:28

4/5/2010 10:18:10 PM

Chapter Two

Aphorism and the Appropriation of Webernian Techniques (1950–1955) This chapter reviews and documents the appropriation of Webernian and Schoenbergian procedures in Dallapiccola’s second serial phase. I asserted in the previous chapter that this phase is demarcated by the second and third tonal translations, Tartiniana (1951) and Tartiana seconda (1956). Its works include the Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, for piano, and its orchestral arrangement, the Variations for Orchestra; Canti di liberazione, for chorus and orchestra; Goethe-Lieder, for mezzo-soprano and clarinet trio; Piccola musica notturna, for orchestra; and An Mathilde, a cantata for soprano and orchestra.1 With the exception of An Mathilde, these works are well known to scholars and performers alike: recordings are plentiful, and individual movements from the Quaderno and Goethe-Lieder are popular choices for analysis textbooks and anthologies.2 Speaking broadly, the second-phase compositions are highly expressive, accessible, transparent, and formally concise. Perhaps their signal attribute is an increased sense of rigor and control.3 The literature contains many close readings and technical accounts of individual movements (though few deal with entire works), and the influence of Webern’s twelve-tone practice is widely (if not universally) acknowledged. This chapter does not attempt to revisit these analyses; rather, it documents the acquisition and formation of techniques in this period. Without question the end of the Second World War played a key role in the technical developments of this phase. Composers were again able to travel freely, attend concerts, and obtain scores.4 After the war Dallapiccola spent a great deal of time studying Schoenberg’s and Webern’s works. His study was fueled by an inscribed copy of René Leibowitz’s recently published Schoenberg et son école. Leibowitz’s book contains many technical descriptions of the procedures, forms, and aesthetics championed by Schoenberg, Webern, and Berg. We can be certain that Dallapiccola read the book quite closely: his copy, which is housed in the archives in Florence, contains a number of corrections and detailed comments in the margins. I would surmise that these annotations were made in preparation for a book review he published in 1947.5

Alegant.indd Sec2:29

4/5/2010 10:18:10 PM

30

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

It is not hard to imagine that Leibowitz’s writings would resonate strongly with Dallapiccola, who was by nature drawn to intricate frameworks and polyphony. For instance (the following statements are drawn from the chapter entitled “The Definite Organization of the New World of Sound”): “Polyphony is the most economical of all possible principles of unification,” “The twelve-tone technique constitutes a synthesis of all preceding techniques,” and especially: With the creation of the twelve-tone technique, the art of music enters a new phase—not (as one might suppose) because the works composed in the new system are radically different from the works which led to the discovery of this system, but because the discovery itself marks the precise moment when (as with Bach and Rameau in the tonal system) the intuitive acquisitions of a particular polyphonic period are organized, by a consciousness which comprehends them clearly, into a complete synthesis of the premises which made them possible, and become the basis for future acquisitions. (104)

Dallapiccola would also have benefited from Leibowitz’s analyses (all the more so since Leibowitz was also a composer). Leibowitz cogently summarizes the primary innovations in Webern’s mature efforts: the double-inverted canons and palindromes in the Symphony, Op. 21; the four-row contrapuntal designs in Das Augenlicht, Op. 26; derivation and the extraction of “BACH” motifs in the String Quartet, Op. 28; and axial symmetry in the famous second movement of the Variations for Piano, Op. 27. In addition, he illustrates Schoenberg’s handling of inversion, canon, and hexachordal inversional combinatoriality, and documents the partitioning schemes in the Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31, Klavierstücke Op. 33a and b, Violin Concerto, Op. 36, Fourth Quartet, Op. 37, and String Trio, Op. 45. The point I want to stress is that Dallapiccola introduces each of these procedures into his second-phase compositions. The works of phase 2 continue the Webernian practices of the previous period. Polyphony remains the primary texture, but the contrapuntal realizations exhibit greater rhythmic and textural variety. Many of the canons are realized as two- and four-voiced designs that are anchored by axial symmetry. At times, the polyphonic fabric gives way to homophonic episodes and interludes, many of which feature cross partitions. Hexachordal (62) cross partitions often function as punctuation markers that announce the ends of sections, stanzas, or movements. With respect to row realization, Dallapiccola now uses one (unique) row for each composition. He uses pedal points less frequently and avoids octave doublings. He also makes it a point to avoid false relations, as suggested by this view on Herbert Eimert’s Lehrbuch der Zwölftontechnik: I am not a theorist, only a composer. But, concerning theorists, perhaps I will be allowed to wonder at the fact that Dr. Eimert, in the musical examples in his little book, seems to have neglected completely that which—at least for

Alegant.indd Sec2:30

4/5/2010 10:18:10 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 31 me—is one of the fundamental achievements of dodecaphonic music: that is, the elimination of octaves and octave false relations.6

Indeed, the abolition of pedal points and octave doublings dramatically changes the approach to orchestration, registration, and texture. While the first-phase works use octave doublings and pedal points to establish structurally retained pitches, the second-phase works rely heavily on the principle of axial symmetry. Many inversional designs are governed by even index numbers, with lines gravitating around a single pitch or pitch class.7 Selected passages from the Quaderno musicale di Annalibera and Goethe-Lieder serve to illustrate the style of phase 2. These works clearly exhibit Webernian and Schoenbergian tendencies, some carried over from phase 1 and others newly added. As a preview, the primary Webernian characteristics are axial symmetry, palindromes, derivation, and aphoristic forms. The primary Schoenbergian procedures are inversional combinatoriality with odd index numbers, and irregular partitioning schemes that exploit nonsegmental relationships. In addition, these works showcase an idea that soon becomes one of Dallapiccola’s hallmarks: floating rhythm.

Quaderno musicale di Annalibera Milton Babbitt was the first to address the structural similarities between the second movement of Webern’s Variations for Piano, Op. 27 and the “Contrapunctus secundus” from Dallapiccola’s Quaderno.8 Many subsequent authors have examined these movements in detail from a variety of angles. In brief, each of these aphoristic movements incorporates a total of eight rows, and combines the pairs of rows into inverted canons at the distance of an eighth note. The canons are governed by axial symmetry with an even index number, which ensures that the inverted lines have the potential to orbit around a focal pitch—an axis or center of gravity. Moreover, each composer takes pains to articulate and highlight these focal pitches. Example 2.1 reproduces the central movement of Webern’s Op. 27, with a few annotations that indicate the row forms and symmetry about the axis A4. Babbitt also formalized the properties of pitch-class inversion.9 In simple terms, an index number is the sum (mod 12) of pitch classes that are inversionally related. Even index numbers partition the total chromatic into five pairs of pitch classes that map into each other, and two singletons that each map into themselves. To illustrate, the index number 6 induces these pitch-class mappings: 0⇔6, 1⇔5, 2⇔4, 3⇔3, 7⇔e, 8⇔t, 9⇔9. Either singleton pitch class may (but need not) serve as a pitch axis. Odd index numbers partition the aggregate into six pairs of pitch classes; there are no single pitch- or pitch-class axes. For example, the index number 1 induces these mappings: 0⇔1; 2⇔e; 3⇔t; 4⇔9; 5⇔8; 6⇔7.

Alegant.indd Sec2:31

4/5/2010 10:18:10 PM

Example 2.1. Webern, Op. 27, ii

Alegant.indd Sec2:32

4/5/2010 10:18:11 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 33 The second movement of Webern’s Op. 27 is governed by the index number 6. The pitch-class axes are 3 (E♭) and 9 (A); the pitch axis is A4. The index number for the first half of “Contrapunctus Secundus” is 0, and the pitch axis is C5, which sounds several times in succession across the first bar line. (See example 2.2.) The second half shifts to an index number of 6 (the same index number as the Webern), and the pitch axis shifts to E♭4 (instead of Webern’s A4). In all, the second half is a transposition of the first half down a major sixth (T-9); moreover, the dux and comes functions of the voices are swapped, so that the left hand initiates the first half whereas the right hand leads off the second half. In summary, the linear organization, axial symmetry, and relatively sparse texture of the “Contrapunctus” are unquestionably Webernian in spirit. But Dallapiccola’s miniature is more than a gloss or pale imitation. Its soundscape is distinct, with gentle rhythms and mercurial gestures, softer dynamics, and, above all, a “tonal” surface that takes full advantage of the row’s triads and seventh chords. The sense of whimsy, introversion, and nostalgia is reinforced by allusions to half- and authentic cadences that conclude each half. Indeed, even the 3–5[016] trichords in measures 4 and 8 in the “Contrapunctus” are less biting than the [016] sonorities in measures 3–4, 8–9, 15, and 19–20 of the Variations. Note also the abundance of articulation markings that appear to be conceived orchestrally rather than pianistically. There are a few subtle procedural differences between these movements, too. The first concerns the use of elision, which occurs when a note functions as the last element of one row and the first element of the next. (Elision can occur with two or more notes, as in Webern’s Symphony.) Webern’s setting frequently uses elision whereas Dallapiccola’s does not. A second detail concerns the types of rows that are used. Webern employs only R and RI row forms in this movement, while Dallapiccola favors a “democratic” arrangement: each half of the “Contrapunctus” contains one P, I, R, and RI form. As a result, each of the row’s intervallic profiles is highlighted on the surface. Other movements of the Quaderno similarly house quartets of P, I, R, RI rows, including the final “Quartina.” Indeed, the use of quartets—and the notion of treating all four forms as a syntactical unit—permeates the works of this phase. The first movement of the Quaderno, “Simbolo,” uses a twelve-tone procedure that is ostensibly Schoenbergian.10 Examples 2.3(a) and (b) show the beginning and ending phrases that frame the movement. Many authors have pointed out that “Simbolo” opens with a BACH motif that is extracted from the initial row, P-t. The first two notes of the row appear as oscillating dyads in the lowest sounding register, suggesting a metronome or ticking clock.11 Above, in an irregular formation of a cross partition—”irregular” because it is not one of the four even (rectangular) arrangements—the uppermost voice projects , a transformation of Bach’s signature, . As David Lewin has observed, virtually every measure of “Simbolo” is part of a dense web of BACH motifs, nearly two dozen in all. Example 2.3(c) details the pitch realization of

Alegant.indd Sec2:33

4/5/2010 10:18:13 PM

34

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 2.2. Quaderno, v (“Contrapunctus Secundus”) P-t along with its order numbers. The point is that the BACH kernel is formed by nonsegmental elements of the row. An intriguing aspect of “Simbolo” is the way in which these motives are seamlessly intertwined with other chromatic tetrachords that are contained within the inner voices. To illustrate, example 2.3(d) shows the overlapping strands of chromatic tetrachords (i.e., 4–1[0123]) in the initial aggregate. This degree of motivic and harmonic saturation is

Alegant.indd Sec2:34

4/5/2010 10:18:13 PM

Example 2.3. “Simbolo” and BACH extractions

Alegant.indd Sec2:35

4/5/2010 10:18:16 PM

36

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 2.4. Schoenberg’s Variations and BACH

typical of the aphoristic movements of the Quaderno specifically and of the phase in general.12 Two years after its completion, Dallapiccola arranged the Quaderno for orchestra. The updated version, titled Variazioni, maintains the pitch and rhythmic structure of the original.13 Given its title and its BACH motive, it seems reasonable to suggest that “Simbolo” was modeled on—or at least inspired by— Schoenberg’s Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31. Schoenberg’s Variations is a monumental achievement that contains a bewilderment of sophisticated partitioning schemes, motivic extractions, and orchestrational nuances. Moreover, its introduction and extensive Finale conspicuously invoke BACH motives.14 Example

Alegant.indd Sec2:36

4/5/2010 10:18:18 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 37

Example 2.4. Schoenberg’s Variations and BACH—(concluded) 2.4(a) shows the home rows of the Variations, which include the hexachordally combinatorial rows P-t and I-7. Example 2.4(b) gives a reduction of the initial BACH appearance, which arrives in measures 24–25. The hexachordal structuring on the surface is clear, as the discrete hexachords are differentiated timbrally and registrally: the first hexachords (h1) of P-t and RI-e are divided among the cello, English horn, and trombone, while the h2 hexachords are assigned to the flute. Perhaps the first observation to make concerns the saturation of ic-1 dyads: each two-note grouping appears as a semitone in pitch space. The P-t and RI-e rows share several dyads, which are maintained by the cello, English horn, and flute.15 Note that the extraction of a BACH cell requires some legerdemain on Schoenberg’s part, since it is not a segment of the row: he combines the first and last notes of the h1 hexachord of P-t with the first and last notes of the h2

Alegant.indd Sec2:37

4/5/2010 10:18:19 PM

38

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

hexachord of RI-e. Example 2.4(c) gives a reduction of the onset of the Finale, which is nearly as long as (and more complex than) the theme and its variations combined. Here, hundreds of measures later, Schoenberg recapitulates the row quartet that appeared in measures 24–26 (P-t, I-e, and their retrogrades), and presents the BACH motive at its proper pitch-class level. Thus, the first flutes and violins project while the remaining flutes and violins project a T6 variant, . The remaining notes of the row are presented by the cello, clarinet, and bass. Soon, the BACH motive is subjected to imitation, retrograde, inversion, and retrograde inversion. At the same time the dynamics increase and the texture thickens in a frenzy of activity. Dallapiccola’s invocation of BACH in the initial measures of the Quaderno says a great deal about the changes in his praxis (regardless of whether one acknowledges a connection between “Simbolo” and Schoenberg’s Variations). The way he derives the BACH motives suggests a shift in attitude from composing mainly with rows (a Webernian attitude) to composing with rows and aggregates (a more Schoenbergian mind-set).16 More importantly, the works of the second phase tend to contrast polyphonic writing that emphasizes the linear aspects of rows with homophonic writing that exploits their nonsegmental relationships.

Floating Rhythm and the Goethe-Lieder Dallapiccola’s rhythmic practice also evolves dramatically during phase 2. Numerous authors have commented on the “schwebender Rhythmus” (“free-floating rhythm”), which the composer claims to have realized fully in the Goethe-Lieder. The sense of floating is achieved through various means, including irregular canons (in which the rhythmic values are not consistent), shifting and simultaneous meters (where two or more instruments play in different meters), and a steadfast avoidance of downbeat attacks due to frequent rests on downbeats, syncopation, and ties over the bar line. The following quotation from “Fragments from Conversation” is apposite: I aim at a rhythm for which the beautiful term “schwebende Rhythmus” (floating rhythm) exists. In the music of our century the concept of “schwebend” appears frequently. . . .I am trying to overcome those four-bar phrases which after two centuries were almost basic to musical logic but eventually became troublesome. My rhythmic as well as metrical experimentation is rather noticeable after the Goethe-Lieder. And in every work I attempt to find something new with regard to metrical ideas since this is an area in which I am extraordinarily interested.17

Two movements from the Goethe-Lieder illustrate the idea of floating rhythm and other notable features of the phase.18 The seven songs of the Goethe-Lieder

Alegant.indd Sec2:38

4/5/2010 10:18:21 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 39 are based on aphoristic poems; they range from 30 seconds to two minutes in length. The songs are delicately scored, with sparse and transparent textures that incorporate few rows at a time. These songs are primarily linear in terms of their row presentations; the lines, however, are angular and disjunct. And they exhibit a high degree of rigor and concentrated expression—a “less is more” aesthetic taken to an extreme. Dallapiccola relies heavily on axial symmetry and canon, with a host of strict, inverted, proportional, and irregular realizations. In addition, symmetry also governs the overall shape: the entire cycle is organized in an arch, with the voice accompanied by a palindromic arrangement of clarinets: 3–1–2–3–2–1–3. Example 2.5 gives the second song, “Die Sonne kommt.” Thomas DeLio calls it “a striking example of the composer’s ability to fashion meticulously a complex network of relationships through the simplest of means. As the composition unfolds relations proliferate, embedding within an ostensibly simple canonic framework an intricate multileveled structure.”19 Its salient characteristics include a pervasive trichordal structuring, a one-to-one correspondence between row presentations and phrase structure (due in large part to the placement of fermatas), and carefully wrought palindromes. (As an aside, the vocal line of this piece debunks the oft-repeated misconception that a twelve-tone composer cannot repeat a note until every pitch class has been articulated. The practice of repeating notes and retracing steps in a row occurs throughout Dallapiccola’s career—especially in vocal settings, where the demands of text setting frequently override the ordered presentation of a row.) The entire vocal line is a mirror; in the second half, the clarinet restates the pitches and rhythms of the vocal line’s first half.20 As a result, there are two midpoints, one occurring between the highest vocal pitches, the B5 on “sie” and “Wer” (m. 9), and the other at measure 13, where the voice and clarinet reverse roles. Indeed, one can imagine that this is where the sun encircles (umklammert) the moon: Die Sonne kommt Ein Prachterscheinen Der Sichelmond umklammert sie. Wer könnte solch ein Paar vereinen? Dies Rätsel, wie erklärt sich’s? Wie?

The sun rises A wonder appears The crescent-shaped moon encircles it Who could imagine such a pair? How can this riddle be explained? How?

Example 2.6(a) diagrams the quartet of rows in the movement: P8, I-9, and their retrogrades, R-8 and RI-9. Again, the song contains a complete quartet of rows, each of which is partitioned into nonoverlapping (disjunct) trichords; thus the surface is inundated with set classes 3–1[012], 3–4[015], and 3–5[016]. The trichords of P-8 and I-9 share several common pitch classes, many of which are realized as invariant, or “frozen,” pitches. Example 2.6(b) details the commonalities among these trichords. On occasion the semitones of these trichords are realized as pitch

Alegant.indd Sec2:39

4/5/2010 10:18:21 PM

Example 2.5. Goethe-Lieder, ii, “Die Sonne kommt”

Alegant.indd Sec2:40

4/5/2010 10:18:21 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 41

Example 2.6. Row distribution in “Die Sonne kommt” echoes—such as the F5–E5 dyads in measure 10, E♭5–D5 dyads in measures 14– 15, and, in a reversal of the first echo, the E5–F5 dyad in measure 15. The fifth song, shown in example 2.7, is based on the following text: Der Spiegel sagt mir: ich bin schön. Ihr sagt: zu altern sei auch mein Geschick. Vor Gott muss alles ewig stehn In mir liebt ihn für diesen Augenblick.

The mirror tells me: I am beautiful. You tell me: to grow older is also my fate. Everything must stand eternally before God Love Him in me for this moment.

By now, the surface characteristics should be familiar: thin textures; soft dynamics; a consistent use of canon; changing meters; floating rhythms, which are enhanced by quintuplets, sextuplets, and nested triplets; and ties over the bar line that soften the downbeats. Formally, the rows are in an design. The initial pair of rows carries the first line of text, “Der Spiegel sagt mir: ich bin schön.” They feature an irregular canon between P-e in the voice and I-7 in the clarinet. The pitch

Alegant.indd Sec2:41

4/5/2010 10:18:23 PM

Example 2.7. Goethe-Lieder, v, “Der Spiegel sagt mir”

Alegant.indd Sec2:42

4/5/2010 10:18:23 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 43

Example 2.7. Goethe-Lieder, v, “Der Spiegel sagt mir”—(concluded)

realization is governed by an index number of 6, and the pitch axis is A4. The floating rhythm makes it difficult to perceive a steady pulse or the arrivals of downbeats. One contributing factor is syncopation, especially the pervasive sense of fouragainst-three and three-against-two attacks. The melisma on “schön,” whose giddiness is entirely appropriate for a marking of “estatico,” is charming. The next pair of rows are also presented in an irregular canon, now between I-0 in the voice and P-6 in the clarinet. These rows are also related by the index number of 6, but the axis of inversion shifts from A4 to E♭5. A sense of regular pulse is briefly suggested by the downbeat arrivals on “al-tern” and “auch” and “Ge-schick.” Intersections between the voice and clarinet include the doubled E4 in measure 4 (note the voice’s hairpin and tenuto), and the sudden accent on A♭5 on “mein Geschick.”

Alegant.indd Sec2:43

4/5/2010 10:18:26 PM

44

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

The voice’s A♭5 is immediately answered by the bass clarinet, which articulates the P-8 row in a transposed augmentation of the first vocal row, P-e. (The bass clarinet preserves the contour of the initial hexachord of this song, which also recalls the contour of the first hexachord in “Die Sonne kommt.”) The third line of text, “Vor Gott muss alles ewig stehn,” brings to light another technique that exerts a strong influence from this point forward: derivation, or the technique of generating an aggregate from a single set class. The setting presents one aggregate consisting solely of 3–5[016] trichords and a second aggregate consisting of 3–1[012] cells. The trichords in the voice and the clarinet are inversionally related, and are governed by odd index numbers (which allow for the possibility of aggregate completion). The technique of derivation blossoms in the Goethe-Lieder—so much so that it dominates the sixth song. (The vocal line in that song is based exclusively on 3–1[012] trichords that are positioned above linear rows in the bass clarinet.) The fourth line of text (mm. 14–15) recalls the initial voice and clarinet rows (P-e and I-7), largely at the same pitch levels. The pp! on A♭5 on “ihn” is a wonderful example of a “negative climax,” an event that becomes increasingly frequent in the later works. The ending is also intriguing from the standpoint of “twelve counting.” The clarinet row should end with an A♮ and the bass clarinet row should end with E♭ and A. Rather than repeating notes, however, Dallapiccola combines forces: the sustained A4 in the voice serves triple duty, and the final E♭ in the clarinet serves double duty. Dallapiccola in all likelihood encountered the technique of derivation in Webern’s Concerto for Nine Instruments, Op. 24.21 As is well known, the Concerto is based on a derived row whose disjunct trichords belong to set class 3–3[014]. Moreover, the trichords are related to each other by the basic operations of transposition, inversion, retrograde, and retrograde-inversion. Example 2.8(a) shows that these trichords are realized in different timbres and different durations, and that they combine to form complementary pairs of inversionally related hexachords. It is easy to see (and hear) that the flute/trumpet and clarinet/oboe trichords are inversions of each other in pitch space. The trichords in the derived aggregates in the Goethe-Lieder, shown in example 2.8(b), are also assigned different durations, and are also disposed symmetrically in pitch space.22 Dallapiccola’s handling of derived aggregates differs from Webern’s. Webern’s derived aggregates invariably preserve the order of a row’s individual trichords, both individually and collectively. As a result, there is a one-to-one correspondence between a derived aggregate and a given row. In Dallapiccola’s practice, however, the trichords are usually unordered, individually and collectively; consequently, it is difficult to associate definitively a derived aggregate with a specific row.23 To put this another way, for Dallapiccola a derived aggregate is not so much about presenting a row in an ultra-concentrated fashion, but about saturating an aggregate with one trichordal set class. As a rule, this trichord is a discrete segment of the source row.

Alegant.indd Sec2:44

4/5/2010 10:18:27 PM

aphorism and webernian techniques 45

Example 2.8. Derived aggregates In summary, the compositions of the second phase continue many characteristics of the first phase, introduce several Webernian and Schoenbergian techniques, and combine these with floating rhythm and a heightened sense of rigor and concentration. The new Webernian techniques include axial symmetry, derivation, and palindromes (on the small and large scales); new Schoenbergian techniques include irregular partitioning schemes (which exploit nonsegmental elements, like the BACH motive), and a greater tendency to compose with aggregates (as opposed to or in addition to rows). This shift toward a freer approach to twelve-tone composition is crucial, as it affords a richer palette of harmonic and melodic possibilities and a wider range of textures and aggregate configurations. Other significant distinctions

Alegant.indd Sec2:45

4/5/2010 10:18:27 PM

46

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

between the soundscapes of this phase and the previous one are the avoidance of octave doubling, which dramatically alters the surfaces of the newer works, and a greater reliance on axial symmetry. I would go so far as to say that axial symmetry and the establishment of pitch axes (as seen in the “Contrapunctus secundus”) render obsolete the sustained pedal points and referential triads and seventh chords of the previous phase. It is tempting to think of the individual movements of the Quaderno and Goethe-Lieder as miniatures, self-contained explorations of new techniques and twelve-tone formations. And their heightened expression and condensed forms evoke the soundscapes of the early atonal efforts of the Second Viennese School. In this light, Dallapiccola’s second-phase compositions have much in common with the rarefied atmospheres of Berg’s Opp. 2, 4, and 5; Schoenberg’s Opp. 11, 15, 19, and 21; and Webern’s Opp. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 16. Many of these atonal explorations are “one-page conceptions,” too.

Alegant.indd Sec2:46

4/5/2010 10:18:29 PM

Chapter Three

The Apex of the Schoenbergian and Webernian Influence (1956–1960) The compositions of phase 3 could hardly contrast more with those of the previous period. As a whole, these works are not well known, though they arguably represent the most fertile period in Dallapiccola’s development.1 In general, they are more complex formally, more intricate rhythmically, and more expansive in size and scope. They are also more rigorous, more dramatic in terms of expression, and more variegated in their configurations and textures. Most important, they demonstrate a complete absorption of Webernian techniques, an increased reliance on Schoenbergian techniques, and several rhythmic and timbral innovations that have no precedents in the Second Viennese School. In terms of specific techniques, the twelve-tone writing becomes even more flexible and the handling of rhythm more sophisticated and assured. The metric framework makes more use of floating rhythms, with few downbeat attacks, many ties over the bar line, numerous syncopations and cross accents, rapidly changing meters, and a multitude of triplets, quintuplets, and rapid flurries of notes. Individual movements often shift back and forth—with little or no transition—between Webernian and Schoenbergian soundscapes: passages based on two- and four-voiced polyphonic designs alternate with passages based on homophonic blocks of hexachords or cross partitions of various sizes; and sparse textures with well-defined pitch content are punctuated with thick textures with diffused pitch content.2 Such stark juxtapositions and extreme shifts in texture and dynamics are often jarring. But they help text painting, as they allow Dallapiccola to transition effortlessly among different partitioning schemes, or “topics,” on a line-by-line or even a word-by-word basis.3 The works of phase 3 still use Webernian techniques, especially symmetry, which occurs in a wide variety of contexts.4 Palindromes structure individual rows, pairs of rows, phrases, sections, and even entire movements; axial inversion in pitch- and pitch-class space occurs with both even and odd index numbers. One property shared by many of the source rows is that of RI-symmetry. To illustrate, example 3.1 compares the row of Webern’s Cantata No. 1 (Op. 29) with the series of Cinque canti, Requiescant, and Dialoghi.

Alegant.indd Sec2:47

4/5/2010 10:18:29 PM

48

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 3.1. RI-invariant rows Pitch realizations of the rows are provided in levels (a) through (d). Each row is RI-invariant, meaning that it can be transformed into itself under some RI operation. (This symmetrical property is reflected by the ordered pitch intervals, which read the same forward and backward.) Thus, with the row of the Cantata, shown in (a), P-0 is equivalent to RI-5.5 Incidentally, the row of the Concerto is the only row in phase 3 that is not RI-symmetrical. However, it is semicombinatorial: it divides into “whole-tone minus one” hexachords, which is to say that each hexachord contains five notes of one whole-tone collection and one note of the other. The prevailing whole-tone flavor of the Concerto’s hexachords is shared by the rows of Dialoghi and Schoenberg’s Wind Quintet (Op. 26), Klavierstück Op. 33b, Prelude (Op. 44) and Phantasy for Violin and Piano. While such correspondences among rows might seem trivial, I would argue that the intervallic and set-class structure of a row is crucial, and that these characteristics suggest a host of potential strategies and developments.6 Four-voice designs are regular features in the works of phase 3. And here, too, the likely models are Webern’s larger-scale efforts, namely the Symphony, Das Augenlicht, and the Cantatas. Leibowitz’s book (Schönberg et son école) offers detailed accounts of many of Webern’s four-voice designs. For instance, the opening of Das Augenlicht is described as follows: Let us also note that this passage is of the greatest interest from the point of view of the tone-row technique. In fact, the double canon of this example uses

Alegant.indd Sec2:48

4/5/2010 10:18:29 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 49 a different form of the twelve-tone row in each voice. Thus, the four possibilities of the row are superimposed, used simultaneously. If we consider the soprano part as the original form of the row, the tenors present the retrograde form, in which case the statement of the orchestral canon (motives I, II, III, IV) uses RI, while the answer of the canon (motives I,’ II,’ III,’ IV’) uses I. It is evident that this complex passage confronts us with new and subtle possibilities of variation in musical speech.7

This description might well have served as a catalyst for Dallapiccola, who soon embarked upon a period of vigorous experimentation with such “complex passages.” It might also have rekindled the memory of hearing the work at an ICMC concert in 1938 in London. That experience was certainly a formative one for Dallapiccola, as this paragraph suggests: What struck me forcibly in Das Augenlicht, at a first and—alas—single hearing, was the quality of the sound. . . .Webern shows us how, even when one is not working in a strictly contrapuntal way, two notes on a celesta, a light touch on glockenspiel, a scarcely audible mandolin tremolo, are able to encompass distances which at first sight seem to be divided by unfathomable spaces. Sound, color, articulation, instrumental distribution, it is all invention: just as important therefore as the overall construction. Das Augenlicht, when one hears it, shows itself full of poetic harmoniousness: voices and instruments, often at the greatest distances from each other, counterpoise each other’s levels of sound. The score seems to be enriched by those mysterious vibrations that suggest a performance under a glass bell. The musical construction has its own internal rhythm, which has nothing in common with a mechanical rhythm. The refined writing would merit a discussion by itself; looking, for example, at how Webern avoids at all costs that brusque recall to reality represented by the strong beats, and which, in this case, would break the dream atmosphere that permeates the whole of this most poetic composition.8

I would venture that the experience of hearing Das Augenlicht made a lasting impression on Dallapiccola and that he sought to re-create its soundscape at various points throughout his career. Phrases that strike me in his description are “scarcely audible,” “glass bell,” and “reality represented by strong beats.” It is easy to imagine that these characteristics influenced the use of soft dynamics, pitched percussion, and, especially, floating rhythm. Dallapiccola continues to use two Schoenbergian techniques that appear in the first two phases: cross partitions and hexachordal structuring. But phase 3 brings new textural features: sound masses (“tall,” complex sonorities, often with undefined or obscured pitch content), Klangfarbenmelodie, an emphasis on percussion, and extremely soft dynamics. To elaborate on this last point, ppp and pppp dynamics appear only infrequently in the first two phases.9 The following quotation from “Fragments” summarizes Dallapiccola’s thoughts on extreme dynamics:

Alegant.indd Sec2:49

4/5/2010 10:18:30 PM

50

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972 Pianissimo appears to me a much finer gradation than fortissimo. I cannot grasp the difference between fff and ffff (depending, that is, on a thousand extramusical factors such as acoustical conditions, etc.) but I can hear their equivalents in piano. In short, piano for me is capable of more nuance (302).

Soft dynamics create soundscapes that are introspective, fragile, and recessive. They are used to great effect in the Concerto per la notte di Natale dell’anno 1956, a five-movement work for orchestra and soprano solo lasting approximately 15 minutes. The first and fifth movements, “Prologo” and “Epilogo,” are for orchestra alone. They are closely related in terms of their pitch and rhythmic structure, gestural vocabulary, and affect. Both movements are set to pp or ppp dynamics throughout, with only one passage marked p; additionally, the strings and brass are often muted. In contrast, the central movements alternate pp and ppp passages with vehement outbursts of f, sf, ff, sff, and even sfff. The extreme contrasts are as spell-binding as they are disorienting. The use of pp, ppp, and pppp dynamics not only expands the expressive range of these compositions; it also undermines the role of pitch. Soft dynamics mask the pitch content of thick sonorities that might be characterized as atmospheric or granitic10 These sonorities often contain all twelve pitches, with no octave doublings, and they are often spaced in interesting ways, as in example 3.2(a). This chord is symmetrical in pitch space about the axis F4/G♭4, and is constructed solely of alternating pitch intervals 6 and 5. As a result, it can be split into two members of set class 6–7[012678], three instances of 4–9[0167], four of 3–5[016], and six tritones (or [06] dyads). Example 3.2(b) shows a sonority that appears in the third movement of Requiescant. Dallapiccola uses a 3–1[012] trichord to generate a derived aggregate registrally and temporally. When the four trichords are combined into a single sonority, shown on the right-hand side of (b), the resultant chord also features six stacked tritones. However, it exhibits a different configuration of pitch intervals, , whether one reads top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top. Additionally, each trichord within the initial sonority is rearticulated four times in the measure with a fixed duration: the “soprano” trichords last 9 sixteenths; the alto, 7; the tenor, 3; and the bass, 7. Example 3.2(c) shows the conclusion of the third movement of the Concerto.11 This passage is based entirely on hexachordal cross partitions (62), but the dynamics and rhythms conspire to blur the pitches. The gesture features a written-out accelerando that is governed (loosely) by an arithmetical progression of “1,” 2, 3, 4, (4), 5, and 6 attacks per beat; the gradual acceleration of harmonic rhythm is accompanied by a decrescendo and a rise in the pitch domain. Dialoghi ends similarly, as example 3.2(d) attests. (Similar textures permeate Ulisse in the next phase; their undulations are particularly appropriate for the waves of the ocean.) Taken together, these registral spacings and textures suggest that Dallapiccola, like many other composers of the 1950s and 1960s, focused a great deal of attention on timbre (and, thus deemphasized the primary role of pitch).

Alegant.indd Sec2:50

4/5/2010 10:18:30 PM

Example 3.2. Atmospheric sonorities in phase 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:51

4/5/2010 10:18:30 PM

52

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 3.2. Atmospheric sonorities in phase 3—(concluded) The remainder of this chapter examines selected passages from three works of phase 3: Cinque canti, Requiescant, and Dialoghi. Like the previous chapter, it aims to document the assimilation and interpenetration of techniques.

Cinque canti The Cinque canti comprise a five-movement cycle for baritone and four pairs of instruments: flute and alto flute, clarinet and bass clarinet, harp and piano, and viola and cello. The orchestration of the Cinque canti resembles that of Webern’s Symphony (minus the horns) and looks forward to that of Parole di San Paolo (1964). The Cinque canti beautifully juxtapose Schoenbergian and Webernian soundscapes, contrasting hexachordal structuring, homophony, and thick orchestration with two- and four-voiced inverted canons, ordered row presentations, sparse orchestration, and palindromes of all types. Jacques Wildberger asserts that the Cinque canti are a direct descendant of the Goethe-Lieder, insofar as they “carry certain metrical experiments one step further (obtained often by ‘irregular canons’) and offer other timbric solutions.”12 By “irregular” Wildberger means that short notes reply to long ones and vice versa: the rhythms are neither one-to-one nor in exact augmentation or diminution. The row of the Cinque canti is RI-invariant, and its discrete hexachords belong to set class 6–30[013679], an octatonic subset (and the set class of the “Petrushka chord”). As a result, multiple labels exist for each row, since every P-x is identical to RI-(x+9) and, by extension, every I-x is identical to R-(x+3). As well, the 48 rows of the row class divide into six families or regions of rows that share the

Alegant.indd Sec2:52

4/5/2010 10:18:32 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 53

Example 3.3. Cinque canti, i, opening same (unordered) hexachordal content. To illustrate, the eight rows below share the hexachords of P-0. (This procedure resembles that of Schoenberg’s American-period works, although the overwhelming majority of Schoenberg’s rows group into twelve regions of four rows each.) P-0, RI-9 → P-6, RI-3 →



← R-0, I-9 ← R-6, I-3

Example 3.3 annotates the opening of the first song. The initial gesture hammers out two thickly scored hexachords, labeled h1 and h2. (The quotations around the row labels indicate that the aggregate presentation is based on hexachordal blocks, which, owing to the redundancy of the discrete hexachords,

Alegant.indd Sec2:53

4/5/2010 10:18:33 PM

54

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

cannot be attributed to a single row. These labels represent all rows in a given region.) The stridency and intensity of this opening is a far cry from the ethereal lyricism of the Machado cycle or Goethe-Lieder. Hexachordal structuring dominates until the second half of measure 6, at which point linear presentations emerge. The ff C♯4 in measure 6 sets off an irregular inverted canon between P-5 and I-1 (irregular because the rhythms are inexact: quarter notes are answered by half notes, and vice versa). The canon brings a change in twelve-tone handling: the hexachordal pairs of the opening create aggregates with no pitch-class duplication, but the angular lines now feature several invariant pitches, among them B3 and G4. Finally, note the floating rhythm, which is enhanced by triplets, ties over the bar line, syncopations, and metric changes (7/4, 2/2, 5/4, 3/2, 5/4, 7/4, 3/2). In contrast, the voice is relatively grounded, and places the expected accents of Aspet-tia-mo, stel-la, and mat-tuti-na on successive downbeats. Example 3.4 details the layout of vocal rows and accompaniment patterns. The voice presents just three rows, one for each line of text. These are P-6, I1, and R-6 (which is synonymous with I-3, due to the inherent RI-symmetry of the row). P-6 and R-6 are realized as a near-exact pitch palindrome save for the

Example 3.4. Summary of vocal rows in Cinque canti, i

Alegant.indd Sec2:54

4/5/2010 10:18:35 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 55 registral placement of C♯ (which is shifted an octave, presumably to give it more weight) and the omission of the final note of R-6 (G♭ is withheld, and initiates the postlude). Further, since every row is itself RI-symmetrical, the vocal rows construct an intervallic palindrome around the B and F♯ of “viaggia” in measure 10. The accompaniment configurations distinguish this song from its predecessors: the two-voice inverted canons that dominated phase 2 are now juxtaposed with hexachordal sonorities and various four-voiced designs. The orchestral interlude in measures 14–20 is based on an intriguing fourrow design, one of Dallapiccola’s earliest settings of a multirow array (see ex. 3.5). This interlude sets the third line of the text, “primo annunzio del sole” (the first presage of the sun). The design combines four rows of the same type: P-6, P-8, P-9, and P-e.13 Figure 3.1 provides a pitch-class reduction showing the underlying design. In contrast to the opening, with its dense, semitone-laden hexachords, this interlude features interval-class 2 dyads that are realized as minor sevenths and major ninths (10 or 14 semitones apart). Additionally, the dynamics are quiet, the attacks are softened by tenuto markings, and the rhythm and meter are, for the moment, entirely stable. A closer look at the passage reveals a high degree of rhythmic and harmonic uniformity. The dyadic attacks together create a single

Example 3.5. Four-voice interlude in Cinque canti, i, 1420

Alegant.indd Sec2:55

4/5/2010 10:18:36 PM

56

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 3.1. Pitch-class representation of Cinque canti, i, 14–20 Pitch-class representation P-e:

et

47

51

62

03

98

P-9:

98 25

3e

40

t1

76

P-6:

65

e2

08

19

7t

43

P-8:

87

14

2t

3e

90

65

Contour upper: lower:

– +

–

+ +

–

+ –

+

+ –

–

composite rhythm (half note, quarter, quarter, half), repeated six times; these appear below the staff. The dyads combine to form set classes belonging to three tetrachordal species or “genres”: 4–1[0123] is chromatic, 4–10[0235] is diatonic, and 4–21[0246] is whole tone. Taken together, the entire constellation of attack points, pitch classes, and set classes is symmetrical—indeed, rigorously symmetrical—around the rests in measure 17.14 One other important configuration in the Cinque canti needs to be mentioned. Example 3.6 displays a construct that Dallapiccola referred to as an “ideogram.” He explains: It is probably the case that I had chosen a series of this kind because of the need that I felt to draw the Cross on the score in musical notes, and at the same time to be able to show graphically the idea of the arms attached to the Cross by means of two other lines.15

Ideograms of the cross appear five times in the central song, which functions as the dramatic core, or “heart,” of the cycle. (It is worth noting that Dallapiccola insisted that these ideograms be reproduced faithfully in the score.) From a technical standpoint, ideograms suggest a freer approach to row handling: two hexachords from different rows are combined, and the voice’s row is incomplete, as its sixth and seventh notes (F and A♯) are diverted to the ensemble. The resultant configuration exploits the properties of both hexachordal structuring and RI-symmetry, as the back-to-back statements of “Acheronte” fashion a palindrome in terms of duration, meter, and melodic profile. This symmetry is reflected by the ordered pitch intervals in the voice’s pentachords, as the succession is answered by .

Alegant.indd Sec2:56

4/5/2010 10:18:37 PM

Example 3.6. The crucifix ideogram in Cinque canti, iii

Alegant.indd Sec2:57

4/5/2010 10:18:37 PM

58

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Requiescant The Cinque canti represent a significant advance for Dallapiccola in terms of partitioning and text painting. Nevertheless, the cycle is relatively small in scope, and its explorations into partitioning and rhythm proportions are sporadic, even tentative. The same cannot be said for Requiescant, which is considerably more expansive and complex. Requiescant is scored for children’s choir, mixed choir, full complement of winds and strings, and a battery of percussion, including harp, celesta, xylophone, vibraphone, and glockenspiel. At eighteen minutes in duration it is approximately three times as long as the Cinque canti. But its most striking aspect is an uncanny structural resemblance to Webern’s Op. 29 Cantata.16 I would assert that the resemblance is so strong as to make it impossible to refute Webern’s influence on Dallapiccola’s music. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that Requiescant is the apotheosis of Dallapiccola’s assimilation of Webern’s praxis. To appreciate the similarities between these works it will be helpful to review the salient characteristics of Webern’s cantata.17 This work is based on a derived row that is also RI-invariant. (The row appears in ex. 3.1 above.) It is also a derived row, as its disjunct trichords are members of set class 3–3[014]. Webern exploits the property of RI-symmetry by linking together T3-related rows; the resultant design is remarkably uniform in terms of its set-class structure.18 Example 3.7 provides a reduction of the opening of the cantata’s first movement. Each row is placed on a single staff in order to showcase the relationships among the linear statements. The passage is built upon a four-row array that pairs P and I rows. It opens with I-7 and I-2 in the outer voices and P-1 and P-8 in the inner voices, then transposes the inverted transforms by T+3 and the prime transforms by T-3, thereby eliding successive rows. The piece alternates between two soundscapes: homophonic textures of sustained chords at a p dynamic evoke an atmosphere of stasis and serenity, whereas polyphonic textures of angular lines at a f dynamic evoke an atmosphere of Sturm und Drang. Despite the shifting meters, there is still often a sense of beat. Figure 3.2 summarizes the row organization of the movement. The rows are arranged into T3 cycles. The cycles are broken in the outer voices before the first choral entrance in measure 14 (as indicated by //); otherwise, they proceed in a consistent, predetermined manner. The same pitch-class collections recur throughout, saturating the movement with a handful of tetrachordal set classes that function as referential sonorities—rhetorically marked signposts. The three tetrachords in the first measure are members of set classes 4–9[0167], 4–23[0257], and 4–20[0158] respectively. (Each tetrachord by definition is symmetrical, because it is formed by a pair of inversionally related dyads; as a result, these tetrachords are shared by many row forms.) From a sonic and a structural standpoint, the outer movements of Requiescant are remarkably similar to the first movement of Webern’s cantata. Requiescant is

Alegant.indd Sec2:58

4/5/2010 10:18:39 PM

Example 3.7. The opening of Webern’s Cantata No. 1, Op. 29, i

Alegant.indd Sec2:59

4/5/2010 10:18:39 PM

60

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 3.2. Row distribution in Webern’s Op. 29, i mm. 1–13 orchestra P-8 I-2 P-1 I-7

P-5 I-5 P-t I-t

14–22 chorus //

//

P-9 I-8 P-7 I-6

P-6 I-e P-4 I-9

23–35 orch./chorus P-3 I-2 P-1 I-0

P-0 I-5 P-t I-3

36–47 orchestra P-9 I-8 P-7 I-6

P-6 I-e P-4 I-9

also based on an RI-invariant row; moreover, the invariant properties of the row are consistently and conspicuously exploited on the surface. In addition, Dallapiccola uses this row to fashion T3-chains; he makes extensive use of four-voice arrays that yield a small family of referential tetrachords; and he contrasts choral and orchestral entrances, homophonic and polyphonic textures, and static and Sturm-und-Drang atmospheres. (One trivial point, perhaps of interest only to those who are interested in row archeology: the fifth movement of Requiescant opens with the same pitch-class set and the same row labels as the first movement of the Cantata.) The sketches for Requiescant are enlightening. Example 3.8(a) reproduces a sketch of Dallapiccola’s rendering of the source row.19 The property of RI-symmetry is evident from the arcs and interval classes between the notes. Below, in (b), is a diplomatic transcription of another sketch that models the opening of the fifth movement. The design presents four rows, notated I-11, RI-5, R-XII, and O-VI. (Like many composers of his time, Dallapiccola uses “O” for the prime row, Roman numerals for “O” and “R” variants, and integers for I and RI transforms.) X’s highlight the notes of two tetrachords that belong to set class 4–9[0167]: {C♯, D, G, A♭}, and {E, F, B♭, B}. The former is identified by x’s and slurs above the notes; the latter by x’s and slurs below. In addition, brackets highlight the remaining notes, {C, D♯/E♭, F♯, A}, which represent set class 4–28[0369]. This array is even more redundant than Webern’s because the outer rows (I-11 and O-VI) and the inner rows (RI-5 and R-XII) are pitch-class retrogrades of each other. As a result, the vertical sonorities (if presented in a note-against-note arrangement) would yield just two tetrachordal set classes. Example 3.9 (a) provides a reduction of the opening of the fifth movement. A comparison of the realization and the abstract four-row design reveals the integration of the orchestra and chorus, an expanded pitch field, and varied textures. The first two chords, sff and syncopated, are presented in note-againstnote format, and set the words “Ding dong! Ding dong!” in imitation. First-species textures in four-voice arrays frequently break down precisely at the point where pitch-class redundancies, or doublings, arise; these doublings create

Alegant.indd Sec2:60

4/5/2010 10:18:41 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 61

Example 3.8. Sketches for Requiescant conspicuous “holes” in the texture. In this particular design, the next two chords would contain simultaneous attacks on C and F♯. Dallapiccola—like most composers—tends to avoid the doublings, invariably by dissolving the homophony into polyphony.20 Throughout the movement the first two chords (which are marked by x’s in the sketch) always appear as simultaneities (creating a bell-like effect), thus functioning almost as a ritornello. The remainder of the array is

Alegant.indd Sec2:61

4/5/2010 10:18:41 PM

Example 3.9. Opening of Requiescant, v

Alegant.indd Sec2:62

4/5/2010 10:18:43 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 63 realized polyphonically, so as to avoid pitch- or pitch-class doublings. Example 3.9(b) traces the history of the bell chords. Note that the last attack fades from ppp to pppp, to match the phrase “carry my soul away.” Figure 3.3 summarizes the large-scale form of the movement and highlights other similarities between Requiescant and the Cantata. The top line shows the sections, suggesting a five-part rondo. The A sections (which comprise measures 1–23, 38–50, and 68–74) are characterized by four-voice arrays and loud dynamics; the rows in these sections are implicated in a series of T3-chains. Sections B and C are organized differently. The B section is saturated with tetrachordal (43) cross partitions; the C section uses various configurations in an almost kaleidoscopic manner, presenting in rapid-fire succession 43 and 34 cross partitions, a four-row array design adorned with an extra row, and a host of irregular aggregate configurations (labeled “mixed”). Before moving on I would like to comment on two other sketches that Dallapiccola made for Requiescant.21 While exploring the archive materials I was at first both surprised and perplexed to encounter the fragments shown in example 3.10. Figure 3.3. Formal design of Requiescant, v A

// B

1 7 12 18 23 I-7 I-t I-1 I-4 I-7 P-8 P-5 P-2 P-e P-8 I-1 I-4 I-7 I-t I-1 P-2 P-e P-8 P-5 P-2 four-row arrays sff f, ff p, pp Ding dong! The castle bell!

A

34 R-5, P-5, P-8, P-e

43 cross partitions mf > p, pp Bury me in the churchyard Beside my eldest brother

C 51

A

34 configurations (mf)

57 P-9 I-2 P-5 I-1 P-6 arrays mp, pp

… two to sing

… and two to pray

P-4, I-8, I-2

Alegant.indd Sec2:63

38 45 I-7 I-t P-8 P-5 I-1 I-4 P-2 P-e four-row arrays sf, mp mf My coffin shall be black, Six angels at my back…

60 I-0, P-1

63 I-9, I-2

43 and mixed configurations mp, p, pp

68

72

76

79

I-7 I-7 P-2 P-2 I-1 I-1 P-8 P-8 arrays ff

I-4 P-5 I-t P-5

I-1 P-8 I-7 P-2

pp ppp pppp

… and two to carry my soul away

4/5/2010 10:18:45 PM

64

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 3.10. Two sketch fragments for Requiescant

The first fragment presents the opening of Bach’s E-major Partita for solo violin; the second fragment is the opening of the main tune of Ravel’s Bolero. Both fragments are written in red pen, as opposed to the remaining sketches which are in pencil. In each sketch Dallapiccola draws boxes around the beginning and ending melodic segments, and connects the boxes with an arrow. Thus, in a manner of speaking, the Bach excerpt is framed by whereas the Ravel is framed by the adjacency motion . A diplomatic transcription of another sketch, shown in example 3.11, reproduces Dallapiccola’s version of the row chart for Requiescant. At the top of the sketch Dallapiccola rewrites the row’s palindromic arrangement of intervals; these are not shown in the example for purposes of legibility. The chart separates each row’s hexachords, and uses arrows to connect RI-equivalent rows (thus, each “O” row connects with a corresponding “I” row, such as O-I and I-6). Pitches are highlighted in one of three ways: boxes, “nested” boxes, and brackets. Of particular significance are the associations between the first tetrachord of the I-11 row and the last tetrachord of the I-2 row (these are bracketed and marked by boxes around B and C♯): these rows feature prominently in the opening of the fifth movement (in fact, they represent the “tenor” line of the array in ex. 3.9). Note also the nested boxes around the tetrachords of the rows labeled I-4 and I-10, the latter of which is marked by an asterisk.22 These rows appear in a passage in the first movement that is structured entirely by 43 cross partitions. Figure 3.4 offers a pitch-class reduction of this passage. The pitch classes in boldface serve as the last four notes of one row and the first four notes of another; they are pivots. They enable Dallapiccola to link the tetrachords of T3-chained rows in an efficient manner. More importantly, these vertical sonorities project different set classes than those that arise in the four-row arrays. Now we can better interpret the arrows and the boxes in the sketches: the arrows represent pitch- and pitch-class associations among the beginnings and endings of the boxed ideas—from the Bach and Ravel fragments to RIsymmetrical rows. The boxes show the invariant segments of the row forms.23 In the broadest sense, such invariance reveal a more nuanced handling of aggregates and a deeper understanding of the set-class redundancies within this complex of rows.

Alegant.indd Sec2:64

4/5/2010 10:18:46 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:65

4/5/2010 10:18:46 PM

Example 3.11. Sketch of the row chart for Requiescant

66

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 3.4. Elided tetrachords in Requiescant I-4 4 6 e 5 x

I-1 0 t 7 9 y

3 1 8 2 x

I-t 9 7 4 6 y

0 t 5 e x

RI-t (= P-5) 3 1 6 4 y

9 7 2 8 x

6 4 1 3 y

5 0 t e x

Each x is a member of 4–6[0127]; y is 4–10[0235].

The second and fourth movements of Requiescant show other important thirdphase developments. The composer speaks about these movements in “Fragments”: “If one day someone has the patience to look at the Requiescant, that is, to study it note for note, he will see that its two instrumental movements represent something quite novel.”24 These instrumental movements function as interludes; they are more concentrated and more formally amorphous than the others. One “novel” feature in the inner movements is a Schoenbergian procedure that Ethan Haimo refers to as a multidimensional set presentation.25 A multidimensional set presentation is a linear projection of a row (or its segments) on two different temporal levels. In other words, one linear row is nested within another. To illustrate, example 3.12 analyzes an excerpt taken from the fifth variation of Schoenberg’s Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31, a clear example of this procedure. (The previous chapter noted the BACH configurations in this work, which also appeared in the “Simbolo” movement of the Quaderno.) Each measure in the example contains the h1 and h2 hexachords of a row, and distinguishes them by timbre and register. The semicombinatorial hexachords belong to set class 6–5[012367]. In the first aggregate, which is based row I-t, the h1 hexachord is distributed among the lower three staves while the h2 hexachord is taken up by the flute, violins, and trumpet, which occupy the upper three staves. The partitioning scheme is applied to the remaining rows in the excerpt. At the same time, the notes of the bass line, which appear at half-note intervals and which are heavily doubled, project a slower version of row P-t: . Haimo writes: “The theme appears in the lowermost register, unfolding slowly over the course of the variation. This is not a foreground presentation of this set but, rather, a middleground thematic statement. Here is a true twelvetone hierarchy with both the slowly unfolding theme and its supportive local set forms derived from the same referential idea. The slowly unfolding theme in the lowest register is not a random concatenation of elements from local set forms but, rather, results from the conjunction of like order positions from a succession of isomorphically-partitioned set forms.”26 During the variation Schoenberg applies the technique of multidimensional set presentations to four rows in

Alegant.indd Sec2:66

4/5/2010 10:18:49 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:67

4/5/2010 10:18:49 PM

Example 3.12. Multidimensional set presentations in Schoenberg’s Op. 31

68

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

turn: P-t, RI-7, R-t, and I-7; the technique spans the variation.27 A more detailed consideration of this intricate passage would chronicle the periodic structure and harmonic rhythm; the syncopations and hemiolas; the isomorphic partitioning between P and I forms; the saturation of interval-class 1 in the horizontal (melodic) dimension; and the invariant interval-class 2 dyads between successive rows, such as the {C3, B♭3} dyad of rows P-4 and I-6, and the {B2, A3} dyad of rows P-3 and I-5. Example 3.13 illustrates the multidimensional set presentations in the second and fourth movements of Requiescant. Example 3.13(a) is drawn from the middle of the second movement; the percussion instruments in the passage are not shown. Each measure of this excerpt contains a hexachordal (62) cross partition whose hexachords are members of set class 6–5[012367], the set class of the discrete hexachords in the row of Schoenberg’s Op. 31. Further, each pair of hexachords is shared (uniquely) by a quartet of rows from a single region. For instance, the first two hexachords, {9, t, e, 0, 3, 4} and {1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8} are shared by rows P-6, I-e, and their retrogrades, R-6 and RI-e. (For the sake of simplicity only the P and I labels are shown in the example.) The top notes of each hexachord combine to form a row segment—in this case, the first six notes of P-3—and thus effect a multidimensional set presentation. Three measures later, as shown in (b), the same procedure articulates the last six notes of P-3; thus, the two multidimensional statements themselves combine to form a complete row. These upper notes of the hexachords of P-3 are symmetrically realized in pitch space as well. Two passages in the fourth movement, shown in 3.13(c) and (d), also feature multidimensional presentations. They retrograde the realizations of P-3 in the second movement, at pitch. Thus, Dallapiccola not only appropriates one of Schoenberg’s more sophisticated twelve-tone procedures, but he embellishes it with palindromes and structural frames that link the interior movements of the work. The second and fourth movements of Requiescant are also distinguished by their innovative handling of rhythm and timbre. Example 3.14 shows the opening measures of the second movement. The initial sonority features a 4–9[0167] tetrachord that is assigned a ppp dynamic. From top to bottom, the luxuriant chord is scored for oboe, viola, E♭ clarinet, and bassoon. The chord is sustained for almost six measures, creating a sense of stasis and timelessness. Toward the end of the third measure the timbres change in an instance of Klangfarbenmelodie: a new quartet (trumpet, bass, clarinet, and trombone) replaces the original group. A sixteenth-note overlap makes for a seamless transition. Another tetrachord materializes in the second system, as falling tritones in the solo violins are answered by rising tritones in the flute and E♭ clarinet. These tritones form a 4–28[0369] tetrachord.28 A third tetrachord belonging to set class 4–9[0167] completes the aggregate. It is sustained first by woodwinds (oboe, English horn, bassoon, E♭ clarinet) and then, after another sixteenth-note overlap, by brass (trumpet, horn, trombone, tuba).

Alegant.indd Sec2:68

4/5/2010 10:18:52 PM

Example 3.13. Multidimensional set presentations in Requiescant

Alegant.indd Sec2:69

4/5/2010 10:18:52 PM

Example 3.14. Requiescant, ii, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:70

4/5/2010 10:18:55 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 71 We can represent this tetrachordal partition of the aggregate by the formulation < {2, 3, 8, 9} {1, 4, 7, t} {0, 5, 6, e} >.29 However, this partition is obtained neither from a row nor a four-row array; rather, the aggregate is fashioned, so to speak, ex nihilo. Two new rhythmic procedures also emerge in the opening measures of the movement. Within (or against) an underlying 3/2 meter, the small drum plays a five-note idea that is “metrically modulated” to fit within 5/8, 4/8, and 3/8 measures. The drum’s quintuplets are answered by single attacks in the triangle, cymbal, and small tam-tam; each instrument splits its 3/8, 4/8, and 5/8 span into equal units of sound and silence. Together, these rhythmic cells return in measures 6 and 7 to finish off the tetrachordal partition that governs the first eight measures. The second and fourth movements have many similar combinations of these 5–4–3 and 3–4–5 ideas. Example 3.15 shows some of them. The introduction of the fourth movement, shown in ex. 3.15(a), features a twelve-note ppp sonority discussed earlier in the chapter. The sonority is sustained for a full measure, after which notes are gradually peeled away from the registral extremes until only a 4–9[0167] tetrachord remains. At the same time, as if from afar, a small drum restates the 5–4–3 quintuplets that were introduced in the second movement. It then retrogrades this figure, creating a minipalindrome. Example 3.15(b) gives a reduction of measures 13–15 of the fourth movement, where a percussion quartet accompanies a multidimensional set presentation. The drum (tamburo) doubles the sostenutissimo melody while the remaining instruments project 3–4–5 patterns three times apiece. All four multidimensional set presentations in the inner movements are accompanied by variations on these rhythmic patterns. A closer look at these passages would reveal that the cells are subjected to retrogression, rotation, permutation, and rhythmic “complementation” (where one instrument fills in the gaps created by the rests of another). A few of these manipulations are illustrated in (c), (d), and (e): observe that the bass drum cells in (c) are reversed individually and collectively, and displaced by an eighth note in (e); and the cells in (d) are the rhythmic complements of those in (e); there is a wealth of associations among rhythmic cells. There is one more piece to the puzzle. The 5–4–3 rhythmic cell also makes an appearance in the texted third movement of the composition—and thus it achieves the status of a “leitrhythm.” Example 3.16 shows the first statement of this leitrhythm, which accompanies the text “fallen to dust” (mm. 44–45), and evokes a sense of incorporeity: the pitch is removed as the choir speaks “to dust,” the texture thins, and the dynamics fade to pp.30 The second appearance of the leitrhythm (mm. 63–64) presages the conclusion of the second stanza, “so sweetly she grew.” This passage is realized by a four-voice array, with the choral lines doubled by instruments, and each line projecting a 3–3[014] trichord of different durations. The instruments drop out in measure 62, exposing “she grew.” These words are realized in a note-against-note

Alegant.indd Sec2:71

4/5/2010 10:18:58 PM

Example 3.15. Rhythmic cells in Requiescant

Alegant.indd Sec2:72

4/5/2010 10:18:58 PM

Example 3.16. Leitrhythms in Requiescant, iii

Alegant.indd Sec2:73

4/5/2010 10:19:02 PM

74

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

setting with strict inversion between soprano and bass, and alto and tenor. Thus, homophony and strict inversion unite the individual lines. Against the sustained tetrachord, the leitrhythm is ominously played by the small drum.

Dialoghi The culmination of the third phase in terms of rigor and systematization is unquestionably Dialoghi, a concerto for cello and orchestra.31 Like the majority of the works in this phase, Dialoghi makes extensive use of axial symmetry, four-row arrays, and palindromes on the small and large scales. (Its five unbroken movements are arranged in an arch form, as Brown, Fearn, and others have pointed out.) Additionally, Dialoghi is based upon an RI-symmetrical row. Specifically, the P-0 and I-9 forms of its row are retrogrades of each other (which is to say that P-0 = RI-9), as shown below: P-0 = < 0, 1, t, 2, 6, 4 I-9 = < 9, 8, e, 7, 3, 5

5, 3, 7, e, 8, 9 > 4, 6, 2, t, 1, 0 >.

Example 3.17 shows a reduction of the opening of the work. The hexachordal structuring is unmistakable: the same 62 cross partition is presented three times in succession, with varied registration and instrumentation.32 (For the sake of legibility I have omitted details of instrumentation.) The wide spacing, soft dynamics, slow tempo, and paucity of downbeat attacks create a fragile and tentative atmosphere. Virtually the entire section is set to ppp and pppp dynamics; only six measures venture above mp. (As an aside, it is instructive to compare the opening of Dialoghi with the opening of Cinque canti: despite a similar emphasis on hexachordal writing, the soundscape of Dialoghi is ethereal and grainy, and places greater emphasis on timbre than pitch.) The scoring recalls the multidimensional set presentations of Requiescant (shown in ex. 3.13), although with a wider registration. Against a backdrop of muted, pp hexachords, the cello plays the first five notes of P-e, sul ponticello. The cello begins on B3, during a sustained hexachord in the second half of measure 4, and zigzags through C, A, and C♯ before arriving at F4 (a tritone from the initial B), which has a hairpin and tenuto mark. After a brief pause in measure 6, the cello then abandons P-e and picks up I-e instead. The notes of the I-e pentachord are inverted in pitch space from B4; the rhythms of the I-e pentachord are halved. After another half-dozen ppp hexachords in the orchestra, now under phrasing slurs, the cello picks up the P-e row where it left off. After another brief pause, it then presents the I-e row about the pitch axis F♯/G♭4, and with irregular proportions (dotted-quarter notes are answered by quarter notes; quarter notes by dotted-eighths; and so forth). The inversional presentations

Alegant.indd Sec2:74

4/5/2010 10:19:05 PM

Example 3.17. Dialoghi, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:75

4/5/2010 10:19:05 PM

76

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 3.17. Dialoghi, opening—(concluded)

of the cello’s five- and seven-note ideas, and the backdrop of hexachords, are transparent and clearly audible. Dialoghi also exhibits an innovative rhythmic organization. Dietrich Kämper and Rosemary Brown have documented the tempo relationships between sections and the systematic interplay of timbre and duration.33 Two passages illustrate this last feature, which I will refer to as rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie. (This term is admittedly awkward.) Example 3.18 reduces a passage taken from the first section; the reduction does not show the un-pitched percussion (maracas and tam-tam), whose pppp tremolos add a bit of white noise. Perhaps the most striking feature is the sense of play on E4, which is sustained for twelve measures by all of the instruments save the strings.34 At the same time the cello subjects the fragments of P-4 to alternating vibrato and non-vibrato modes of attack. Kämper shows that the cello takes the second through twelfth notes of a row while the first note is passed off between wind instruments and pitched percussion. He then tracks the duration values of E4 for each instrument. Figure 3.5 recasts his observations, using a durational constant of a quarter note.

Alegant.indd Sec2:76

4/5/2010 10:19:09 PM

Example 3.18. Klangfarben technique in Dialoghi, i, 33–34

Alegant.indd Sec2:77

4/5/2010 10:19:13 PM

78

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 3.18. Klangfarben technique in Dialoghi, i, 33–34—(concluded)

The wind and brass instruments sustain E4 for nine quarter notes apiece while the pitched percussion and harp increase their durations steadily from 3 through 10 quarter notes.35 Example 3.19 shows another passage of rhythmicized Klangarbenmelodie, a transition between the first and second sections. The texture contains three

Alegant.indd Sec2:78

4/5/2010 10:19:19 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 79 Figure 3.5. Instrumental durations in Dialoghi, 33–44 Instrument Trombone Harp Flute Celeste Vibraphone Bassoon Tubular bells Horn Harp Celeste Bass clarinet Vibraphone Clarinet Trumpet Tubular bells

Duration (in quarter notes) 9 3 9 4 5 9 6 9 7 8 9 9 9 9 10

strata: a recitative-like exclamation of F♯4 in the cello that occurs over a long crescendo from pp to sff; percussive attacks; and a four-row array constructed of P-e, P-0, P-7 and P-8. The example shows the h1 hexachords of the rows in the array, which consist of [013] and [024] trichords. Example 3.20 focuses on the instrumentation of the [013] trichords. It divides the ensemble into four trios, each with a wind, brass, and string instrument. The instruments within each trio attack the same pitch simultaneously, but sustain their notes for different lengths; the effect is one of a written-out decrescendo. The durations are proportionally related. Figure 3.6 shows that the durations of the sustained notes for the instruments of each trio are related by 1:1:2 or 1:2:1, and that the durations within each trio are related by 1:2:4. As an illustration, the oboe maintains the pitches B5, C5, and A5 for 7, 14, and 7 sixteenth notes; these are in the proportion 1:2:1. The trumpet, oboe, and first violin maintain B5 for 3½, 7, and 14 sixteenth notes; these reduce to 1:2:4. To Brown and Kämper, these rhythmic/timbral procedures are examples of “total serialism,” the application of twelve-tone procedures to parameters other than pitch (or pitch class). Total serialism was the brainchild of the early Darmstadters, chief among them Pierre Boulez and Karlheinz Stockhausen; as an historical movement it reached its zenith around the middle of the 1950s.36 Although the durations and timbres in Dialoghi are not truly serialized in Dallapiccola’s works, they are integrated to an extent. At the very least, they suggest that the composer was interested in arithmetical structuring of rhythm and timbre as well as pitch.

Alegant.indd Sec2:79

4/5/2010 10:19:25 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:80

4/5/2010 10:19:25 PM

Example 3.19. Interaction of rhythm and timbre in Dialoghi, 54–60

Example 3.20. Close-up of the instrumental durations

Alegant.indd Sec2:81

4/5/2010 10:19:29 PM

82

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 3.6. Durational proportions in Dialoghi, 57–60 Instrument

number of sixteenth notes

ratio

first attack

second

third

Oboe Trumpet Violin I

7 14 3.5

14 28 7

7 14 3.5

1:2:1 1:2:1 1:2:1

Saxophone Horn Violin II

10 20 5

20 40 10

10 20 5

1:2:1 1:2:1 1:2:1

English Horn Trombone Viola

9 18 4.5

9 18 4.5

18 36 9

1:1:2 1:1:2 1:1:2

Contrabassoon Tuba Bass

7 14 3.5

7 14 3.5

14 28 7

1:1:2 1:1:2 1:1:2

The central aims of this chapter were to document the thorough assimilation of Webernian and Schoenbergian techniques in the third phase, and to summarize the new explorations of rhythm and timbre. The Webernian attributes are perhaps most clearly evident in Requiescant, which reveals a thorough absorption of RI-symmetry, pitch and rhythmic palindromes, four-row arrays, and the construction of and associations among a handful of referential tetrachords. Among the Schoenbergian influences surfacing during the second half of the 1950s are the appropriation of multidimensional set presentations and the references to the 6–5[012367] hexachords of the Variations, Op. 31, and a marked increase in—and more inventive use of—hexachordal structuring in general and 62 cross partitions in particular. Such Schoenbergian procedures appear from the initial measures of the Cinque canti to the concluding measures of Dialoghi. And Dallapiccola’s techniques dealing with the interpenetration of rhythm and timbre include such devices as rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie, metric modulations, and leitrhythms. At this point I should like to revisit my decision to divide the works of the 1950s into two distinct phases. Some scholars would argue that the demarcation between phases 2 and 3 is not neatly defined with respect to chronology and technique, and that the works of the entire decade should be lumped into a single phase. They would also argue that the works of (my) phase 3 are not uniform from the standpoint of rhythmic praxis, insofar as the later works of phase 3 (Requiescant and Dialoghi) use serialized durations whereas the earlier works

Alegant.indd Sec2:82

4/5/2010 10:19:39 PM

the apex of the schoenbergian and webernian influence 83 (Cinque canti and Concerto per la notte di Natale) do not. Moreover, the evidence of Dallapiccola’s first rhythmic explorations can be detected in the irregular canons of the “Contrapunctus Primus” of the Quaderno and the Goethe-Lieder (these, of course, are second-phase works). What is to be gained by separating the works of the 1950s into those written before and those written after 1956? I would first say that Dallapiccola himself stated that each one of his tonal translations fueled a period of growth and technical acquisition. The third translation is Tartiniana seconda (1956), which straddles An Mathilde and the Cinque canti. I would also say that the combination and application of techniques and procedures in phases 2 and 3 reflect different approaches to twelve-tone composition, and, further, that the works of these phases inhabit quite distinct soundscapes. While one can certainly find exceptions, I would assert that the works of phase 2 are dominated by axial symmetry, polyphony, aphoristic forms, and thin textures; and that homophony (cross partitions) and thicker textures play secondary roles. In the third phase, however, homophony and hexachordal structuring are on an equal footing with polyphony. Furthermore, nearly all of the works in the third phase exploit RI-symmetrical rows, and make significant use of four-row arrays (which as a rule generate different harmonies than cross partitions do). These works also exhibit a freer approach to row setting (witness the ideograms of the Cinque Canti and the Concerto), introduce several new Schoenbergian procedures, incorporate rhythmic and timbral innovations, and are considerably larger in scope and complexity.

Alegant.indd Sec2:83

4/5/2010 10:19:39 PM

Chapter Four

Consolidation and Synthesis (1960–1972) I have argued in the previous chapters that the starting and ending points for the first three phases are delineated by tonal translations, and that each phase begins with a flurry of compositional activity and exploration. I have also asserted that the works of each phase are relatively homogenous with respect to their procedures, formal attributes, organizational principles, and soundscapes. But some factors make it difficult to pinpoint a starting date for the fourth phase, after Dialoghi. One is that there is no fourth tonal translation; another is the fact that the compositions of this period are less homogenous than those of previous phases. However, there is ample justification for marking Dialoghi (1960) as the last work of phase 3, and considering Preghiere (1962) as the inauguration of phase 4. Dialoghi is the last of a group of works (including Cinque Canti and Requiescant) that is permeated with RI-symmetrical rows, four-voice arrays, inversional designs, and certain rhythmic and timbral innovations. Preghiere anticipates many of the characteristics of Ulisse and the subsequent works of the last phase, chiefly the application of hexachordal inversional combinatoriality and an increased tendency to compose with aggregates (as opposed to rows).1 This chapter has three aims: to advance a conceptual framework for the late works and to make a case for combining them into a single phase; to document the influence of several Schoenbergian techniques that have not been addressed in the literature; and to show how Dallapiccola’s penchant for self-quotation and borrowing contributes to the synthetic nature of the fourth phase. Hexachordal structuring plays a significant role in nearly all of the works of the last period, with the exceptions of Parole di San Paolo (1964) and Sicut Umbra (1970). Dallapiccola once stated that the entire opera of Ulisse was built on hexachords whose tones remained the same but whose order fluctuates: “I wanted to retain a constant. . . .The two hexachords never change. The order of their tones changes.”2 To illustrate, example 4.1 surveys the vast row complex of Ulisse. Dietrich Kämper considers the first row, labeled “Mare I” in the example, as the “Ur-Row” from which the other rows are derived; he also suggests that the arrangement of semitones in this row suggests the undulating rise and fall of the ocean.3 Perhaps the first thing to mention about the complex of rows is that they are permeated with semitones; the example indicates the interval-class 1 connections between adjacent notes and notes separated by one. The wealth of semitones

Alegant.indd Sec2:84

4/5/2010 10:19:39 PM

Example 4.1. Row complex in Ulisse

Alegant.indd Sec2:85

4/5/2010 10:19:39 PM

86

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

lends a sense of “crunchiness” to the vertical sonorities that are generated by cross partitions. But the most important aspect of this chart (and one Kämper does not mention) is the fact that the non-overlapping hexachords of these rows all belong to the same set class: 6–5[012367]. (Hexachords of this set class contain a chromatic tetrachord plus a semitone that lies four semitones away, such as {G, A♭} plus {B, C, D♭, D}, or {A, B♭} plus {D♯, E, F, F♯, A, B♭}.) This set class is not only the “constant” to which Dallapiccola refers above; it is also the same sonority as the discrete hexachords of the rows in Requiescant and Schoenberg’s Variations Op. 31 (and Schoenberg’s Op. 48, ii as well). Additionally, both Dallapiccola and Schoenberg take advantage of the fact that these semicombinatorial hexachords generate aggregates under certain RI operations. In addition to hexachordal structuring, the typical fourth-phase work exhibits the following characteristics. Homophony dominates the surface; polyphony, the main technique of phase 1, is used primarily as a foil. The metric structure remains ambiguous, with a widespread use of floating rhythms, and very few downbeat attacks. The atmospheric textures are more variegated and further refined, and show an increased reliance on Klangfarbenmelodie, flutter tonguing, and un-pitched percussion. The row handling is often so free that it is difficult (and at times nearly impossible) to “twelve count” the surface. Paradoxically, as the handling of rows becomes freer, the treatment of other parameters becomes more constrained; at times the writing approaches austerity. Save for Ulisse, the fourth-phase compositions are quite compact in scope and scale—certainly closer to the works of the second phase than to those of the third.4 The late compositions exhibit a far greater range of configurations and textures and partition schemes than previous phases, and they shift between different soundscapes far more frequently. The majority of the movements in the first two phases are based on a single procedure or configuration—a specific type of canon, cross partition, palindrome, or derived aggregate. In the third phase, individual movements often shift rapidly between configurations; it is not uncommon to find in a single movement or even a single section unaccompanied rows, inverted canons, cross partitions of different sizes, fourrow arrays, and atmospheric sonorities with little discernable pitch content. In phase 4, however, the pendulum swings back. Generally, individual movements of the later works use fewer modes of organization but shift between then more frequently. Once we look at how these soundscapes are arranged, we can see that different works share similar progressions and juxtapositions of textures. In this light, we can divide the works of the fourth phase into three groups: one group unites Preghiere, Three Questions with Two Answers, and Ulisse; another includes Parole di San Paolo and Sicut Umbra; and a third combines Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi and Commiato. While there are differences between the compositions in each family, of course, the grouped works exhibit a similar “mind-set” with respect to textures, techniques, formal organization, and twelve-tone techniques.

Alegant.indd Sec2:86

4/5/2010 10:19:42 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 87 Before we survey some of the works of this phase, I will summarize perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Dallapiccola’s language: his penchant for borrowing and self-quotation.5 Rosemary Brown writes extensively on these issues, and has found many common threads among the modal, tonal, and twelve-tone works. She makes a strong case that the composer’s use of self-quotation ensures “continuity and unification over his output as a whole” and is one of his “most important and significant compositional aids.”6 Indeed, one set of musical quotations spans more than thirty years: the so-called “radiant” B-major triads that are in Tre laudi (1936–37) and Volo di notte (1937–38), and return in Il prigioniero (1944–48) and again in Ulisse (1960–68). Each of these major triads is used to set a text that deals with salvation or epiphany; it is also marked by timbral, dynamic, or other means. Another example of borrowing is the recurrence of a particular aggregate configuration that appears in the Goethe-Lieder, An Mathilde, and Ulisse. Example 4.2(a) reproduces the opening of the seventh Goethe-Lieder. The opening measures are based on derived aggregates that are generated from 3–1[012] cells. Each trichord has a unique pattern of or semitones, which it projects in different durations (akin to the opening of Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24). The floating rhythm and soft dynamics highlight the uncertainty of the text “Ist’s möglich?” (Is it possible?).7 Example 4.2(b) shows a related passage from Ulisse. It too features a questioning text that is supported by a similar arrangement of set classes and durations. (I translate “Quanto e cosa appresi? Fole!” as “How much and what have I learned? [It is all] Folly.”) Similar realizations of derived aggregates are found throughout Ulisse, where they invariably accompany questions asked of, and by, Ulysses.8 To Brown, Fearn and others, this configuration acquires in Dallapiccola’s music an “interrogative” function. Dallapiccola’s music contains countless references to his own music and to the music of others, ranging from single notes or chords, ideograms, and derived aggregates to entire arrays. A brief sampling will serve to give a sense of them. As we saw in the previous chapter, one innovation in Dialoghi is the application of a durational series to a sustained pedal point (see exx. 3.18 to 3.20). This technique returns in Preghiere, Ulisse, and Parole di San Paolo; what is more, the pedal point manipulations are quite transparent.9 Occasionally, entire passages are lifted from one work into another, with an identical realization of pitches, rhythms, dynamics, and other parameters. For instance, the 2:1 canonic passage that introduces the Cinque frammenti di Saffo appears in the “Expositio” opening of Sex carmina alcaei and the concluding movement of Due liriche di Anacreonte. But without question the most extensive borrowing of material occurs in Ulisse, whose second act is a virtual storehouse for the music of the three previous phases. Among other things, it imports verbatim not only an extended passage of the third movement of An Mathilde, it also assimilates much of the second movement and nearly all of the fourth movement of Requiescant—thirty-one measures in all, including the leitrhythms and multidimensional set presentations.10

Alegant.indd Sec2:87

4/5/2010 10:19:42 PM

Example 4.2. Derived aggregates and an “interrogative” configuration

Alegant.indd Sec2:88

4/5/2010 10:19:42 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 89 As an aside, it goes without saying that this degree of musical self-reference is unusual, especially in twelve-tone music. Certainly, many composers reuse the same techniques and compositional designs, and many use BACH motives, Tristan associations, and other eponymous techniques. Few, however, import entire movements into works that are written much later. Neither Schoenberg nor Webern quotes his own works. Berg’s self-references are short, such as the passage in Wozzeck that is imported into Lulu, as Alwa muses that an opera could be written about her. Babbitt reuses the same rows and versions of the same arrays, subjected to standard and circle-of-fifth transformations, as Mead has shown.11 Despite the fact that the majority of fourth-phase compositions borrow techniques and passages from earlier works, they have much in common, including cross partitions (of all four sizes), hexachordal structuring, irregular partitioning schemes, and highly concentrated, almost austere writing. To make this point I will examine passages from the first effort of the fourth phase, Preghiere (1962), and the last, Commiato (1972).

Preghiere Preghiere is another work that has virtually escaped scrutiny.12 Its text, like that of many of the late works, deals with passing and salvation. A working translation reads: “Dark life, I beg you to unveil for me your designs; Dark life: to be transparent, concise, like death.—Clear hope.” Figure 4.1 shows the basic form of the first movement. It highlights the alternation of strict ritornellos and loose episodes, the distribution of rows, and the design that reinforces the outer structure of: “Dark life,” “Dark life,” and “Clear hope.” Figure 4.1. Formal overview of Preghiere, i mm. 1

5

9

Ritornello 1 P-1 I-0 strict

Oscura vita, cio che ti chiedo, R-3 loose

È di svelarmi i tuoi di segni. RI-0

11 Ritornello 2 I-1 + P-2 R-0 + RI-3 strict 26

15 18 Oscura vita: d’essere trasparente, I-1 R-8 P-e/I-t P-2

20 concisa, I-e, R-2

loose 28

32

Ritornello 3

—Chiara speranza . . .

P-1 strict

Alegant.indd Sec2:89

3

30

P-4 very loose

31

23 a esempio della morte. RI-4 I-0 silence (!) 34

speranza. Ritornello 4 (= structural frame) I-1, R-e + R-2 P-2 I-3 strict chiara

4/5/2010 10:19:44 PM

90

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Perhaps the most telling property of the row is its hexachordal combinatoriality. Figure 4.2(a) displays row P-1 with I-0, its inversional partner. Figure 4.2. Characteristics of the row of Preghiere (a) hexachordal invariance between rows P-1 and I-0 P-1: < 1 0 3 4 9 t

87265e>

I-0: < 0 1 t 9 4 3

56e782>

(b) invariant segments among these rows’ hexachords P-1: 1 0

349t

872

65e

I-0: 0 1

t943

56e

782

4–9[0167]

[016]

[016]

[01]

(c) invariant {3, 4, 9, t} tetrachords among different rows P-1

10

349t

...

R-1

I-0

01

t943

...

RI-0

P-7

76

9t34

...

R-7

I-6

67

43t9

...

RI-6

These rows and their retrogrades form a region whose members share the unordered hexachordal collections {0, 1, 3, 4, 9, t} and {2, 5, 6, 7, 8, e}. These hexachords share several invariant segments, which are shown in (b). The h1 hexachords maintain a {0, 1} dyad and {3, 4, 9, t} tetrachord, which represents set class 4– 9[0167]. The h2 hexachords exchange their [016] cells. (This property holds for all inversionally combinatorial rows in the composition.) As (c) suggests, a single [0167] configuration is shared by a total of eight rows from different regions. For instance, P-1, I-0, P-7, I-6, and their retrogrades all contain the pitch-class set {3, 4, 9, t}. Thus, set class [0167] can function as a referential sonority.13 In this vein, example 4.3 traces the history of set class [0167] throughout the work. The similarities between the realizations of these tetrachords (even with the rhythms normalized) are easy to see and hear, because many of the configurations preserve the spacing of the original sonority. The hexachordal structuring implicit in the structure of the row is not always manifest on the surface; occasionally, the discrete hexachords of rows are obscured by tetrachordal or irregular partitions. Example 4.4 offers a reduction of the opening of the first movement, which is notable for its idiosyncratic application of the quintessential Schoenbergian procedure: hexachordal inversional combinatoriaity.

Alegant.indd Sec2:90

4/5/2010 10:19:45 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 91

Example 4.3. Referential 4–9[0167] tetrachords in Preghiere The tempo is (typically) slow, the initial dynamic level (atypically) forte, and the instrumental writing angular and hard-edged. The rhythm is “floating,” through the avoidance of downbeat attacks, frequent meter changes, ties over the bar lines, and rests that initiate sextuplets and septuplets. I consider the first three measures as a ritornello, since they return several times throughout the movement. The ritornello contains two aggregates, and exploits the invariance between rows P1 and I-0 by using a similar 2 + 4 partition on their h1 hexachords. (Subsequent ritornellos similarly exploit the dyadic and tetrachordal equivalance between inversionally related rows.) P-1 opens with a leap from D♭3 to C2, then sustains an accented tetrachord for several measures. This tetrachord, {E♭, E, A, B♭}, is a member of set class 4–9[0167]. Similarly, the h1 hexachord of I-0 leaps from C5 to D♭6 and echoes the same [0167] tetrachord—at pitch.14 I-0 is used as a strict inversion of P-1 in pitch space; together these rows share a total of eight pitches (the sustained [0167] tetrachord in addition to F1, F♯2, G5, and A♭6). The baritone enters, sotto voce, in measure 4, overlapping with I-0 just as I-0 overlapped with P-1. With the entrance of the voice the surface design changes: now segments are repeated and the hexachordal structuring and inversional

Alegant.indd Sec2:91

4/5/2010 10:19:45 PM

Example 4.4. Preghiere, i, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:92

4/5/2010 10:19:46 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 93 symmetry of the opening are abandoned. In contrast to the floating rhythms of the ensemble, the voice is somewhat grounded, with the accents of normal speech on downbeats (“vi-ta,” “chie-do,” “sve-lar-mi,” “di-se-gni”). The accompaniment contains several sustained tetrachords that are segments of R-3 and RI-0 (and not cross partitions). This distinction is important: if the tetrachords were generated by a 43 cross partition they would yield an aggregate (and there would be no pitch class duplication between the tetrachords). Here, however, the first and third tetrachords share the dyad G–A♭.15 Returning to the example, the first line of text is followed by a variant of the ritornello (mm. 11–14), whose inversionally related rows appear simultaneously instead of successively. The sharing of pitch classes creates a sense of compression and harmonic acceleration. (It also indicates the changing attitude toward row realization that differentiates this opening from that of Cinque canti, shown in ex. 3.3.) The opening thus achieves a number of functions. It uses hexachordal combinatoriality, isomorphic partitioning, segmental invariance, and axial symmetry, and effectively creates a constellation of “frozen” [0167] sonorities. It also presents an inventory of four gestures that recur throughout the work: two-note slurs with exaggerated leaps, sustained tetrachords (which belong to set classes 4–3[0134], 4–4[0125], and 4–9[0167]), and recitative-like iterations of single staccato notes. The third movement begins with an extended instrumental section that is based on an extremely free row setting. Example 4.5(a) focuses on the initial configuration of the movement, which also returns at its midpoint. After a silent downbeat (a common feature of floating rhythm) a ppp hexachord unfolds a semitone tremolo and a 4–9[0167] tetrachord in the middle register. (This [0167] recalls the sustained sonority in the first ritornello of the first movement.) The tempo is too slow to discern a pulse; the hexachord seems suspended, timeless. The [0167] tetrachord situated in the middle system is flanked by an A♭–G dyad below and a C♯–D dyad above; these dyads exchange registers midway through the next measure, widening the pitch field and creating [0167] sonorities in the outermost registers. As figure 4.3 reveals, the opening gestures combines the h1 hexachords of P-8 and P-2 (with the understanding that I-7 and I-1 are synonyms for these rows), and displays in boldface the pitch classes that appear in the first three measures. The fourth measure is based on the pitch classes of the rows’ h2 hexachords: the upper register has {D, E♭, A♭, A} while the lower register has {C, C♯, F♯, G}. The middle register thickens the texture, doubling C and A at pitch and G♭ and E♭ at the octave. (This marks a return to previous practice, as octave doublings and false relations are rare in the second and third phases.) Taken together, the pitch-class content of the aggregate contains neither an octatonic collection nor an aggregate. The transparent textures, soft dynamics, and irregular partitions continue until measure 113, at which point the first line of text is introduced. Below is the text for the third movement and a translation:

Alegant.indd Sec2:93

4/5/2010 10:19:56 PM

94

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Example 4.5. Preghiere, iii, opening and nadir Dinanzi al Crocifisso Io pallido mi fermo tremando: “Tu, che sei il vero figlio di Dio, Schioda, l’umanità da questa croce.”

Before the crucifix I stand pale and trembling: “Thou who art the true son of God unnail humanity from this cross.”

Example 4.5(b) shows the approach to “Crocifisso,” which is both the dynamic nadir and the spiritual climax of the entire work (mm. 112–15). This passage is based on a transformation of the opening of the movement that inverts the counterpoint to the tremolo dyads, and by so doing makes a complete octatonic collection. “Crocifisso,” delicately set to an eight-note, pppp sonority, is spoken rather than sung—as if the baritone simply cannot give voice to the word. It also occurs on a downbeat: in fact, this is only the second time that the voice and the ensemble have a simultaneous downbeat arrival.

Alegant.indd Sec2:94

4/5/2010 10:19:56 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 95 Figure 4.3. Partitional model for Preghiere, iii, opening h1 hexachords P-8: P-2: I-1: I-7:



The final line of text represents the poetic and musical climax. Example 4.6(a) shows the first words of its plea, “Tu, che sei.” Curiously, this line, which is sung at a ff dynamic, is accompanied not by the full body of instruments but by a solitary, sustained F4—rendering the clash between the pedal point and the baritone’s E4 and sustained F♯4 especially poignant. This climactic presentation of “Tu, che sei” is a recontexualization of the last line of the first movement, the whispered “Chiara speranza” (Clear hope). Example 4.6(b) shows the two events.

Example 4.6. Preghiere, iii, climax

Alegant.indd Sec2:95

4/5/2010 10:19:59 PM

96

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

In summary, Preghiere has much in common sonically and technically with the works of the second and third phases: floating rhythms, sudden contrasts of textures and dynamics, and the use of axial symmetry and set-class redundancy. But Dallapiccola also breaks new ground in several respects. First, he combines the hexachords of inversionally combinatorial rows so as to create new types of configurations, many of which generate octatonic collections and weighted aggregates. Second, not once does the voice sing an entire, unbroken row, which could hardly contrast more with the overlapping linear presentations that dominate the early serial works.16 Third, the violent ending, with its thickly scored ff and fff sonorities, is rare in Dallapiccola’s output: most of his works end quietly. Finally, Preghiere provides the first glimpse of the mosaic-like arrangement of materials that is common in the last phase. The ritornello of the first movement highlights two-note leaps, sustained tetrachords, and repeated single notes; the latter part of this same movement brings hexachordal cross partitions. These four ideas serve as the building blocks for the entire composition.

Commiato Like Dialoghi and Requiescant, Commiato is based on a symmetrical five-movement design.17 The first and fifth movements are vocalises on “Ah!”; the second and fourth movements are instrumental; and the middle, texted movement is the core of the drama.18 The first two and last two movements are precise retrogrades of each other with respect to pitch, rhythm, dynamics, articulation, and orchestration; Commiato is thus the most extensive palindrome in the composer’s output.19 The instrumentation is also intriguing. Commiato is scored for woodwinds (two flutes, three clarinets, and bassoon), brass (French horn and trumpet), percussion (harp, celeste/piano, and xylomarimba/vibraphone), single string instruments, and soprano solo. The solo strings and lack of un-pitched percussion create an intimate, chamber-like atmosphere. Commiato’s pitch-class organization is quite complex. The outer movements in particular exhibit a free approach to aggregate completion. There are very few linear row statements. Instead, instrumental and vocal lines are fragmented, and rows often fold back onto themselves, returning to earlier notes and recycling segments in a seemingly random fashion. As was the case in Preghiere, hexachordal combinatoriality is used in an unusual way. To illustrate, figure 4.4(a) presents two semicombinatorial rows, labeled P-0 and P-6. The non-overlapping hexachords of these rows belong to set class 6–30[013679], a semicombinatorial hexachord and an octatonic subset (it is the set class of the “Petrushka” chord). The rows are aligned so as to highlight the invariant dyads of P-0 and P-6.20 Dallapiccola finds an interesting partitioning scheme to generate much of the movement’s pitch-class material, shown in figure 4.4(b). Here, P-4 and I-1 are partitioned into their disjunct trichords,

Alegant.indd Sec2:96

4/5/2010 10:20:00 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 97 Figure 4.4. Characteristics of the row of Commiato (a) dyadic invariance between P-0 and P-6 P-0:

<

06

53

9e

t8

71

24

>

P-6:

<

60

e9

35

24

17

8t

>

6–30[013679]

6–30[013679]

(b) trichordal partitions of two inversionally-related rows [a]

[b]

[c]

[d]

P-4:

<

4t9

713

20e

568

>

I-1:

<

178

t 42

356

0e9

>

[e]

[f]

[g]

[h]

[016]

[026]

[013]

[013]

(c) unorthodox pairing of trichords to yield 6–5[012367] [a]

+

{ 4, t, 9 }

[g]

[e]

{ 3, 5, 6 }

{1, 7, 8 }

+

[c] { 2, 0, e }

{ 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, t }

{ 7, 8, e, 0, 1, 2 }

6–5[012367]

[012367]

which are labeled [a] through [h]. Trichords [a] and [e] belong to set class 3–5[016]; [b] and [f] have a whole-tone flavor and represent set class 3–8[026]; the remaining trichords are members of set class 3–2[013]. These two rows are not hexachordally combinatorial—at least not as they stand. But their trichords can be combinatorial. To illustrate, figure 4.4(c) unites trichords [a] and [g], and [e] and [c]; these hexachords represent set class 6–5[012367]—the same set class of the hexachords of the rows in Ulisse (and Requiescant, and Schoenberg’s Variations). Example 4.7 gives a reduction of the opening and illustrates the structuring of these [012367] hexachords. Commiato begins with a ff “Ah!” on an exposed G♯5 that is accompanied by hexachords generated in the manner described above. The instruments hammer out five attacks, then three, then two; each is a version of 6–5[012367]. The voice drops out in measure 4, as a single sf chord in a lower register emerges and is sustained for nearly six measures. The rhythm is floating but the affect is anything but ethereal: the syncopated rhythms, lack of downbeat attacks, and ff dynamics create an austere surface. G♯5 is also prominently featured in the transition between the first and second movements, where

Alegant.indd Sec2:97

4/5/2010 10:20:01 PM

Example 4.7. Commiato, i, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:98

4/5/2010 10:20:01 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 99

Example 4.7. Commiato, i, opening—(concluded)

it is sustained for a total of twelve measures. (Owing to the palindromic structure, it also bridges the last two movements.)21 The reduction in example 4.7 provides the P and I labels for the hexachordal sonorities and their trichordal components (represented by the letters a, g, c, e). The first attacks combine a/g and e/c from rows P-4 and I-1. The [012367] sonorities appear in a variety of spacings and trichordal arrangements: sometimes they

Alegant.indd Sec2:99

4/5/2010 10:20:03 PM

100

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

combine [012] and [016] cells (as in measure 2), or [013] and [016] (as in measure 3), or a pair of [026] trichords (as in the first half of measure 4). Each hexachordal sonority also doubles the voice’s G♯, but with a different element of the chord: in the first chord G♯ is the topmost pitch; in the second chord A♭ is the third highest pitch; and in the third chord G♯ is the second-highest note, and so on. This pattern continues until the voice abandons G♯5 in measure 4. Here, a sf [012367] hexachord in a much lower register signals the completion of the first vocal row presentation. The remainder of the movement unfolds in a similar fashion, broken only by an eight-note chord in measures 19–20. A better way to hear the vocal lines is to consider them as a unique row. (It is much simpler to start with a new row than to derive it from the original using labyrinthine order-number manipulations.) The “new” P-0 possesses invariant properties among its disjunct trichords and tetrachords. From a trichordal standpoint, the row contains alternating [016] and [012] trichords, as follows: P-0:

[012]

These four trichords make up a partition that is invariant under the index number of 8. In other words, P-0 and I-8 contain the same four trichords. From a tetrachordal standpoint, the row enjoys this interesting feature: any two inversionally related rows that are based on the same pitch class (that is, P-x and Ix) share the same (unordered) tetrachords. For instance, consider P-0 and I-0, shown below. These rows fix the first tetrachord (x) while swapping the remaining two (y and z). P-0: I-0:



x x

y z

z y

Example 4.8 reconsiders the vocal lines in first movement from the vantage point of the new row. (It omits the interlude in measures 16–19 and the oscillations between D5 and G♯5 in the last six measures.) The voice presents four rows, one of each type: I-7, R-7, P-8, and RI-8. The order numbers (which appear in italics below the pitches) demonstrate the recycling of row segments; indeed, at times the lines seem to be governed variously by additive procedures and Fortspinnung. Note also the conspicuously floating rhythm: the only downbeat attacks occur in measures 6 and 32. The vocal rhythms are free and speech-like. Let us consider first the sustained trichords that accompany each row. Observe that the trichords that accompany I-7 and P-8 are members of 3–6[016], whereas those that accompany R-7 and RI-8 are members of 3–1[012]. Because these trichords are sustained throughout each vocal row, they generate a wealth of tetrachordal harmonies with the voice. I would conjecture that Dallapiccola chooses these four rows for their initial trichords: not only do these trichords

Alegant.indd Sec2:100

4/5/2010 10:20:05 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 101

Example 4.8. Vocal lines and incipit trichords combine to produce an aggregate, but the first two and second two cells generate complementary hexachords belonging to set class 6–5[012367]: the initial trichords of I-7 and R-7 yield {C, D♭, E, F, F♯, G} while those of P-8 and RI-8 yield {D, D♯, G♯, A, B♭, B♮}. Furthermore, pairing I-7 with R-7, and P-8 with RI-8, takes advantage of the property of tetrachordal invariance (as shown in fig. 4.5). In particular, the first four notes of I-7 {the D♭, G, C trichord plus the voice’s

Alegant.indd Sec2:101

4/5/2010 10:20:05 PM

102

dallapiccola’s serial odyssey, 1942–1972

Figure 4.5. Pitch class associations among the rows in the first movement (a) pitch-class and row design I-7

{ 7 1 0 } ---------------------------------------------2346

R-7

{4 5 6 } ---------------------------------------------398te

P-8

0217

{ 8 2 3 } --------------------------------------------10e9t

RI-8

5e89t

4765

{ e t 9} -----------------------------------------------06745

3128

(b) tetrachordal invariance among the row pairs

(unordered tetrachords)

I-7

< 7102

3465

e89t >

abc

R-7

< 4563

98te

0217 >

bca

P-8

< 8231

0e9t

4765 >

def

RI-8

< et90

6745

3128 >

efd

D5} match the last four vocal notes of R-7, ; the same holds true for the first four attacks of P-8 and the last four vocal notes of RI-8. (The other two tetrachords are swapped, as well, though the correspondence between them is harder to perceive.) But it is easy to hear the saturation of [012] and [016] cells (and not just among the non-overlapping segments), the frequent chromatic tetrachords, pentachords, and hexachords, and the luxuriant treatment given to the voice’s RI-8 row, which takes nine measures to project its nine notes. One final observation: by ending the movement with the “new” row RI-8, the voice is able to reclaim the G♯ with which it opens the movement. This does more than erect a structural frame within the movement: because the entire work is a palindrome, this G♯5 is part of a nested set of frames. I would add two more thoughts on Commiato. I have on several occasions had the pleasure of studying the sketches for this work. The first thing that struck me was the frailty of Dallapiccola’s handwriting: in contrast to the meticulous penmanship in nearly every other sketch in the archive, the sketches for Commiato are demonstrably fainter, less assured, and more difficult to decipher.22 Clearly, the composer’s strength was failing. Additionally, the sketches contain pages upon pages of intricate partitioning schemes that create a host of invariant relationships among trichords, tetrachords, and hexachords of certain rows.

Alegant.indd Sec2:102

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 103 Even though only a few of these schemes find their way into the finished work, the sketches nonetheless show a sophisticated approach to partitioning and segmentation, and, yet again, a desire to compose with aggregates instead of (or in addition to) rows. (They also suggest why sketches were not necessary for the earlier compositions: partitioning strategies, especially those involving nonsegmental row elements, were not a priority.)

*

*

*

At this point I should like to summarize some of the findings in part 1. I set out to document the technical evolution of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone language. As a point of departure, I defined two distinct soundscapes, one based primarily on Webern’s late music and the other on Schoenberg’s. I then made a case for dividing Dallapiccola’s serial output into four phases, and traced the Webernian and Schoenbergian influences in each phase, along with the composer’s innovations. I attempted to support the central arguments in two ways: first, by referencing Dallapiccola’s writings on such diverse topics as tonal translations, polyphony, cross partitions, floating rhythm, polarity, ideograms, dynamic extremes, and the memory of hearing Das Augenlicht; and second, by analyzing a number of works, some familiar (like the Sex carmina alcaei, Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, Goethe-Lieder, Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, and Cinque canti), and others less so (notably Requiescant, Dialoghi, Preghiere, and Commiato). Figure 4.6 revisits two of the fundamental assertions in part 1: that Dallapiccola’s compositional language evolved gradually from a Webernian conception to a Schoenbergian one, and that Schoenberg’s influence on Dallapiccola’s music has not been properly accounted for. The figure recontextualizes the information that was presented in figure 1.1 of the first chapter, and shows the salient procedures of each phase. From a Webernian standpoint, the first phase is saturated with canons, polyphonic textures, and, on rare occasions, passages that are governed by axial symmetry with even index numbers. Phase 2 incorporates derived aggregates (likely inspired by Webern’s Op. 24), which appear in the Goethe-Lieder and An Mathilde, and inversional canons, which appear in the “Conrapunctus Secundus” of the Quaderno (itself likely inspired by Webern’s Op. 27, ii). Phase 3 is the zenith of Webern’s influence: the works of the second half of the 1950s mimic the structural features of Opp. 26, 29, and 31. These compositions use derived (RI-invariant) rows, palindromes on multiple structural levels, a wealth of four-row arrays (plus, of course, characteristics of the previous phases). The close relationship between the Op. 29 Cantata and the outer movements of Requiescant is particularly striking, and, in my view, presents an irrefutable argument for Webern’s influence. After 1960, Webern’s influence wanes. A few Schoenbergian characteristics appear infrequently in the first phase, largely in the use of cross partitions (which suggest an influence of the

Alegant.indd Sec2:103

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:104

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Phase 4

Phase 3

Phase 2

Phase 1

Large-scale retrogrades

Inversional combinatoriality; 6–5[012367] collections

Leitrhythms, un-pitched percussion

Klangfarbenmelodie

Mosaic-like forms

Atmospheric textures

Extreme dynamics

Ideograms

Rows with semicombinatorial properties

Derived rows (especially RI-symmetry)

Rhythmicized timbre

Irregular canons

Multidimensional set presentations

Hexachordal structuring

Four-row arrays

Floating rhythm

Innovations

Palindromes (small scale and large scale)

BACH motifs, irregular partitions

Axial symmetry with odd index numbers

Axial symmetry with even index numbers Derived aggregates

Homophony, cross partitions

Schoenbergian procedures

Polyphony, canon

Strict, linear organization

Webernian procedures

Figure 4.6. A reconsideration of techniques across the four serial phases

consolidation and synthesis (1960–1972) 105 character-development concepts of Proust, as well as the opening idea of Schoenberg’s Op. 33a Klavierstück). We can find in these works quite a few tetrachordal (43) and hexachordal (62) cross partitions, the latter tending to function as punctuation. The analysis of the second Machado song reveals how malleable and effective cross partitions are in Dallapiccola’s hands (recall that nearly the entire song is based on transformations of a single 43 configuration). Schoenberg’s influence increases in phase 2, as several techniques in his Variations for Orchestra are incorporated into works composed during the first half of the 1950s. The Quaderno pays homage to BACH (and by extension to Schoenberg); at the same time, hexachordal structuring (and especially 62 cross partitions) appear more frequently. Schoenberg’s influence grows in phase 3, as shown by the use of multidimensional set presentations in Requiescant and hexachordal structuring in the openings of Cinque Canti and Dialoghi. Phase 4 is saturated with hexachordal combinatoriality, and Ulisse, Preghiere, and Commiato exploit in unique ways the unordered 6–5[012367] hexachords found in the row of Schoenberg’s Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31. As for innovations, phase 2 introduces irregular canons and floating rhythm (in the Goethe-Lieder and Quaderno), and a more inventive use of cross partitions. Phase 3 brings a freer attitude toward row handling and aggregate formations, as demonstrated by the ideograms in Cinque canti. A few years later, Requiescant and Dialoghi bring many rhythmic and timbral explorations: rhythmicized Klanfarbenmelodie, atmospheric sonorities, un-pitched percussion and leitrhythms, and dynamic extremes. Though one could certainly make a case that phase 4 is merely an extension of the previous phases, the novelty of these works lies in their kaleidoscopic arrangements of twelve-tone configurations and textures, more concentrated means of expression, and an consistent application of hexachordal combinatoriality. If I were to summarize the evolution of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone language over a thirty-year period, I would say that his approach to row handling becomes freer and less ordered (meaning that he composes less with rows and more with aggregates), his large-scale forms more constrained and mosaic-like, his compositional voice more acerbic, the rhythms more floating, and the soundscapes more variegated.

Alegant.indd Sec2:105

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:106

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Part Two

More Detailed Analyses

Alegant.indd Sec2:107

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:108

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

Chapter Five

Dallapiccola’s Idiosyncratic Approach to “Octatonic Serialism” Octatonic collections appear in the works of many twentieth-century composers. Even a partial list of composers who use octatonic collections would include Samuel Barber, Bela Bartók, Ernest Bloch, Benjamin Britten, George Crumb, Claude Debussy, Irving Fine, Ross Lee Finney, Alberto Ginastera, John Harbison, Aram Khatchaturian, Witold Lutosławski, Olivier Messiaen, Darius Milhaud, Robert Morris, Jean Papineau-Couture, Krzysztof Penderecki, Francis Poulenc, Sergei Prokofiev, Maurice Ravel, Alexander Scriabin, Dmitri Shostakovich, Igor Stravinsky, Toru Takemitsu, and Joan Tower, among others.1 That little has been written about octatonicism in serial music should hardly come as a surprise, since the eight-note collection would appear to be incompatible with strict serial technique.2 This chapter argues that Dallapiccola was a leading practitioner of what might be termed “twelve-tone octatonicism,” and shows that octatonic elements permeate his serial compositions, from the Liriche greche (1942–45) to Commiato (1972). Roman Vlad was the first scholar to note Dallapiccola’s penchant for octatonic harmonies.3 In a 1957 monograph, Vlad describes the “octophonic feeling” of two works composed in the 1940s as follows: The row structure on which the Quattro liriche are based is typical of Dallapiccola’s tendency to use the twelve-note spaces so as to obtain tonal and modal combinations. The row can in fact be described as an ascending form and an inverted transposition of the normal eight-note scale, which results in what Olivier Messiaen calls a “mode of limited transposition.” Dallapiccola’s row omits one note (i.e., A) as it rises and two (E♭ and C) as it descends, but this does not deprive the row of its “octophonic” feeling. Similar modal implications are to be found in the row of the Variazioni which constitute the Tre poemi for voice and chamber orchestra.4 ___________________ An early version of this paper, “Six of One and Half a Dozen of the Other: Octatonicism in Dallapiccola’s Twelve-Tone Music,” was delivered the Third Biennial International Conference on Twentieth-Century Music held in Nottingham, U.K., 2003. It was subsequently developed into an article that was co-written with John Levey and published in Music Analysis 25.1–2 (2006). With my co-author’s permission, I have revised the article in order to expand some of the analyses and to take into account recent publications on Dallapiccola’s music. I will also use the first-person singular rather than plural.

Alegant.indd Sec2:109

4/5/2010 10:20:07 PM

110

more detailed analyses

Example 5.1. Octatonic elements in the rows of Quattro liriche and Tre poemi Example 5.1 redraws two of Vlad’s analytical illustrations. Example 5.1(a) shows that the row of the first Machado song includes subsets drawn from two different octatonic scales. The first seven notes are part of what I call the c/c♯ collection, while the last six notes belong to the c/d collection; G♭ functions as a pivot between the two. Example 5.1(b) in turn demonstrates that the first vocal phrase of the Tre poemi articulates a 5+7 octatonic division: the first five notes belong to the c/c♯ collection while the last seven are part of the c/d collection. A brief digression on terminology is in order. I will continue to use a “fixeddo” pitch-class integer notation, with C = 0, C♯ or D♭ = 1, D = 2, . . . , B♭ = t, and B♮ = e. Thus, we can represent the three distinct members of set class 4–28[0369] as: {C, E♭, F♯, A}, {C♯, E, G, B♭}, {D, F, A♭, B}, or {0, 3, 6, 9}, {1, 4, 7, t}, {2, 5, 8, e}. A passage whose pitch-class content is based on two (or fewer) of these [0369] tetrachords will be octatonic (in whole or in part); a passage containing elements of three [0369] tetrachords will not be. I identify the different configurations of [0369] by their token representatives c, c♯, or d; hence I label three distinct octatonic collections as “c/c♯,” “c/d,” or “c♯/d.” Thus, the c/c♯ collection includes pitch classes {0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, t}; the c/d collection contains {0, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, e}; and the c♯/d collection has {1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, t, e}. Vlad’s findings are extended by Michael Eckert’s 1985 article entitled “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Dallapiccola.”5 In the course of the essay Eckert documents octatonic features in several other compositions, including Due studi, Il prigioniero, Piccola musica notturna, and Cinque canti. He ends with an analysis that highlights the octatonic elements in the Sex carmina alcaei. Example 5.2 reproduces some of Eckert’s observations of the work’s octatonic design. Example 5.2(a), for instance, shows that the opening of the first movement begins with solo statements of rows P-1 and R-2. (I will continue to identify P

Alegant.indd Sec2:110

4/5/2010 10:20:08 PM

Example 5.2. Some octatonic passages in the Sex carmina alcaei (after Eckert)

Alegant.indd Sec2:111

4/5/2010 10:20:08 PM

112

more detailed analyses

and I rows by their initial pitch classes and R and RI rows by their terminal pitch classes.) The initial septachord of P-1 belongs to the c/c♯ collection, while its concluding hexachord is drawn from the c/d collection (here, A♮ functions as a pivot); in R-2, by comparison, the initial hexachord belongs to the c/c♯ collection whereas the concluding septachord is drawn from the c♯/d collection Example 5.2(b) shows a later passage in which the combination of P-0 in the voice and P-9 in the instruments is supported by open fifths in the lowest register. Taken together, these vocal and instrumental fragments articulate a complete c/d collection; the E5 in the middle system initiates a new section based on the c♯/d collection. Example 5.2(c) presents an excerpt from the beginning of the sixth movement, “Conclusio.” Here, the first bar contains a complete statement of the c/c♯ collection, comprised of the first hexachords of I-0 in the upper system and P-4 in the middle system. Eckert shows that Dallapiccola occasionally combines segments of different rows in order to make complete octatonic collections. However, much of the Sex carmina alcaei is resistant to an exclusively octatonic interpretation: all told, there are fewer than twelve “purely” octatonic measures in the work. In short, the layering or superimposition of different rows creates neither a strong sense of aggregate completion nor a strong sense of octatonic structuring. Eckert claims that while the later compositions “still include occasional ‘tonal and modal combinations’ both melodically and harmonically, triadic and octatonic formations become increasingly rare in Dallapiccola’s music after the mid-’50s.”6 This is true insofar as complete octatonic collections are rarely encountered. But, as I will demonstrate, set classes 6–27[013469] and 6–30[013679] appear throughout the four serial phases. Eckert’s observations are extended by Dana Richardson in a dissertation entitled Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture.7 Richardson advances a three-pronged analytical approach that focuses on octatonic collections, voice-leading progressions, and tonal “analogs.” He finds octatonic elements in several works after the 1950s, and challenges Eckert’s assertion that octatonic formations become increasingly rare. He, like Eckert, looks for complete octatonic collections; the surfaces of Piccola musica notturna and Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi prove somewhat resistant to this approach, however: fully one-third of the surfaces of these works are deemed “non-octatonic.”8 This chapter revisits the subject of octatonicism in Dallapiccola’s twelvetone music and reconsiders the work of Vlad, Eckert, and Richardson in several ways. First, it views Dallapiccola’s octatonic designs through a hexachordal filter rather than an octatonic one. Second, it analyzes several works that have either not been discussed in the literature to date, or have not been considered from a harmonic point of view (especially an octatonic one). The analyses uncover a range of techniques by which octatonic surfaces are generated, and highlight features shared by these works. They also demonstrate that Dallapiccola’s use of octatonicism continues through the Cinque canti to the last works, Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi and Commiato, which are an octatonic renaissance of sorts. Finally, the focus on hexachords lends additional

Alegant.indd Sec2:112

4/5/2010 10:20:10 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 113 support to one of the primary arguments laid out in part 1: that the notion of hexachordal structuring—a quintessentially Schoenbergian trait—becomes increasingly important in the later phases. The first part of this chapter provides a theoretical framework. It explores the octatonic elements embedded in many of Dallapiccola’s rows and examines the properties of two hexachordal set classes, 6–27[013469] and 6–30[013679]. The second half contains analyses that show the ways in which octatonic surface formations interact with large-scale design. Compositions from all four serial phases are explored.

The Octatonic Inventory Allen Forte enumerates the set-class inventory of the octatonic scale in an article entitled “Debussy and the Octatonic.”9 His table 1 (reproduced as fig. 5.1 here) shows that the unordered subsets of set class 8–28[0134679t] include one sevennote collection, six pairs of hexachords, seven pentachords, twelve tetrachords, and many trichords and dyads (which are not shown). The two hexachords printed in bold type, set classes 6–27[013469] and 6– 30[013679], are the only octatonic subsets that can be mapped into their complements. The remaining hexachords are Z-related.10 Figure 5.2 lists the rows with octatonic elements that appear in Dallapiccola’s works. For the sake of comparison each row is transposed to begin with pitch class 0.11 The rows can be divided into four categories. The compositions in group 1 belong to the first serial phase (the 1940s). They include the Sex carmina alcaei and the outer movements of the Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, whose rows divide neatly into 6–27[013469] hexachords. The column designated “CUP” indicates Robert Morris’s notion of the “complement union property.”12 To illustrate, the CUP for set class 6–27 includes [0369] + [03]; this means that any diminished-seventh chord plus any non-intersecting minor third produces a member of set class 6–27. As an illustration, 6–27 can be derived by joining {C, E♭, G♭, A} with any of these ic-3 dyads: {C♯, E}, {D, F}, {E, G}, {F, A♭}, {G, B♭}, {A♭, B}, {B♭, D♭}, or {B, D}. Group 2 includes the rows of the Cinque canti, Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, and Commiato. These hexachordal pairs belong to set class 6–30[013679], a sonority also known as the “Petrushka” chord, since the opening of the second tableau of Stravinsky’s ballet famously combines C-major and F♯-major triads. Tempus has two movements, “Ploratus” and “Exhortatio,” whose non-overlapping hexachords project different orderings of this same set class. The CUP for 6–30 is [0369] + [06], meaning that the combination of any diminished-seventh chord plus any non-intersecting tritone yields a member of set class 6–30. For instance, 6–30 can be obtained by pairing {C, E♭, G♭, A} with any of these tritones: {C♯, G}, {D, G♯}, {E, B♭}, or {F, B}. The rows in group 3 contain pairs of Z-related hexachords, only the first of which is truly an octatonic subset. Set class 6–Z29[023679] has no CUP: the second hexachord of Tre poemi {2, 4, 5, 7, t, e} contains two non-intersecting members

Alegant.indd Sec2:113

4/5/2010 10:20:10 PM

114

more detailed analyses

Figure 5.1. The octatonic universe (after Forte) the master set:

8–28[0134679t]

subsets: 7–31[0134679] 6–Z13[013467] 6–Z23[023568] 6–27[013469] 6–30[013679] 6–Z49[013479] 6–Z50[014679]

(6–Z42 [012369]) (6–Z45[023469])

(6–Z28[013569]) (6–Z29[023679])

5–10[01346] 5–16[01347] 5–19[01367] 5–25[02358] 5–28[02368] 5–31[01369] 5–32[01469] 4–9 [0167] 4–10[0235] 4–12[0236] 4–13[0136] 4–Z15[0146] 4–17[0347] 4–18[0147] 4–25[0268] 4–26[0358] 4–27[0258] 4–28[0369] 4–Z29[0137] (trichords and dyads are not shown)

of a 3–10[036] trichord, but not every combination of these trichords produces a member of 6–Z29. The octatonic segments of the rows assembled in group 4 are distributed asymmetrically. Hence, the row for Job features an isolated pitch class, a complete c♯/d collection, and a member of 3–7[025], whereas the allinterval row of Piccola musica notturna contains set classes 5–16 and 6–27, and a singleton.13 In summary, figure 5.2 shows that rows with octatonic elements are found throughout Dallapiccola’s serial works. It also suggests a chronological shift in the deployment of particular hexachordal types, from set class 6–27 (which is found in the rows of phase 1), through Z-related hexachords (which permeate the rows of phases 2, 3, and 4), to set class 6–30, which is in the last two compositions.

Alegant.indd Sec2:114

4/5/2010 10:20:11 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:115

4/5/2010 10:20:11 PM

056389 036e92 035689

1945 1944–48 1948

Il prigioniero

Machado, i, iv

0176t4 0e9356 06539e

1970/71 1970/71 1972

Tempus, “Ploratus”

Tempus, “Exhortatio”

Commiato

0179t3 0e2389

1951 1962

Due studi, “Fanfare”

Preghiere

6154t

0 09134

1950 1954

Job

Piccola musica

e2875t 6

683

428e65

2e754t

te2358

t87124

478219

325e98

7314t9

3t7421

17845t

7et214

8741te

Hex. 2

1578e2t4

089631

1948

Tre poemi

Group 4 (“irregular”)

014679

1948

Machado, ii

Group 3 (Z-related)

0e5862

1956

Cinque canti

Group 2 (6–30)

035629

1943

Hex. 1

“Intermezzo”

Year

Sex carmina alcaei

Group 1 (6–27)

Composition

Figure 5.2. Rows with octatonic subsets

[0369] + [05]

[0369] + [06]

(same)

[0369] + [03]

CUP

[01347], 6–27, 1-1

1–1, 8–28, [025]

6–Z13/6–Z42

6–Z23/6–Z45

6–Z50/6Z29

6–Z50/6–Z29

6–30[013679]

(same)

6–27[013467]

Prime form

Example 5.3. Some octatonic rows and their CUP formations

Alegant.indd Sec2:116

4/5/2010 10:20:11 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 117 Example 5.3 surveys the rows formed from 6–27 and 6–30 hexachords and highlights their CUP formations. Each 6–27 contains one [0369] plus an ic-3 dyad from another cycle; by comparison, each 6–30 contains a complete [0369] plus an ic-6 dyad. Stems indicate the distributions of the [0369] tetrachords and dyads within each hexachord. As mentioned previously, 6–27 and 6–30 are the only octatonic hexachords that can be mapped into their complements; in this sense they are more malleable than the Z-related pairings. As a further consequence, these hexachords can also be grouped into regions, or families of rows. Consider, for instance, the row of the Sex carmina alcaei, which includes two 6–27 hexachords. As figure 5.3(a) shows, P-0 and R-0 share the same (unordered) hexachords as I-1 and RI-1. Figure 5.3. Regions of 6–27 and 6–30 hexachords (a) a region comprised of 6–27[013469] hexachords P-0 ⇒



⇐

R-0

I-1 ⇒



⇐

RI-1

(b) a region comprised of 6–30[013679] hexachords P-0 ⇒



⇐

R-0

P-6 ⇒



⇐

R-6

I-3 ⇒



⇐

RI-3

I-9 ⇒



⇐

RI-9

Together, these four rows comprise a region; the 48 rows of the row-class can thus be divided into twelve distinct regions. In contrast, rows based on 6–30 hexachords form six regions of eight rows each. Figure 5.3(b) shows the P-0 form of the “Ploratus” row found in Tempus, along with its other family members. A second characteristic of these hexachords is their ability to create complete octatonic collections under transposition, and to generate aggregates under inversion. Figure 5.4 shows the set classes that arise when a member of 6–27 is combined with itself under various transposition and inversion operators (Tn and TnI). The upper section of the figure shows the set classes generated from the union of pitch-class set {0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 9} and its twelve transpositions. Note that the inventory is fairly limited in scope. In fact, the various hexachordal combinations yield just four different set classes: 6–27 (under T0, the “trivial” operator); 7–31 (under T3 and T9); a complete octatonic collection (under T6); and eight configurations of set class 10–3 (the total chromatic minus one interval-class 3). The symmetries illustrated in the figure are largely a by-product of the ic-3 cycles inherent in set class 6–27. Every 6–27 contains one complete [0369] plus one ic 3 that in a sense represents half of another [0369]. Thus, a transposition

Alegant.indd Sec2:117

4/5/2010 10:20:13 PM

118

more detailed analyses

Figure 5.4. Combinations of set class 6–27[013469] Operation

X ∪ Tn(X), where X = { 0 1 3 4 6 9 }

n=0

6–27[013469]

n = 3, 9

7–31[0134679]

(all but 5-31[01369])

n=6

8–28[0134679t]

(all but [0369])

n = 1, 2,4, 5, 7, 8, t, e

10–3

(all but [03])

Operation

X ∪ TnI(X), where X = { 0 1 3 4 6 9 }

n=6

8–3

(all but [0134])

n=3

8–10

(all but [0235])

n=9

8–17

(all but [0347])

n=0

8–26

(all but [0358])

n = 1, 4, 7, t

8–28

n=5

10–3

(all but [03])

n = 2, 8

11–1

(all but one note)

n=e

12–1

(the aggregate)

operator will either: preserve the original [0369] and keep the minor third in its orbit (under T0, T3, T6, T9), thereby creating a six-, seven- or eight-note octatonic collection; or create a new [0369] while duplicating the minor third from the original hexachord, thereby generating a member of set class 10–3. The bottom portion of figure 5.4 indicates the set classes that occur when pitch-class set {0, 1, 3, 4, 6, 9} is combined with its twelve inversional representations.14 This set-class inventory is slightly larger than the transpositional one. Under inversion, 6–27 hexachords combine to generate five octachords, a ten-note set, an eleven-note set and the aggregate. Figure 5.5 outlines the set-class inventories for the combinations of 6–30. The set-class inventory for 6–30 is smaller than that for 6–27: it includes the source hexachord, three octachords, one ten-note collection, and the aggregate. The combinations of 6–27 and 6–30 create fairly limited harmonic palettes, ranging from a single hexachord to the aggregate. Some of these are purely octatonic, others not. But the point I want to emphasize is that Dallapiccola uses all of the collections in figures 5.4 and 5.5. To this point I have reviewed the literature on Dallapiccola’s octatonic practice, explored some of his octatonic rows, and examined various properties of set classes 6–27 and 6–30. Before surveying some of the specific compositional

Alegant.indd Sec2:118

4/5/2010 10:20:13 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 119 Figure 5.5. Combinations of set class 6–30[013679] Operation

X ∪ Tn(X), where X = { 0 1 3 6 7 9 }

n = 0, 6

6–30[013679]

n = 3, 9

8–28

n = 1, 2,4, 5, 7, 8, t, e

10–6(all but [06])

Operation

X ∪ TnI(X), where X = { 0 1 3 6 7 9 }

n=6

8–3

(all but [0134])

n = 0, 6

8–25

(all but [0268])

n = 3, 9

8–9

(all but [0167])

(all but [0369])

n = 1, 4, 7, t

8–28

n = 2, 8

10–6

(all but [06])

n = e, 5

12¬–1

(the aggregate)

uses of these hexachords, it will be helpful to make a few brief remarks on the issues of segmentation and realization. Consider example 5.4(a), which presents a reduction of measures 827–29 of Dallapiccola’s opera Il prigioniero.15 The chorus intones the word “Domine,” first on a G♯-minor triad, then in descending major thirds. The accompaniment features a series of ascending 6– 27 hexachords beginning on F♯2 and rising to C6; each hexachord is supported by a sustained tritone. We can interpret the set classes in this passage in several ways. The reading in example 5.4(a) uses an octatonic “filter” that highlights the presence of complete 8–28 collections. In this segmentation, the elements of the first bar (the G♯-minor triad, the initial 6–27 hexachord, and the B–F tritone) complete the c/d octatonic collection. (I hear the minor triad as a tonal artifact, or “remnant.”) Three more complete 8–28 collections surface in the following measure (belonging to the c♯/d, c/c♯, and c/d collections respectively), though they may appear somewhat arbitrarily defined. Put simply, by what criteria might one feel justified in assuming a palpable ic-3 overlap between each successive pair of 6–27 hexachords? Without this overlapping effect, for example, the same passage would involve an initial 8–28 collection followed by three 6–27 hexachords, each including a doubled [0147] tetrachord, as indicated in example 5.4(b). My objective in the ensuing analyses is to highlight the ways in which Dallapiccola exploits 6–27 and 6–30 hexachords on the surface. Therefore, I will only touch on issues of segmentation, and will not spend much time arguing the merits of one particular reading over another. (Of course, I hope not to advance any implausible readings, either.)

Alegant.indd Sec2:119

4/5/2010 10:20:13 PM

120

more detailed analyses

Example 5.4. Octatonic surfaces in Il prigioniero

Compositional Designs Based on 6–27 Hexachords Arguably, Dallapiccola’s most transparent use of set class 6–27[013469] occurs in the middle movement of the Ciaccona, intermezzo e adagio for solo cello. The work was composed for the cellist and composer Gaspar Cassadò, who performed it frequently in concert, thereby helping to establish Dallapiccola’s international reputation. This short movement is in ABA’ form, featuring strictly organized outer sections that contrast with a freer, more episodic central section.16 Example 5.5 provides an annotated score for the opening A section. It labels the rows and their discrete (non-overlapping) hexachords, which I designate h1 and h2.

Alegant.indd Sec2:120

4/5/2010 10:20:14 PM

Example 5.5. Octatonic structuring in the “Intermezzo”

Alegant.indd Sec2:121

4/5/2010 10:20:16 PM

122

more detailed analyses

Example 5.5. Octatonic structuring in the “Intermezzo”—(concluded) Throughout the movement Dallapiccola presents each row in isolation, taking care to articulate the boundaries of hexachords and rows. There are no statements of complete octatonic collections (set class 8–28); rather, the surface is a steady procession of 6–27 hexachords. The symmetrical phrase structure and periodic arrangement of hexachords are perhaps the most obvious characteristics of the initial statement (m. 93–101). In registral terms, the realization of P-6 is as constrained as possible: the pitches are contained within a single octave that is bounded by F♯3 and F4. (We saw a similar constrained pitch structure in the opening of Sex carmina alcaei, another first-phase composition.) On the surface, P-6 realizes a 5+1 partitioning of its h1 and h2 hexachords, with five marcato quarter-notes followed by a triplet-note “tag” framed by rests. The h1 hexachords can be divided into similar trichords: h1 unfolds two members of 3–5[016] related by T3, {F♯, B, C} and {A, D, E♭}. Row I-e enters in measure 97, matching the rhythm, dynamics, and articulation of P-6; it is a clear example of isomorphic partitioning (a Schoenbergian procedure). I-e is also an exact inversion of P-6 in pitch space about the axis D4–E♭4, save for the final note, the triplet G2 (m. 100): given the strict symmetry between P-6 and I-e, a G3 is “due” instead. A sff open-string C in measure 101 punctuates the initial pair of rows; the ensuing ff outburst ushers in new material. The accented, open-string attacks serve as formal markers throughout the movement and are frequently subjected to various additive procedures. The first such marker (m. 101) is a single sff low C; the second is two statements of

Alegant.indd Sec2:122

4/5/2010 10:20:18 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 123 a C–G dyad; the third consists of three statements of a C–G–D trichord. Occasionally, one of the open-string notes also forms the last note of a given row. These are the only irregularities in the unfolding of linear rows. The opening establishes a steady harmonic rhythm, a relatively constrained pitch-space realization, and a consistent pattern of 5+1 and 3+3 hexachordal parsings. Example 5.6(a) summarizes many of the above observations.

Example 5.6. Summary of “Intermezzo,” opening

Example 5.6(b) draws attention to another facet of the surface presentation: polarity. In “On the Twelve-Note Road,” Dallapiccola describes polarity as follows: Thus I arrived at the conclusion that, if in the twelve-tone system the tonic no longer existed, if, consequently, the dominant–tonic attraction was excluded, if sonata form, for the same reason, had completely disintegrated, there still existed a force of attraction—often hidden, it is true, but even so always there: the polarity (I don’t know if others before me have used such a definition or if they have found another), meaning the existence of extremely refined relationships between certain notes; relationships not always easily recognized today (being far less evident than that of dominant–tonic), but present all the same. And the interesting aspect of this polarity is that it changes (or can change) from one work to another. One series may present us with the polarity between the first and twelfth note; another between the second and ninth . . . and so

Alegant.indd Sec2:123

4/5/2010 10:20:19 PM

124

more detailed analyses

on. And I do not speak of the possibilities inherent in single segments of the series (composer’s emphases).17

The polarity between the invariant dyads is readily perceived. Rows P-6 and I-e preserve the outer dyads of their respective h1 hexachords, {F♯, B} and {D, E♭}; they also maintain the final dyad of h2, {G, B♭}. (The order of pitch classes in each dyad is reversed). Moreover, the {D, E♭} dyad of the h1 hexachords is restated at pitch, which is significant because these pitches serve as the axis of symmetry between the opening rows. The sense of polarity is preserved between nearly all of the subsequent row pairs in the outer sections of the movement (the rhapsodic B section is the primary deviation).18 From an octatonic standpoint the “Intermezzo” is undoubtedly Dallapiccola’s most “monochromatic” conception. The 6–27 hexachords that are the movement’s primary building blocks activate a consistent harmonic rhythm and enhance the regular, periodic phrase structure. The multiple associations formed among the various dyadic pitch and pitch-class combinations—the polarities—reinforce an already rigid harmonic design. By comparison, in the first of the Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, a composition from the 1940s, the row handling is more complex and the harmonic vocabulary more variegated. Overall, the song is quite compact, with a sparse texture, a high tessitura (the lowest note of the accompaniment is F♯3), and a transparent, ethereal orchestration.19 The ensuing analysis focuses on the organization of twelve-tone materials, paying particular attention to the ways in which octatonic hexachords and row fragments are combined. Due to considerations of space, I shall gloss over many of the surface details, including aspects of octave doubling (one of the identifying features of the first phase), text setting, and registration. The song is based on a short text: “La primavera ha venido. ¡Aleluyas blancas de los zarzales floridos!” (Spring has come. White hallelujahs of flowering brambles!) The setting is in three sections, each of which begins with a single row statement supported by a gradually thickening texture. As shown in figure 5.6, part 1 contains an extended introduction and the first line of text. The introduction features repeated presentations of a “fanfare” gesture, followed by two melodic row statements. Part 2 restates the fanfare gesture and introduces the second line of text, which is accompanied by linear row statements and descending chromatic lines. Part 3 once again commences with a single melodic row statement before expanding gradually into a three-voice texture for an ecstatic repeat of the second line. The pitch-class material is based primarily on discrete (i.e., non-overlapping) 6–27[013469] hexachords. These hexachords are invariably projected as melodic strands sporadically accompanied by segments of rows and descending chromatic lines. The set classes on the upper level of each principal formal unit are octatonic in whole or in part (for instance, 4–13[0136], 6–27, and 7–31 are

Alegant.indd Sec2:124

4/5/2010 10:20:20 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:125

4/5/2010 10:20:20 PM

6

7

8

9

10

11

7–31 8–28

7–31 8–17

6–z50

8–28

18

34

35

33

36

9–7

8–17

8–28 9–7

13

14

23

25

26

37

8–28

8–28 8–28

38

8–28

27

39

8–28

40

12–1

41

10–3

28

42

||

7–31 8–28

Three, Two ----------------------------------

24

4–13 6–27

9–10

9–2

5–13

5–5

3–8

(3–8)

Three rows ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Row fragments -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One row ------------------------------------------------------------- Two rows

32

9–3

denouement

10–5 8–5

30

10–3 ⇒

31

22

6–27

Chromatic lines ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ecstatic restatements of line 2

5–25 6–27

21

Two rows, chromatic lines

20

19

6–27 6–27

17

One row, fanfare

12

15

16

7–31

29

6–27 12–1

Two rows ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5

Line two “Aleluyas blancas de los zarzales floridos!”

6–Z23

4

Restatement of fanfare;

4–13 6–27

One row, “fanfare”

3

Line 1: “La primavera ha venido”

N.B.: 3–8[026]; 4–13[0136]; 5–5[01237]; 5–13[01248]; 5–25[02358]; 6–Z23[023568]; 6–27[013469]; 6–Z50[014679]; 8–3[01234569]; 8– 5[01234678]; 8–17[01345689]; 8–28[0134679t].

III.

II.

1

meas.

2

Introduction

I.

Figure 5.6. Formal overview of the first Machado song

126

more detailed analyses

octatonic subsets), while those on the lower level are non-octatonic. Overall, part 1 establishes an octatonic foundation: with two exceptions (mm. 9 and 16), the harmonies within each full measure are purely octatonic. Part 2 combines 6–27 hexachords and chromatic lines to produce a variety of non-octatonic collections, including 8–5, 10–3, 10–5, and ultimately the aggregate. Octatonic and chromatic elements continue to coexist in part 3 until the final measures, which fade away on a {C4, E4, F♯4} trichord that can be heard variously as a diatonic, whole-tone, or octatonic sonority. (The fourth song ends with this same set class, in a kind of closing parallelism.) Figure 5.7 presents a different view of the form that focuses on the placement of 6–27 hexachords. The disposition of h1 and h2 hexachords reinforces the harmonic rhythm, with the majority of measures unfolding one or more versions of this hexachordal set class. Dallapiccola exploits many different combinations of the [013469] collections, and thus creates a spectrum of harmonies—from the unadorned hexachord to the aggregate. Note in particular the stacks of T6-related hexachords in measures 23–26 and 36–38 and the complementary hexachords in measure 37. The figure also shows how the underlying framework of 6–27 hexachords is embellished with row segments, chromatic lines (notated “ic-1” for short), and dyadic partitions. Certainly one of the most important aspects of this song is the exploitation of 6–27 hexachords with the aim of completing or interlocking eight-note octatonic collections—and not completing aggregates. Let us now examine the song itself, shown in example 5.7. The distinctive fanfare gesture in the opening is comprised entirely of dyads.20 Row P-t restates its first dyad no fewer than six times, asserting the pitch-class set {A♯, C♯, D♯, E} through brute-force repetition. This tetrachord combines with the accented {G4, F♯5} dyad on the fourth beat of measure 2 to form a member of set class 6–27. Incidentally, the opening aggregate is not a typical representation of a dyadic cross partition. Given row P-t, < t 1 3 4 6 7 9 8 5 2 0 e >, the two lines can be modelled as follows:

upper line: lower line:

order numbers 23 48t9 01 56e7

pitch classes 34 6502 t1 79e8

The adjacent order numbers of the rows appear horizontally instead of vertically, and the order numbers of the second hexachord are scrambled. As a result, the fifth and sixth dyads are swapped, and the aggregate ends with a {D, A♭} tritone instead of a {B, C} semitone. Returning to the score, we can see that the {D, A♭} tritone is marked by a crescendo and poco sf accent, and is sustained through the next measure and a half, where it hovers above the repeated {C, F} and {E♭, G♭} dyads of P-0. The last dyad of P-t and the first two dyads of P-0 thereby form another octatonic subset, though not a version of 6–27; instead, {C, D, E♭, F, G♭, A♭}

Alegant.indd Sec2:126

4/5/2010 10:20:21 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:127

4/5/2010 10:20:21 PM

6

Piano

35

P-2, h1 h2

P-4, h1 P-e, h1

h2

P-5[segments] P-t, h1

34

I-4 [segments] I-e ----------------------------

h2

33

I-2, h1

32

Voice

31

30

III.

24

—

h2

P-5

h2

36

I-7, h2

I-7, h1

37

P-6, h1 h2

13

26

— 27

—

P-9 [segments]

12

P-e, h2

P-5, h2

P-5, h2

38

—

—

P-3, h1 h2

39

P-t, h1 h2 dyads — P-2, h1 h2

P-4, h1 h2

25

—

11

3, 2, 1 ic-1 lines

P-3, h1 h2

1 ic-1 line

23

—

3 ic-1 lines

22

—

P-5, h1 h2

21

—

10

I-6, h1 h2

9

P-t, h1 h2

20

—

8

R-7, h1 h2

7

dyads — —

19

—

P-7, h1 h2

5

Piano

18

—

3

ic-1 line P-9, h1 h2

17

dyads

1

Voice

II.

Piano

Voice

I.

Figure 5.7. Distribution of 6–27 hexachords in Machado, i

29

—

I-7

RI-8

15

—

—

—

40

—

—

—

41

— R-2 h1,h2

28

—

14

—

—

42

—

16

Example 5.7. Machado, i, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:128

4/5/2010 10:20:21 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 129 forms set class 6–Z23[023568]. This hexachord and the {A3, A♭4} dyad on the third beat of measure 4 (the counterpart of the {G4, G♯5} dyad in the second measure), produce the octatonic septachord 7–31. P-0 is partitioned in the same fashion as P-t: repeating its initial dyads (five times instead of six) and similarly reordering the elements of its h2 hexachord. P-0 concludes with a {B♭, E} tritone on the downbeat of measure 5; this tritone accords with the h1 hexachord of row P-7 in the upper voice. Thus, shuffling the order of the h2 hexachords of rows P-t and P-0 enables Dallapiccola to link the beginning and endings of successive rows. It also allows the odd-numbered measures to contain octatonic subsets. Now a new pattern of linear 6–27 hexachords emerges. Measure lines articulate the boundaries of rows and hexachords (which are invariably realized as arches in pitch space, six notes ascending and six notes descending), producing a uniform harmonic rhythm and a tendency toward two-measure hypermetric groupings. The dyads in the left hand of the piano combine with 6–27 hexachords to form larger subsets; the alignments of dyads and hexachords generate 7–31, 8–28 (a complete c/d collection), and 7–31 again, excluding the “suspended” B♮ from the previous measure. Example 5.8 shows the climax of the song (mm. 21–27). Measure 21 brings a contrasting idea in the form of descending chromatic lines. At first, the descending lines in the piano and voice start a tritone apart; the piano on D6, the voice on A♭5. These lines adorn the hexachords of P-5, which continue the pattern of one 6–27 hexachord per measure. In measure 23, the left hand of the piano and the voice unfold P-3 and P-9, whose hexachords combine to form two complete octatonic collections. (Recall that any 6–27 hexachord plus its tritone transposition automatically complete an octatonic collection.) Here, the tritone-related rows are combined in a three-against-two realization that enhances the rhythmic flow and avoids parallel motion. The pitch classes from the descending chromatic lines add one note each from the remaining [0369] tetrachord, making nine-note collections in measures 23 and 24. A stacked-fifth sonority on the downbeat of measure 25 triggers a three-line chromatic descent that accompanies the melisma on “flo-ri-dos!” As before, T6-related rows generate complete collections (P-4 in the voice and P-t in the left hand, reversing roles in another three-versus-two); the notes added by the supplementary chromatic lines nearly generate double aggregates. This measure, though the densest in the song, has a ppp dynamic. The chromatic lines evaporate in measure 26, and the surface returns to its octatonic roots. Example 5.9 reproduces the conclusion of the song. The voice’s I-7 row is accompanied by elements of three separate rows, P-5, P-e, and the end of I-e, which plummets from G6 to A4 before settling on B♭4. Harmonically, the tritone-related linear 6–27 hexachords of P-5 and P-e initiate a series of complete octatonic collections. The vocal hexachords of I-7 and P-3 introduce supplementary notes that project 10–3 and 8–Z29 (non-octatonic sets).

Alegant.indd Sec2:129

4/5/2010 10:20:23 PM

Example 5.8. Machado, i, climax

Alegant.indd Sec2:130

4/5/2010 10:20:23 PM

dallapiccola's approach to "octatonic serialism" 131

Example 5.9. Machado, i, conclusion In summary, the rows’ 6–27 hexachords construct an octatonic framework that is periodically embellished with foreign pitch classes belonging to other 6–27 hexachords, descending chromatic lines, row fragments, and free-floating dyads. The embellishments have two functions: they vary the texture, and they prevent the octatonic surface from sounding overly restricted or monochromatic.

Alegant.indd Sec2:131

4/5/2010 10:20:25 PM

132

more detailed analyses

Set class 6–27 plays a larger role in Il prigioniero, Dallapiccola’s second opera.21 The score is technically ambitious, with several distinct row forms exhibiting disparate octatonic, diatonic, whole-tone and chromatic collections.22 Il prigioniero was completed in the same year as the Machado songs, so it is not surprising that the works share many structural and sonic characteristics. For one thing, they both open strongly with octatonic elements that are immediately repeated. Example 5.10 shows the beginning of the Prologue. The opening is strident and relentless, as the orchestra hammers out three tetrachords in shifting, syncopated rhythms. This 43 cross partition becomes a principal cell. The first two harmonies (marked “x”) are members of set class 4–13[0136], and the third (marked “y”) is a version of 4–18[0147], the same sonority emphasized at the beginning of the first Machado song. (These set classes share a [036] subset; we can move between these sonorities by “toggling” one pitch class.) In measure 9, as the orchestral fury momentarily subsides, the mother sings a version of the “Prayer row,” which contains two discrete 6–27 hexachords. The line “Ti rivedrò, mio figlio!” (Once more, my son, I’ll see you!) sets the h1 hexachord plus the first note of h2, B♭, thereby creating set class 7– 31. A repetition of “Ti rivedrò” (mm. 11–12) projects h2 in its entirety. Harmonically, the opening uses set classes 4–13[0136], 4–18[0147], and 6–27[013469]. Over the course of the opera they become referential sonorities. The ensuing discussion traces a partial history of set class 6–27[013469] in the opera. Several motives are fashioned from 6–27 hexachords, and are subsequently developed. The primary motivic transformations are imitation (canon, sequence, stretto, and axial symmetry), augmentation, and diminution, among other devices. These transformations exhaust the set-class inventory of figure 5.4. Interestingly, 6–27 never appears as a vertical sonority. Passages saturated with 6–27 collections occur at the end of the second, third, and fourth scenes. Example 5.11 provides a reduction of the end of scene 2, measures 536–66. Dramatically, this scene sets the prisoner’s internal dialogue immediately before he decides to escape. It opens with clarinets doubled at the octave, involving three repetitions of a row I designate P-1. (This row exhibits a different order than the “Prayer” row but preserves its discrete 6–27 hexachords.) The soundscape recalls the opening of the “Ayer soñé que veia,” the second Machado song, with a consistent harmonic rhythm of 6–27 hexachords that is reinforced by the measure lines; the row’s hexachords unfolding as arches in pitch space; a reliance on literal repetition; a fairly high tessitura; and a sparse texture. Starting in measure 544, two 6–27 hexachords are staggered, which alternates octatonic and non-octatonic harmonies. Shortly thereafter (mm. 547–49), the prisoner sings a version of the “Fratello” leitmotive, a 3–3[014] trichord with an intervallic profile of semitones. (This is a literal pitch restatement of the very first “Fratello” utterance in measures 198–99.) Note the subtle details of the setting: the downbeat of measure 548 (on “La tam-pada”) has a [014] trichord, the same set class as the “Fratello” leitmotive. Also, the clarinet transposes the first

Alegant.indd Sec2:132

4/5/2010 10:20:27 PM

Example 5.10. Il prigioniero, Prologue, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:133

4/5/2010 10:20:27 PM

Example 5.11. Il prigioniero, a passage from scene 2

Alegant.indd Sec2:134

4/5/2010 10:20:29 PM

Example 5.11. Il prigioniero, a passage from scene 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:135

4/5/2010 10:20:32 PM

136

more detailed analyses

Example 5.11. Il prigioniero, a passage from scene 2—(concluded)

note of h1 up an octave, so as to double the voice temporarily on E4. Measure 551 introduces a third row to the texture (and it is significant that this row, P-7 moves in parallel tritones with P-1), and measure 559 reintroduces pitch-class D♭, which rounds off the section. With the repeated open fifths of “l’altre sere,” the scene—and the prisoner’s interior dialogue—comes to a close.23 In scene 3, the choir (which has been absent since the prologue) sings a fragment from Psalm 51, one of the seven Penitential Psalms: “Domine, labia mea aperies; Domine, et os meum annuntiabit laudem tuam” (O Lord, open thou my lips, and my mouth shall show forth thy praise). Example 5.12 excerpts this passage, which is labeled the second “intermezzo corale.” For purposes of space I have condensed the choral parts into a single system. Dallapiccola’s directions are unique among his output:

Alegant.indd Sec2:136

4/5/2010 10:20:35 PM

Example 5.12. Il prigioniero, a passage from scene 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:137

4/5/2010 10:20:36 PM

138

more detailed analyses

The sonority of the Second Choral Intermezzo must be formidable: every spectator must feel himself literally overwhelmed and submerged by the immensity of the sound. To this end there should be no hesitation in making use, if necessary, of mechanical means, such as loudspeakers, etc.

In measure 823, the chorus sings a C-major triad, and an octatonic subset is blared by the organ and orchestra. (How ironic that the prisoner’s inner turmoil is realized with a major triad.) Chromaticism soon pervades the surface. The chorus’ four triads combine to form the aggregate (C major, B♭ minor, D major, and G♯ minor), and semitonal (ic-1) motion governs the stacked tritones and the soprano and alto thirds in measure 828. Two details are worth pointing out. Example 5.12(b) shows the 6–27 hexachords resurfacing in measure 827; note that they are transposed upward by T+11. Example 5.12(c) shows that the soprano and alto pitches on “Domine” combine with the underlying sustained tritones to produce sliding 4–18[0147] sonorities; this is, of course, the set class of the first chord in the opera (shown as “x” in ex. 5.10). Both of these features return in the climactic scene. The next seventy-five measures develop these triads, 6–27 fragments, descending tritones, and chromatic lines, and propel the fourth scene to its culmination. The dramatic crux of this scene (and the opera as a whole) occurs at the moment when the prisoner is betrayed by the jailer. Example 5.13 shows the approach to this event.24 The action includes the Prisoner, the Grand Inquisitor, choir, and orchestra. The stage directions indicate: “The prisoner, at the height of ecstasy spreads out his arms in a gesture of love for all humanity. Two enormous arms, half hidden by the lowest branches, slowly move out to return the embrace. The prisoner finds himself held fast by the arms of the Great Inquisitor.” The climax, which occurs on the sustained presentation of “Domine” in measures 897–98, is saturated by 6–27 fragments. Each section of the chorus, doubled by a brass instrument, states this hexachord and veers off. The voices are imitated at T+11, beginning with the bass on B2, the tenor on B♭3, and the alto and soprano on A4. The harmonic rhythms ebb and flow, and are anchored by descending tritones in the lowest registers. The explosion on “Domine” dissolves into a ppp B minor triad, against which the Grand Inquisitor taunts the Prisoner with a statement of the “Fratello” leitmotive—fittingly, at its original pitch level.25 One thing that makes the betrayal such a powerful event is the preparation of the “Fratello” idea. Dozens of “Fratello” motives are sprinkled throughout the opera. Many of these are partially spoken or sung falsetto, and all exhibit the characteristic intervallic profile. In addition, example 5.14(a) shows the “Prayer” row, with the shift in direction that typically occurs at its hexachordal boundary.

Alegant.indd Sec2:138

4/5/2010 10:20:38 PM

Example 5.13. Il prigioniero, scene 4, climax

Alegant.indd Sec2:139

4/5/2010 10:20:38 PM

140

more detailed analyses

Example 5.14. “Fratello” leitmotivs and the opera’s climax This boundary is marked by a descending ic 1 followed by ic 3; thus, the center of the Prayer row embeds the [014] cell that we have come to associate with “Fratello.” This idea emerges with full force at the approach to the climax, which is shown in example 5.14(b).26 Amid a backdrop of 6–27 hexachords and other row fragments, the bass, alto, and soprano sing “Domine” using the “Fratello” leitmotive. Further, they do so in a rising T+11 sequence that recalls the similar treatment in the previous scene. In the wake of the sustained fff “Domine” chord, the Grand Inquisitor sings “Fratello” and completes the cycle. The pp dynamic and soavissimo delivery conspire to wrench—indeed, to choke—all hope from the Prisoner.

Compositional Designs Based on 6–30 Hexachords As we observed in part 1, the second and third phases bring dramatic changes in the handling of texture, rhythm, and harmony. Compared to the first-phase works (created during the 1940s), the compositions of these phases contain fewer complete octatonic collections. At the same time, they make greater use of octatonic subsets, chief among them set class 6–30[013679], often as simultaneities. Typically, these chords are punctuation markers for the beginnings or endings of sections and movements. The first full-fledged exploration of set class 6–30[013679] occurs in the Cinque canti, in which Dallapiccola uses new procedures, partitioning schemes, rhythmic devices, and canonic techniques.27 To review briefly, the row of the Cinque canti is RI-symmetrical: each P row has an RI equivalent (and each I row has an R analogue).

Alegant.indd Sec2:140

4/5/2010 10:20:42 PM

dallapiccola’s approach to “octatonic serialism” 141 P-0: < 0 e 5 8 6 2 7 3 1 4 t 9> Intervals: e 6 3 t 8 5 8 t 3 6 e The RI-symmetry is reflected by the palindromic arrangement of directed pitchclass intervals (the corresponding elements of the row sum to 9: 0–9, t–e, 4– 5, and so on). More importantly, the row is built from non-overlapping 6–30 hexachords. As a result, the row class (the universe of 48 rows that includes 12 transpositions and 12 inversions, and their retrogrades) can be divided into six regions of eight rows apiece. To illustrate, the following octet of rows share the same (unordered) hexachordal collections: P-0, RI-9 P-6, RI-3

⇒ ⇒



⇐ ⇐

R-0, I-9 R-6, I-3

The first song of the Cinque canti realizes 6–30 hexachords as simultaneities. As example 5.15 reveals, the hexachordal structuring is strongly asserted, as the accompaniment initially presents a series of 62 cross partitions, which are labelled P-3, P-4, P-5, and P-0.28 In the latter half of measure 6 the texture changes from single-row presentations of cross partitions to two-part counterpoint; the hexachordal simultaneities give way to axial symmetries and canonic imitation from which set class 6–30 is conspicuously absent. The remainder of the movement alternates between these modes of presentation. Without question the most intriguing instances of 6–30 in Cinque canti occur in the crucifix-shaped ideograms that dominate the central movement.29 Example 5.16 reproduces the ideograms with which the movement opens (a) and closes (b). From a harmonic perspective the crucifix is a “frozen” pitch-space realization of this octatonic subset. While set class 6–30 is clearly exposed in the beginning of the first movement and throughout the third, it does not exert a strong presence in the remaining movements, which are primarily concerned with tetrachordal structuring (in four voices) and the pervasive use of canon and axial symmetry. It is as if Dallapiccola “reserves” punctuations of 6–30 hexachords for the most rhetorically charged events. Fifteen years pass before Dallapiccola returns to rows that are constructed of non-overlapping 6–30 hexachords. Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi (A Time to Destroy—A Time to Build) is a two-movement composition for chorus. Like many of the fourth-phase compositions it uses: hexachordal organization; a free approach to row setting and partitioning (with very few linear row statements); a preference for homophonic textures; floating rhythm; and an austere surface.30 The harmonic language relies heavily on two configurations: 6–30[013679] hexachords, which are often shared by several voices or presented as block sonorities (especially at cadences), and derived aggregates. One type of derived aggregate

Alegant.indd Sec2:141

4/5/2010 10:20:43 PM

142

more detailed analyses

Example 5.15. 6–30 articulations in Cinque canti, i, opening is based on a partition of six semitones (designated “[01] x 6”); another incorporates a partition of six tritones (labelled “[06] x 6”). Still others are derived from set classes 3–2[013], 3–3[014], 3–5[016], and 4–9[0167]. Figure 5.8 provides a translation of the “Ploratus” movement, which is based on a lament written by Paulinus of Aquileia.31 Figure 5.9 provides a diagram of the outer form. It shows the primary partitioning strategies, stanzaic divisions of the text, and dynamics. The lines designated “partition” chart the aggregate formations. Aggregates are derived from dyads as well as trichords, and rows are realized linearly and as 62 cross partitions. The figure also shows how dynamic levels and tempo changes reinforce the formal divisions. Example 5.17 gives the score for the opening measures of Ploratus. The emotional impact is heightened by ff dynamics, a high tessitura (especially in the soprano, tenor, and bass lines), and the overlapping two-note articulations of

Alegant.indd Sec2:142

4/5/2010 10:20:43 PM

dallapiccola’s approach to “octatonic serialism” 143

Example 5.16. Ideograms and 6–30[013679] hexachords

Figure 5.8. Translation of “Ploratus” Ploratus (Deploration) O quae in altum extollebas verticem, O you who once raised your peak on high, Quomodo jaces despecta inutilis pressa ruinis, How you lie there, looked down upon useless, Numquam reparabilis tempus in omne! Never to be repaired for all time! Pro cantu tibi cithara et organo luctis advenit, Instead of a song for you by lyre and organum, there comes a mourning, Lamentum et gemitus . . . a weeping and a sighing.

Alegant.indd Sec2:143

4/5/2010 10:20:44 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:144

4/5/2010 10:20:45 PM

Text: Measure: Partition: Row(s):

Text: Measure: Partition: Row(s):

Text: Measure: Partition: Rows:

Part I: O quae in altum …, 5 8 9 (6–30)2 (6–30)2 I-9 P-7

>

dolcissimo

//

ff

57 [013]4

pp

f

>

36 (6–30)2 P-3

12 [013]4

Ah! gemitus; Ah! luctus … 59, 60 61 Linear [013]4 I-9/P-6

p

Part II: Quomodo jaces … tempus in omne! 20 25 29 32 Linear (6–30)2 [014]4 Linear I-t/ P-7 P-e I-2/P-e P-t, h1

3 [01]6

Part 3: Pro cantu tibi … 49 51 54 Linear rows + (6–30)2 [014]4 I-3 → R-8 → R-8 → P-9 ↑ I-e ↑ RI-9 ↑

f, a tempo

Ah 18 [01]6

ff, impetuoso

Ah 1 [01]6

Figure 5.9. Formal diagram of “Ploratus”

mp

66, 68 Linear I-9

38 [014]4

14 [013]4

ppp

//

41 45 (6–30)2 I-2 R-0

pp

ppp

gemitus… 69 72–80 (6–30)2 I-0

39 [013]4

Più agitato

Ah 16 [01]6

Example 5.17. “Ploratus,” opening Alegant.indd Sec2:145

4/5/2010 10:20:45 PM

146

more detailed analyses

“Ah!” that effectively obscure any sense of pulse (and meter). The first eight measures realize three aggregates, two of which are based this partition of [01] dyads: { {0, e} {1, 2} {3, 4} {5, 6} {7, 8} {9, t} } In measure 5 the texture changes and the dyads coalesce into 6–30 hexachords: { {0, 3, 4, 6, 9, t} {1, 2, 5, 7, 8, e} }; this shift is reinforced by a brief rest in measure 6 and a full measure of rest in measure 8 (not shown). The arrows in the example indicate two (of the movement’s many) vertical presentations of set class 6–30; these, once again, function as formal markers. Example 5.18 shows some of the 6–30 simultaneities in the movement. The reduction emphasizes two features.32 The first concerns the pitch-space realizations of the 6–30 hexachords. By far the most common configuration of [013679] combines one member each of set classes 3–5[016] and 3–8[026]. This is the arrangement that occurs in the first “measure” in the example: the h1 hexachord of I-9 contains a [016] in the right hand and a [026] in the left, while the h2 hexachord reverses the registral positioning of the trichords and re-spaces them. 6–30 hexachords are also generated by two members of set class

Example 5.18. “Ploratus,” summary of 6–30[013679] hexachords

Alegant.indd Sec2:146

4/5/2010 10:20:47 PM

dallapiccola’s approach to “octatonic serialism” 147 3–3[014] (in the second measure), by two [016] trichords (in the third measure) and by a combination of 3–8[026] and 3–10[036] (in the fourth measure of the second system). The second feature emphasized in the example concerns those passages in which a solo soprano line hovers above the vertical 6–30 hexachords; these moments are the densest and most complicated in the movement. The first instance occurs in measures 42–45, where the highest and lowest lines retrograde their pitch-classes: in the soprano is set against in the bass.33 The second and third verticalities in this passage are momentarily disarranged, breaking the chorus’s sequence of 6–30 hexachords. The addition of the solo line in turn produces two seven-note set classes: 7–28[0135679], which augments 6–30 with a note from a third [0369] orbit (and is not purely octatonic), and 7–31[0134679], the sole octatonic septachord. Several of these features, such as the solo vocal line, the outer-part pitch-class exchange, and the septachordal sonorities, return at the conclusion of the movement (mm. 74–80). By ending with a verticalization of 7–31, “Ploratus” reinforces and embellishes the octatonic essence of its serial 6–30 hexachords.

Derivation and Set Class 6–27 The octatonic passages examined so far have been based on the realizations of the discrete 6–27 or 6–30 hexachords of individual rows. The final portion of this chapter considers a different method by which octatonic sonorities are achieved: derivation. One extended application of derivation in Dallapiccola’s music occurs in the final movement of An Mathilde, a multimovement cantata written for female voice and orchestra.34 Composed in 1955, a year before the Cinque canti, An Mathilde employs similar techniques, including axial symmetry, irregular canons, and floating rhythm. Chapter 6 is devoted entirely to an analysis of An Mathilde. For this reason I will examine just one passage in which 6–27 hexachords are derived. Figure 5.10 examines the row of An Mathilde from a trichordal and hexachordal perspective. The row’s discrete trichords, shown in (a), belong to set classes 3–2[013], 3–1[012], 3–5[016], and 3–4[014] respectively; however, its disjunct hexachords, in (b), are not octatonic subsets. During the work each of the row’s trichordal set classes is used to generate aggregates. The key here is the partition of four [016] trichords, shown in (c); the trichords of this partition are labelled a through d. The union of [016] trichords produces three pairs of complementary set classes: 6–27[013469] (generated by any T3-related pairing of [016] trichords), 6–7[012678], an all-combinatorial hexachord, and a Z-related pair.35 (A different collection of [016] trichords will yield different hexachordal collections but the same set classes.)

Alegant.indd Sec2:147

4/5/2010 10:20:49 PM

148

more detailed analyses

Figure 5.10. The row of An Mathilde (a) The row’s discrete trichords P-0 = [013]

(c) Hexachords generated by a partition of [016] trichords a = {1,2,8}; b = {5,t,e}; c = {0,6,7}; a + b = {1,2,5,8,t,e}; c + d = {0,3,4,6,7,9}: a + c = {0,1,2,6,7,8}; b + d = {2,3,4,9,t,e}: a + d = {1,2,3,4,8,9}; b + c = {5,6,7,t,e,0}:

d = {3,4,9} 6–27[013469] 6–7[012678] 6–Z38/6–Z6

The first appearance of 6–27 hexachords in An Mathilde occurs in a concluding passage of the first section of the third movement. (See ex. 5.19.) The text is “O, den Gedanken kann mein Herz nicht fassen!” (Oh, my heart cannot bear the thought!). Measures 20 and 21 abruptly present a pair of accented 6–20[014589] hexachords that represent the first sustained gesture in the movement thus far, while at the same time intimating a sense of temporal suspension. The realization of these hexachords is noteworthy: observe that the upper three voices all descend one semitone while the lower three voices ascend one semitone. As the voice sings “fassen,” the last word of the first stanza, two 6–27[013469] hexachords accompany it. Each hexachord stacks two [016] trichords; thus, measures 24–25 realize in concrete form the abstract model featured in figure 5.10(c). Several factors emphasize these 6–27 hexachords rhetorically, including the doubling of the voice’s D♭5–C5 on “fassen” and the silence preceding the sforzando tutti attacks.36 Ulisse also uses [016] trichords to generate 6–27[013469] hexachords, but on a much more expansive scale. As we observed in chapter 4, hexachordal structuring is a constant source for the opera’s harmonic organization. Naturally, many hexachords are the discrete segments of (linear) rows. Many others are obtained through derivation. A detailed tracing of the row forms and trichordal derivations would exceed the scope of the present study; suffice it to say that [016] trichords are prevalent and are frequently combined to generate 6–27 hexachords and aggregates. Three contrasting realizations of 6–27 are illustrated in example 5.20. The first, at (a), is from an early part of the prologue. Not only are the constituent trichords arranged in typical vertical formation, but each trichord is also embellished by the notes missing from its respective collection (hence B♭ and D♭ complete the c/c♯ collection, while “rigandoti le guancie” is accompanied

Alegant.indd Sec2:148

4/5/2010 10:20:50 PM

dallapiccola’s approach to “octatonic serialism” 149

Example 5.19. An Mathilde, iii, conclusion of section 1

by a complete c♯/d collection). The excerpt in (b) appears at a later stage of the prologue. Here the gentle sequence of [016] trichords produces 6–27 hexachordal simultaneities on every attack—although it must be said that the succession of hexachords is partially obscured by the wide spacing and ppp dynamics. Such is not the case in (c): the ff dynamics and sustained trichords are easily heard. Furthermore, the interior trills added to the 6–27 hexachords round out the c/d and c/c♯ collections. Overall, the opera has more than six dozen distinct instances of set class 6–27. Nearly all of these occur at dynamic extremes and climactic points, such as when a singer or the chorus shouts the object of a leitmotive like Ulisse, Itaca, or Posidone dio (the God Poseidon).37 Set class 6–27[013469] plays a larger role in Ulisse than in Il prigioniero. One crucial distinction between the two works is that 6–27 is a discrete segment of the row of Il prigioniero but arises from trichordal derivation in Ulisse. The final example of octatonic derivation is Commiato. As we saw in chapter 5, Commiato’s five movements are arranged in an arch form: the first and fifth and

Alegant.indd Sec2:149

4/5/2010 10:20:50 PM

Example 5.20. Three types of 6–27 realizations in Ulisse

Alegant.indd Sec2:150

4/5/2010 10:20:51 PM

dallapiccola’s approach to “octatonic serialism” 151 the second and fourth movements are literal retrogrades of each other; the middle movement is the spiritual core of the work.38 The text of the middle movement is taken from the first two verses of a lauda attributed to Brunetto Latini; Dallapiccola wrote it in memory of his close friend Harald Kaufmann.39 The text is reproduced in figure 5.11 along with a translation by Ivana di Siena. Figure 5.11. Text of Commiato, iii O fratel nostro, che se’ morto e sepolto, O our brother, thou who are dead and buried, Nelle sue braccia Iddio t’abbia raccolto. May God have gathered you into his arms. O fratel nostro, O our brother, La cui fratellanza perduta abbiam, ché morte l’ha partita, Death came between our friendship, Dio ti dia pace e vera perdonanza May God give you peace and true forgiveness Di ciò che l’offendesti in questa vita: For your offenses against Him in this life: L’anima salga, se non è salita May your soul rise, if it is not risen yet, Dove si vede il Salvatore in volto. To where you will see the face of the Savior.

The pitch-class structure at the opening of the third movement is based primarily on row segments and derived aggregates; unbroken twelve-tone statements are quite rare. Example 5.21 offers a reduction of the first portion of the movement. The trichordal structuring is apparent, with prominent [016] cells clearly projected both in the accompaniment and voice. In measure 94, two [016] trichords create set class 6–Z23[023568], an octatonic subset. Measures 95–96 introduce the first of many 6–27 hexachords and aggregates that are derived from [016] trichords. 6–27 hexachords continue to structure the accompaniment until the recitative-like passage in measure 104, at which point set class 6–30, the discrete hexachord of the row, begins to resurface. The first appearance of 6–30 occurs on the words “perduta abbiam chè morta l’ha partita,” thus emphasizing them. One detail worth pointing out concerns the voice’s [016] trichords.40 This passage in Commiato is among Dallapiccola’s most poignant utterances. The slow tempos, dynamic extremes, and trichordal derivation all contribute to the sense of heartfelt expression and “other-worldliness.” I set out to show that octatonicism is an important and overlooked aspect of Dallapiccola’s compositional praxis, and that its use spans his serial career.

Alegant.indd Sec2:151

4/5/2010 10:20:53 PM

Example 5.21. Commiato, iii, opening

Alegant.indd Sec2:152

4/5/2010 10:20:53 PM

Example 5.21. Commiato, iii, opening—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:153

4/5/2010 10:20:55 PM

154

more detailed analyses

To this end I examined the roles played by set classes 6–27 and 6–30 in representative works, and showed how these hexachords arose either as the discrete hexachords of rows or via the process of derivation. 6–27 and 6–30 appear in each of the serial phases. Phase 1 works with octatonic elements include the middle movement of Ciaccona, intermezzo e adagio (1946), the second Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado (1948), and Il prigioniero (1944–48). Phases 2 and 3 are represented by An Mathilde (1954) and Cinque canti (1956) respectively; phase 4 is represented by Ulisse (1960–68), Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi (1970–72), and Commiato (1972).41 Examining Dallapiccola’s output through an octatonic filter allows us to focus on his use of two hexachords in particular. Overall, set class 6–27 appears to play a larger role in Dallapiccola’s canon than 6–30 does. This is perhaps due to the fact that 6–27 can be generated by [016] trichords whereas 6–30 cannot, and that it exhibits a more diverse set-class vocabulary when combined with its transpositions and inversions. In terms of realization, 6–27 often appears within or near complete octatonic collections, whereas 6–30 hexachords typically stand alone. Finally, even if one is sceptical about the “purity” of the octatonic passages examined, and unconvinced by an analytical approach that privileges certain hexachordal subsets, it nonetheless seems clear that Dallapiccola was intrigued by 6–27 and 6–30, and that these sonorities are among his “signature harmonies.”

Alegant.indd Sec2:154

4/5/2010 10:20:57 PM

Chapter Six

An Mathilde An Unsung Cantata An Mathilde is the last composition of Dallapiccola’s second serial phase, and one of his few works for large orchestra. It is scored for strings (4.4.4.4.2), eight winds (flute, two oboes, three clarinets, bassoon, saxophone), four brass (two horns, trumpet, trombone), and an assortment of un-pitched and pitched percussion, including celesta, harp, glockenspiel, xylophone, and vibraphone.1 It shares many structural characteristics with the Goethe-Lieder (which were completed several years earlier), including canon, axial symmetry, and trichordal derivation. But there are significant differences between these works. The seven songs of the Goethe-Lieder are based on aphoristic and whimsical texts, whereas An Mathilde incorporates three of Heinrich Heine’s most personal and heartfelt poems. And while the Goethe-Lieder are quite familiar to both scholars and performers alike (for instance, “Die Sonne kommt” appears in numerous anthologies and is a staple in many analysis courses), An Mathilde has been virtually ignored. In fact, at present there are no commercially available recordings of it.2 The analytical commentary on An Mathilde is confined to observations found in separate chapters of Rosemary Brown’s dissertation and an article by Peter Kiesewetter in Melos. Brown focuses her comments on three topics: canon, rhythmic proportion, and symbolism. She documents the strict canons in the second movement and the 1:2:2 proportional canons in the third, and argues that these canons project a “vertical homogeneity” that looks forward to the interaction of timbre and duration in Dialoghi and Ulisse. The analytical highlight is a discussion of an intriguing passage in the last movement, where “Seid Schild und Vögte eurem Ebenbilde” (Be shield and guardian to your image) is set in a symmetrical design that incorporates simultaneously the techniques of retrogression and inversion. Kiesewetter opens with a brief discussion of the text, then goes on to consider isolated structural features of the three movements. His analysis of the first movement focuses on the instrumentation of the instrumental introduction and the pitch structure of the vocal line in the first stanza of text. He notes that B♭ is the first, lowest, and highest note, and that the melismas and repeated notes emphasize the rhymes between such words as “grauen” and “schauen.” The analysis of the second movement advances a Riemannian interpretation of

Alegant.indd Sec2:155

4/5/2010 10:20:57 PM

156

more detailed analyses

the opening phrase and summarizes the rhythmic and timbral aspects of two canonic passages.3 His reading of the last movement focuses on the twelve-tone strings in the opening that arise from chaining trichords together.4 This chapter extends the observations of Brown and Kiesewetter in an effort to provide a fuller account of An Mathilde. It examines the salient characteristics of the row, enumerates the primary compositional techniques and procedures, surveys the poetic structure and the formal organization of the movements, and examines the interaction of harmony, texture, aggregate formation, text setting, and formal articulation.5 The analysis is, in a sense, an extension of the second chapter of this book, which summarized the technical and sonic characteristics of the second-phase compositions. One key feature of the analysis is an annotated score of the entire work. This is intended to show the realization of rows and aggregates, and the inventive use of partitioning strategies, on the surface. (The reduction also makes it easier to play through the composition on the piano.)

The Row and Its Raw Materials Example 1 provides a pitch realization of the P-0 form of the row. This is, really, a pedestrian row: it is not symmetrical or “derived”; its subsets do not exhibit octatonic characteristics; and its disjunct hexachords are not combinatorial (except trivially, under retrograde, as all rows are).6 Example 6.1(a) provides a pitch realization of the row with its interval-class succession. The row contains half a dozen instances of ic 1; these are represented by slurs between adjacent elements and elements separated by one note. In addition, three tritones are identified by brackets. P and I rows start with interval-class 1 and end with interval-class 4. The remaining levels in the example detail the disjunct set classes of the hexachords, tetrachords, trichords, and dyads. The hexachords, shown in (b), form a Z-related pair—a rarity among Dallapiccola’s rows.7 The tetrachords include two instances of set class 4– 12[0236] and one of 4–18[0147]; these share a common subset, 3–10[036]. In addition, the configurations of [0236] within any given row are related by T5 or T7. Thus, rows in the relation P-x and P-(x+5) will share a common [0236] tetrachord. This creates a web of associations among rows that are partitioned into disjunct tetrachords, as follows: P-0: < 0 1 t 4 6 5 3 9 2 8 7 e > P-5: < 5 6 3 9 e t 8 2 . . . > P-t: < et82... > Continuing, the trichords, shown in example 6.1(d), represent different set classes from the [01] family: [013], [012], [016], and [014]. Finally, the dyads, listed in (e), project two semitones, three tritones, and one interval-class 4.

Alegant.indd Sec2:156

4/5/2010 10:20:57 PM

an mathilde 157

Example 6.1. The row of An Mathilde and its properties

The row chart for An Mathilde is illuminating.8 As was his custom, Dallapiccola placed the P and R rows on the left-hand side of a large piece of staff paper, beginning with “O-I” (my P-0) and proceeding by semitones through “O-XII” (P-e). The I and RI rows are arranged in a similar fashion on the opposite side of the page. The pitches of the rows are placed within the range of an octave; flats, naturals, or sharps appear before every note. Perhaps the most intriguing feature of the chart is the presence of cross partitions in the outer margins; these cross partitions appear next to a handful of rows that are marked with x’s.9 That

Alegant.indd Sec2:157

4/5/2010 10:20:57 PM

158

more detailed analyses

Example 6.2. Sketches of cross partitions the row chart contains sketches of cross partitions suggests the close relationship between the source row and its two-dimensional configurations. Example 6.2 redraws the cross partitions in the margins, restating the P-0 form of the row as a referent in level (a). Examples 6.2(b) and 6.2(c) show different configurations of the same 34 cross partition of row P-0. These configurations preserve

Alegant.indd Sec2:158

4/5/2010 10:20:59 PM

an mathilde 159 the pitch classes in the vertical dimension but alter their spacing and registral assignment, thus changing the content of the horizontal lines. The realizations in (d) and (e) show one 26 cross partition of P-0 followed by a variant that is generated from R-0. Examples 6.2(f) and (g) show a 43 configuration followed by an irregular (unbalanced) 62 design. The remaining variants include a 26 realization of row I-0 that preserves the initial {C-D♭} dyad of P-0 (another instance of polarity), and two configurations derived from I-0, the first irregular and the second aligned. These sketches are significant because many of the configurations in example 6.2 appear in the work at these identical pitch levels; in a sense, the sketch is an endorsement of cross partitions. These configurations serve as harmonic building blocks and also as markers that punctuate the ends of rows, aggregates, phrases, and sections. The sketch also suggests the extent to which the row and its cross partitions are linked in the precompositional (or protocompositional) stage. Indeed, I would assert that the row is ordered specifically so that its 34 cross partitions would yield four different set classes and its 43 cross partitions would duplicate 4–12[0236]. One of the most striking aspects of An Mathilde is the variety and invention of its partitioning strategies, and the ways in which they are used to illuminate the text and articulate the form. Given that An Mathilde is a second-phase work, it is hardly surprising that the pitch-class structure on the surface is dominated by linear presentations of rows, set into monophonic, polyphonic, and homophonic textures. These linear rows are accompanied by derived aggregates, four-row arrays, uneven aggregate formations, and, naturally, many strategically placed cross partitions.10 Hexachordal (62) cross partitions tend to function as punctuation markers that announce the completion of sections or movements. They are typically set in extreme dynamic levels (pp, ppp, and, rarely, ff). In contrast, 43, 34, and 26 configurations serve a number of functions: some introduce motivic material, others summarize previous events, and still others are used to create a harmonic backdrop. Dallapiccola also relies heavily on derived aggregates, particularly in the outer movements: throughout the course of the work aggregates are made from each of the row’s disjunct trichords: 3–1[012], 3–2[013], 3–3[014], and 3–5[016].11 Notably, at moments of utmost expression, the voice abandons twelve-tone rows and projects linear aggregates that are formed exclusively from [012] cells. Such presentations are invariably espressivo or molto espressivo and assigned dynamics of pp or ff. Example 6.3 excerpts four linear aggregates from the three movements. (I have omitted the cross partitions that accompany these formations.) Example 6.3(a) shows the first linear aggregate, in which the bass clarinet and English horn outline four [012] trichords that pair up into 6–1[012345] hexachords. The trichords are differentiated by duration and contour, and project all four possible shapes of a single three-note cell. (If we use + to indicate a rising

Alegant.indd Sec2:159

4/5/2010 10:21:01 PM

Example 6.3. Realizations of “linear” aggregates

Alegant.indd Sec2:160

4/5/2010 10:21:01 PM

an mathilde 161 interval and–to indicate a falling interval, the four possible shapes are , , , and .)12 Poetically, the presentation of this aggregate formation coincides with the first pangs of grief. Shortly afterwards, this formation returns in a more expansive presentation; here, the narrator is overcome by “violent weeping.” This outburst, shown in example 6.3(b), begins in a pp dynamic and swells to the downbeat of measure 43, which is the movement’s first forte. Now the voice abandons twelve-tone rows and unfolds four [012] cells. The presentation of these trichords is enhanced by the grounded (not floating) rhythm, and the successive downbeat attacks. Observe that the vibraphone inverts the voice’s line about the pitch axis C♯5/D♭5; this pitch axis is doubled on the downbeat of measure 38. Incidentally (and less obviously), the vibraphone’s line repeats the pitch-class content of the woodwind trichords in example 6.3(a). The voice’s presentation of RI-2 is then accompanied by linear aggregates in measures 39 and 41, whose trichords ascend. The hemiola at the end of measure 42 creates a sense of friction, and heightens the impact of the following downbeat. The woodwind timbres help to cement the association between this linear aggregate and the one in measure 17. Linear aggregates appear strategically in the second and third movements as well, and function as a kind of leitmotive for “Mathilde.” Example 6.3(c) shows a dream-like, melismatic flourish on “Mathilde,” again with registrally compressed [012] trichords that combine to form chromatic hexachords.13 The pitch classes of these trichords recall the bass clarinet and bassoon trichords in example 6.3(b). A fourth and final linear aggregate occurs toward the end of the composition, in a final reference to the beloved Mathilde. In this passage, which appears in example 6.3(d), Heine bares his soul: “Beschwör ich euch, ihr Engel, schützt Mathilde” (I implore you, you angels, protect my Mathilde). The voice once more strings together [012] trichords into a linear aggregate, at a ppp dynamic. The accompanying instruments echo the voice’s trichords in measure 97, subjecting them to hairpins and staggered rhythms. Note particularly the exchange between F♯4 and G4 immediately before and on the third quarter note. Thus, in the final measures of the work linear aggregates and derived aggregates are brought together. Dallapiccola associates the melodic trichords of the 43 cross partitions with the [012] trichords in these linear aggregates—even though these two formations are generated in different manners. Example 6.4(a) redraws the bass clarinet and English horn [012] cells in the first linear aggregate. Example 6.4(b) reproduces the four 43 cross partitions that appear just one measure after this linear aggregate. These cross partitions, the first in the work, are derived from a complete quartet of transformations (one each of P, I, R, and RI).14 By definition, the columns of these configurations are fixed: each cross partitions brings two 4–12[0236] tetrachords and a single 4–18[0147]. But the horizontal lines are, in a manner of speaking, “free,” as a host of trichords can be projected horizontally. Example 6.4(c) extracts the uppermost trichords in the configurations. These trichords fashion their own linear aggregate of [012] cells. In addition, the trichords replicate the intervallic profile and contour

Alegant.indd Sec2:161

4/5/2010 10:21:04 PM

162

more detailed analyses

Example 6.4. Associations among linear aggregates and 43 configurations

of the trichords in the presentation of 6.3(a), taking octave transposition into account. More importantly, these associations are easy to hear. The fourth manner of generating pitch-class material is the most innovative aspect of An Mathilde: four-row arrays.15 A bit of background is in order. Typically, tetrachordal sonorities in phase 1 compositions arise via 43 cross partitions, such as those found in the opening of the second Machado song and the opening of Il prigioniero. An Mathilde is the first work that incorporates four-row arrays and realizes these arrays in note-against-note, or “chorale” settings. The arrays are constructed so that the tetrachordal set classes that arise in the chorales are distinct from those in the columns in the 43 cross partitions, thus expanding the palette of tetrachordal sonorities.16 In all likelihood, the models for the four-row designs are Webernian: the Symphony, Das Augenlicht, the String Quartet, and especially the Opp. 29 and 31 cantatas. As a rule, the four-row designs in these works are based on P/P/I/I or R/R/RI/RI templates. The arrays in An Mathilde, however, combine P, I, R, and RI rows. This is historically significant for two reasons. First, they are the only P/I/R/RI arrays in Dallapiccola’s oeuvre.17 Second, they predate by more than a decade the P/I/R/ RI constructs in Stravinsky’s Requiem Canticles (1966).18 Example 6.5 reproduces the P/I/R/RI construct that opens An Mathilde.

Alegant.indd Sec2:162

4/5/2010 10:21:04 PM

Example 6.5. An Mathilde, i, the opening four-row array

Alegant.indd Sec2:163

4/5/2010 10:21:05 PM

164

more detailed analyses

The reduction places each row on a separate system. The soundscape is ethereal, with pianissimo dynamics, thin textures, espressivo markings, open spacings, and floating rhythms. It is an exquisite opening that suggests to me the rising of a curtain. The outer and inner voices of the array move in strict and “near-strict” pitch inversion, with an even index number between P-2 and I-0 (the “soprano” and “bass” lines), and an odd index number between RI-4 and R-e (the “alto” and “tenor”). The first three attacks of rows P-2 and I-0 are symmetrically disposed about G4; the horn breaks the axial symmetry by leaping up to the viola’s A♭4 in the previous measure (A♭3, technically, is due). The inner voices are symmetrically disposed about the axis G4/G♯4. After the fourth and longest chord, the chorale splinters apart into a double inverted canon at the half note. The shift from homophony to polyphony is matched by a change in rhythmic orientation, as the floating rhythms and tentative attacks give way to a steady stream of two- and three-note gestures. As the array near its completion, the texture thins and the percussion roll fades. Note in particular the delicate writing for the harp, celesta, glockenspiel, and vibraphone, and the subtle pitch doublings and echoes in measures 4 through 6. Figure 6.1 provides a pitch-class reduction of the opening four-row array. The reduction in (a) displays the rows’ pitch classes in a note-against-note setting and provides labels for the vertical set classes. The design labels the tetrachordal set classes as a, b, c, and d, and the trichordal sonorities as e, f, and g. The first four sonorities, which are strongly asserted on the surface, are 4–22[0247], 4– 27[0258], and two 4–16[0157] tetrachords. Figure 6.1(b) models the rhythmic

Figure 6.1. Pitch-class structure of the array (a)

the initial P/I/R/RI array in a note-against-note format

P-2 RI-4 R-e I-0

< < < <

2 5 t 0 a

3 9 6 e b

0 8 7 2 c

6 2 1 8 c

8 7 8 6 e

7 1 2 7 f

5 e 4 9 c

e t 5 3 c

4 0 3 t d

t 6 9 4 d

9 3 0 5 b

1 4 e 1 g

> > > >

a = 4–22[0247]; b = 4–27[0258]; c = 4–16[0157]; d = 4–Z15[0146]; e = 3–1[012]; f = 3–5[016]; g = 3–7[025] (b)

a temporal model

P-2: RI-4: R-e: I-0:

chorale 2 3 5 9 t 6 0 e

Alegant.indd Sec2:164

0 8 7 2

6 2 1 8

polyphony 875 71 e t 824 67 9 3 t

e4 0 5 4

t 9 1 6 3 4 3 9 0 e 5 1

4/5/2010 10:21:07 PM

an mathilde 165 pattern of the surface realization. It shows that the chorale breaks just before pitch-class doubling would result in the appearance of two trichords in the fifth and sixth columns. Dallapiccola employs a total of eight P/I/R/RI arrays in the three songs. I include these to give a sense of the range in texture and harmony that these arrays afford. Figure 6.2(a) reproduces the pitch-class structure of the first design. Figure 6.2. The universe of P/I/R/RI arrays (a)

i, mm. 1–6 chorale 2 3 0 6 0 e 2 8 t 6 7 1 5 9 8 2 [0247] [0157] [0258] [0157]

P-2 I-0 R-e RI-4

(b)

i, mm. 8–12 chorale 9 t 7 1 1 0 3 9 e 7 8 2 2 6 5 e [0135] [0135] [0146] [0135]

P-9 I-1 R-0 RI-1

(c) P-8 I-6 R-3 RI-e (d)

polyphony 875 e4t91 679 3t451 8245390e 71et0634

polyphony 3206e548 78t4e562 93564t10 4t879301

i, mm. 24–27; and iii, mm. 68–75 chorale 8 9 6 5 2 t 0 4 [0268] [0156]

polyphony 6021e5t437 8201394te7 e506897143 39286571te

i, mm. 27–32

P-9 I-5 R-2 RI-0

polyphony 9t713206 5471e028 19t4e578 154t3976

chorale e 5 3 9 6 0 8 2 [0358]

4 8+3 t 6 3 2 e 0+7 [0156]

[0358]

[012568]

(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:165

4/5/2010 10:21:07 PM

166

more detailed analyses

Figure 6.2. The universe of P/I/R/RI arrays—(concluded) (e)

ii, mm. 22–27, a T2-transposition of the design in (b) chorale e 0 3 2 1 9 4 8 [0135] [0146]

P-e I-3 R-2 RI-3

(f)

9 3 5 e t 4 7 1 [0135] [0135]

polyphony 5428176t 9t061784 e5786032 6059e523

ii, mm. 28–31, an R8-transformation of the design in (e) polyphony te824317 et175682 62394t01 04392865

P-t I-e R-7 RI-e

chorale 0 6 5 9 9 3 4 0 e 5 8 7 7 1 t e [0135] [0146] [0135] [0135]

(g)

ii, mm. 34–38, realized in a double canon

P-5 I-4 R-4 RI-4

5 639et82710 4 360te17289 3 e06179t825 5 98271et063 [012]

(e)

iii, mm. 68–75

P-8 I-6 R-3 RI-e

chorale 8 9 6 5 2 t 0 4 [0268] [0156]

4 5 4 4 [01] (!)

polyphony 6021e5t437 8201394te7 e506897143 39286571te

It shows the set classes of the chorale and polyphony sections along with the pitchclass doublings that arise in three of the columns. (The doubled pitch classes are shown in boldface.) It is important to note that the set classes for the polyphonic sections are hypothetical; owing to imitation, these sonorities are not realized on the surface. There is much we could learn from the set-class and pitch-class correspondences among the arrays; suffice it to say that the arrays in figure 6.2 serve to articulate a handful of tetrachordal sonorities beside 4–12[0236] and 4–18[0147], the set classes of the verticals of the 43 cross partitions. In this way the P/I/R/RI constructs enhance the tetrachordal vocabulary of the work.

Alegant.indd Sec2:166

4/5/2010 10:21:07 PM

Example 6.6. “Chorale” realizations in the arrays

Alegant.indd Sec2:167

4/5/2010 10:21:07 PM

168

more detailed analyses

Example 6.6 extracts the pitch realizations of chorale portions of the P/I/ R/RI designs. Level (a) shows the pitch structure of the tetrachordal sonorities along with their dynamics, which vary from configuration to configuration. The designs in [2], [5], and [6] are framed off, so to speak, as their first and fourth verticals are identical from a pitch-class standpoint. The example highlights the spacing and “voice leading” of the chorale sonorities, and suggests the care with which individual voices are set. Example 6.6(b) reproduces the upper lines of those chorales that comprise four chords. Observe that Dallapiccola maintains the intervallic profile of these tetrachords, which belong to set class 4–12[0236]. This tetrachord mirrors the opening vocal fragment of the work, as shown in (c). All told, these P/I/R/RI arrays shed light on the composer’s approach to tetrachordal partitioning and array realization. Having surveyed the primary partitioning strategies in the composition, I now examine the individual songs.

Den Strauß, den mir Mathilde band Aided by his wife, Laura, Dallapiccola eventually settled on three of Heine’s many poems about his beloved Mathilde.19 These poems were written during the 1850s, toward the end of Heine’s life, as he lay virtually imprisoned on his “mattress tomb.” These poems are deeply personal and astonishingly direct. The first, Den Strauß, den mir Mathilde band, was found among Heine’s papers after his death; Gedächtnisfeier and An die Engel are from the Lazurus cycle of the Romanzero. Each poem setting offers a different portrait of Mathilde and of life as viewed from beyond the grave. Figure 6.3 is a translation of the first poem, in which the narrator weeps upon receiving a bouquet of flowers from his wife because they remind him of past pleasures: a world full of flowers and sun, joy, and love.20 The poem spirals deeper and deeper into emptiness and loss. Dallapiccola reinforces the tripartite outer structure of the poem by changing partitioning strategies, texture, dynamics, and other parameters. The first section encompasses measures 1–16. Example 6.7 provides a reduction of the material after an instrumental introduction. The reduction places the presentation of linear rows and aggregate formations on separate staves in order to show the subtleties of partitioning and row handling. The realization of this section is delicate and transparent, with a sparse texture. The text setting throughout the work is traditional: strong syllables are accented, and phrase and sentence structures tend to coincide with the ends of hexachords or rows. The voice opens with a pitch-class palindrome between statements of I-t and RI-t. (I would conjecture that a strict pitch and rhythmic palindrome would be too restrictive, and would suggest a recessive rather than a progressive dynamic.) The midpoint of the palindrome occurs on “brachte,” the downbeat of measure 9. The rhythms of the voice are grounded (as opposed to floating).

Alegant.indd Sec2:168

4/5/2010 10:21:09 PM

an mathilde 169 Figure 6.3. Translation of the first poem [1] Den Strauß, den mir Mathilde band The bouquet, which Mathilde tied for me [2] Und lächelnd brachte, mit bittender Hand and brought with a smile, I send away [3] Weis ich ihn ab – Nicht ohne Grauen with pleading hand – not without dread [4] Kann ich die blühenden Blumen schauen. can I look at the blooming flowers. [5] Sie sagen mir, daß ich nicht mehr They tell me that I no longer [6] Dem schönen Leben angehör, belong to this beautiful life, [7] Daß ich verfallen dem Totenreiche, that I belong to the realm of the dead, [8] Ich arme unbegrabne Leiche. I, poor unburied corpse. [9] Wenn ich die Blumen rieche, befällt When I smell the flowers, [10] Mich heftiges Weinen – Von dieser Welt violent weeping seizes me—Of this world [11] Voll Schönheit und Sonne, voll Lust und Lieben, beauty and sun, full of joy and loving, [12] Sind mir die Tränen nur geblieben. only tears have remained for me.

The instruments, however, seem to float. The syncopated attacks obscure a sense of pulse, save for measures 10–12, a stream of triplets. The silence in measure 7 places into relief the first mention of “Mathilde.” The pitch doublings between the voice and the lines of the underlying four-row arrays produce flickers of imitation (the A4 and C5 in measure 6, for instance, return in “Strauß”) and pitch echoes (such as the replication of E5, F5, and F♯4 in measure 11 that anticipate the setting of “Weis ich ihn ab”). As the third line of text darkens the mood of the poem, the soundscape changes dramatically: in measure 13 the tetrachords of the arrays give way to hexachords, the triplet subdivisions fade, the harmonic rhythm slows to a crawl, and the voice abandons rows and instead takes up isolated segments of P-0 and I-1. Example 6.8 traces some of the associations among 4–12[0236] tetrachords and semitonal (that is, interval 1) motions. Example 6.8(a) shows three instances of set class [0236] with the interval profile . Example 6.8(b) highlights some prominent semitones on the surface. The sense of grief intensifies in the second part (mm. 17–34), which appears in example 6.9.

Alegant.indd Sec2:169

4/5/2010 10:21:09 PM

Example 6.7. An Mathilde, i, continuation of part 1

Alegant.indd Sec2:170

4/5/2010 10:21:09 PM

Example 6.7. An Mathilde, i, continuation of part 1—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:171

4/5/2010 10:21:11 PM

172

more detailed analyses

Example 6.8. An Mathilde, i, details in the closing passage This section introduces two new configurations. One is a slow-moving 26 cross partition that unfolds the dyads of P-1 in progressively shorter rhythmic values. The first five dyads project only interval classes 1 and 6; the sixth dyad, which comprises A♭ and C, is assimilated by the voice’s RI-7 row. The presentation of RI-7, which begins in measure 19, is fractured and disjunct: the row spans nearly two octaves. The voice is grounded, with accented syllables on downbeats. It is accompanied by a complete quartet (meaning one each of P, I, R, RI) of 43 cross partitions. The cross partitions are unified by the index number of 7, which allies P-0 and I-7, and R-6 and RI-1. Melodically, the uppermost lines of the configurations project [012] cells, with an occasional octave leap breaking up conjunct motion; these trichords form an aggregate. RI-7 concludes with “angehör” in measure 23; the completion of the row is punctuated by a single 34 cross partition—a new configuration. The trichords accelerate toward a sforzando [014] that recaptures the A♭4 and C4 of “Sie sagen” in measure 19; this sonority effectively frames off the entire first section. Moreover, the sf trichord triggers an outburst that culminates with “unbegrabne Leiche” (unburied corpse). The

Alegant.indd Sec2:172

4/5/2010 10:21:13 PM

an mathilde 173

Example 6.9. An Mathilde, i, part 2 outburst brings two successive four-row arrays, the first of which now includes the voice. In this array, the upper two and lower two rows are symmetrical in pitch space. A second, instrumental array commences with the completion of the vocal row on “Leiche” in measure 27. This array is realized as a mirror of the previous one: thus, it gradually distills a polyphonic surface into a homophonic one. The last sonority of this array is subsumed within the sustained hexachords, which belong to row P-2. The close of this section recalls that of the first section (see especially measures 13–16).

Alegant.indd Sec2:173

4/5/2010 10:21:14 PM

Example 6.9. An Mathilde, i, part 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:174

4/5/2010 10:21:16 PM

an mathilde 175

Example 6.9. An Mathilde, i, part 2—(concluded)

The second section increases tension, introduces several new configurations, and highlights the contrast between the tetrachords of the four-row arrays and the tetrachords of the 43 configurations. Recall that the verticalities of cross partitions are fixed: each row projects one instance of 4–18[0147] and two of 4–12[0236]. These set classes differ from the sonorities that arise in the four-row arrays in measures 1–3 and 8–11. Details related to the octatonicism discussed in the previous chapter include the 6–27[013469] hexachord in the first half of measure 20, on “mir,” and a flash of 6–30[013679] on “an-gehör” in measures 22–23. The third stanza contains the dynamic climax and what I consider the heart of the song. Example 6.10 provides a reduction. This section presents just a single linear row, RI-2, which sets the text fragment “mich heftiges Weinen—von dieser Welt” (with violent weeping—of this world). Otherwise, the voice projects only [012] cells. The accompaniment

Alegant.indd Sec2:175

4/5/2010 10:21:18 PM

Example 6.10. An Mathilde, i, part 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:176

4/5/2010 10:21:19 PM

Example 6.10. An Mathilde, i, part 3—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:177

4/5/2010 10:21:21 PM

Example 6.10. An Mathilde, i, part 3—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:178

4/5/2010 10:21:22 PM

an mathilde 179 features [012] trichords, 26 and 43 cross partitions, and irregular partitions. (These aggregate representations are marked in the reduction.) In the third stanza, Dallapiccola repeats “Weinen,” “von dieser Welt,” and “voll Schönheit und Sonne, voll Lust und Lieben”; and he inserts an extended pause (two empty measures of rest) before the ultimate line. As a result, the final stanza is significantly expanded in scope, becoming: Wenn ich die Blumen rieche, befällt mich heftiges Weinen, Weinen, von dieser Welt von dieser Welt voll Schönheit und Sonne, voll Lust und Lieben, voll Schönheit und Sonne, voll Lust und Lieben, [...] sind mir die Tränen nur geblieben.

The climax occurs on the statements of “voll Schönheit und Sonne, voll Lust und Lieben” beginning in measure 43. For the first statement of this line the voice projects a complete row; for the second statement, the voice breaks free of the row’s confines and uses [012] cells to create linear aggregates. Earlier, these trichords appeared in steady rhythms, close registral proximity, and hushed dynamics. Now, in the apotheosis, they have wide leaps, dotted rhythms, forte dynamics, and sforzandi. But the most telling aspect of this passage is the fact that it is a waltz—which seems an appropriate “topic” for nostalgia. Example 6.11 highlights the vocal line in measures 42 through 54. It shows the tail end of row RI-2 and the bracketed [012] cells that make up the linear aggregates. The rhythms are thoroughly grounded, with a dozen measures of steady triple meter; as a result, the harmonic rhythm features one [012] per measure, and these can be grouped together into a four-bar hypermeter. (The hypermetric groupings are indicated by brackets.) The hypermeter breaks on “Lieben” in measures 50–51, as [012] cells are extended and (subsequently) accelerated. The result is that “Lieben” rather than “Lust” acquires downbeat status in measure 54. During the ensuing rest, the texture thins, the dynamics drop, and we are returned from the past to the present. The last phrase of this section deserves a closer look. The majority of the pitch-class material is generated from linear row presentations, derived aggregates, and a handful of 43, 34, and 26 cross partitions. The final measures of each section are the exception: they are based on irregular partitions. Moreover, as example 6.12 suggests, these closing passages use “closing parallelism.”21 Example 6.12(a) shows the close of the first section (mm. 14–16) along with the pitch classes of its rows, P-0 and R-1. The passage features two block hexachords, h1 of P-0 and h2 of R-1; these are T1-related in pitch space. Above these hexachords two 3–5[016] trichords emerge: the oboe and voice articulate ; this [016] is answered by on “Blumen schauen.” The next passage, shown in 6.12(b), retains the first passage’s hexachordal structuring and the melodic [016] cells. Moreover, the h2 hexachord of R-0 in measure 34 revoices the h1 hexachord of P-0 in measure 14. Additionally, the second [016] in (b) is a retrograde of the first [016] in (a). Finally, example 6.12(c) shows how the concluding measures of the song replicate the setting of (a), with two [016] trichords and two hexachordal sonorities that are yet again T1-related in pitch space. Here, at last, the voice has two [016] trichords, the second of which (“nur geblieben”) recalls at once the [016] in measures 33–34 and the oboe/voice composite trichord in measures 14–16. Thus, the closing sections of each stanza highlight the row’s discrete hexachords and [016] trichords. Examples 6.12(d), (e), and (f) capture some of the associations among the [016] cells of these aggregates. By way of summary, figure 6.4 diagrams the formal organization of the first song. It highlights the setting of the individual lines, the changing partitioning strategies in the voice and the accompaniment, dynamics, and other features.

Alegant.indd Sec2:180

4/5/2010 10:21:24 PM

Example 6.12. Closing parallelism

Alegant.indd Sec2:181

4/5/2010 10:21:25 PM

Example 6.12. Closing parallelism—(concluded) Figure 6.4. An Mathilde, i, formal diagram Measure:

1

6

Intro

8

Text line: Voice: Accomp.: Dynamics

4-row pp

Stanza 1 1 2 I-t RI-t 4-row ppp

mm.:

17

19

21

11

14

3

4 (irregular) (irregular) pp, ppp

24

28

32

dynamics

interlude 5 RI-7 [012]4 26 43 x 4 molto p

p

mm:

35

43

47

text line: voice: accomp.:

Stanza 3 9 10 [012]4 P-2 26 26 [012]4 [012]8

(10) 11 (11) [012]4 [012]4 26 43 (x3) [012]4

26 [012]8

pp

f

f > p ppp pppp

text line: voice: accomp.:

dynamics

Alegant.indd Sec2:182

38

Stanza 2 6 7

ff

51

f

55 interlude [pause ]

62 12 [016]s 62

4/5/2010 10:21:27 PM

an mathilde 183

Gedächtnisfeier (Memorial Service) The setting of Gedächtnisfeier is noteworthy for its inventive use of materials and its expressive range.22 Below is a translation of its five stanzas, with a synopsis of S. S. Prawer’s commentary. [1] Keine Messe wird man singen, Keinen Kadosch wird man sagen, Nichts gesagt und nichts gesungen Wird an meinen Sterbetagen.

No mass will be sung, No Kaddish will be said, Nothing will be said and nothing sung on the days after my death.

The opening stanza is defined by a sense of emptiness and desolation, owing to the measured rhythms, the alliteration, the repetition of such words as “kein” and “nichts.” The second and third stanzas, however, shift to a tone that is whimsical, humorous, and tender: [2] Doch vielleicht an solchem Tage, Wenn das Wetter schön und milde, Geht spazieren auf Montmartre Mit Paulinen Frau Mathilde. [3] Mit dem Kranz von Immortellen Kommt sie mir das Grab zu schmücken, Und sie seufzet: Pauvre homme!– Feuchte Wehmut in den Blicken.

But perhaps on a day when the weather is fair and mild, Mathilde will go for a walk to Montmartre with Pauline. With the wreath of immortelles she’ll come to decorate my grave, and she’ll sigh: “poor man!”– Moist sorrow in her eyes.

The tone changes again in the concluding stanzas, which, in Prawer’s words, are “invaded by a wave of tenderness”: [4] Leider wohn ich viel zu hoch, Und ich habe meiner Süßen Keinen Stuhl hier anzubieten; Ach! sie schwankt mit müden Füßen. [5] Süßes, dickes Kind, du darfst Nicht zu Fuß nach Hause gehen; An dem Barrieregitter Siehst du die Fiaker stehen.

Alas, I’ll be living much too high, and I’ll have no chair here to offer my sweet one; Ah, she sways on weary feet. Sweet, plump child, you mustn’t go home on foot: At the barrier gate you’ll see the cabs standing.

Dallapiccola employs a variety of twelve-tone arrangements, chief among them canons, which are reserved for this movement alone, and four-row arrays. Other schemes involve a flashback to the linear aggregates in the first song; tenand twelve-note punctuation chords; and a Schoenbergian technique called a dyadic construct (to be defined shortly). The changes in partitioning strategies support the tripartite division inherent in the poem: the opening stanza is about loss; the second and third stanzas provide a humorous glimpse into Mathilde’s daily life; the fourth and fifth stanzas reveal a deep sense of regret. The ensuing

Alegant.indd Sec2:183

4/5/2010 10:21:28 PM

Example 6.13. An Mathilde, ii, part 1

Alegant.indd Sec2:184

4/5/2010 10:21:28 PM

an mathilde 185

Example 6.13. An Mathilde, ii, part 1—(concluded)

analysis examines the salient characteristics of the individual stanzas’ settings, paying particular attention to the ways in which the partitioning strategies paint the text. Example 6.13 provides a reduction of the first section (mm. 1–9). It opens with an unaccompanied row, the first time the row is so clearly exposed. The heaviness of the text is suggested by mezzo forte dynamics, molto accento articulations, repeated notes, and falling gestures. Dallapiccola parses the row into disjunct hexachords, with h1 in the first two measures and h2 in the next two. The second trichord of each hexachord is echoed with a semiclosed mouth; the echoes reinforce set classes [012] and [014] and also lend a sense of intimacy.23 Upon the conclusion of the opening row a three-voice canon projects P-2 in three different octaves and at the distance of four quarter notes. The voice’s last two notes, G and B of row I-6, play into the rhyme scheme, linking “sagen” (m. 4) with “Sterbe-tagen” (m. 8). One subtle feature of the opening concerns the use of linkage technique. (Linkage occurs when the same material from the end of one formal unit is repeated at the beginning of the next.) Recall that the first song ends with an irregular partition based on R-0, in which the h2 hexachord of the row is sustained for thirteen quarter notes. And the second song opens with P-0, which (naturally) begins with this same hexachord. In fact, four pitches in these hexachords appear at the same pitch levels: B♭3, D♭4, F♭4, and G♭4.

Alegant.indd Sec2:185

4/5/2010 10:21:30 PM

Example 6.14. An Mathilde, ii, part 2

Alegant.indd Sec2:186

4/5/2010 10:21:31 PM

Example 6.14. An Mathilde, ii, part 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:187

4/5/2010 10:21:34 PM

188

more detailed analyses

Example 6.14. An Mathilde, ii, part 2—(concluded) Example 6.14 shows the second section (mm. 10–21). Vocally, the flexible rhythms and the markings of quasi parlato and cadenzato suggest a recitative—appropriate for a line that muses: “Perhaps, on one day, when the weather is fair . . .” The voice, temporarily grounded on G4, slowly gains momentum and breaks into row R-9 near the end of measure 10. Interestingly, the voice’s first note is a false lead. We have every right to expect that its first two notes, G and A♭, belong to P-7: . But P-7 does not materialize; instead, “solchem Tage” is taken by row R-9, which continues until “milde” in measure 14. In retrospect we realize that G4 is a continuation of the last vocal pitch of the previous section (another subtle instance of linkage). Overall, the section is framed by canons based on an inversion of the h1 hexachords in the previous section: measure 10 initiates a twovoice irregular canon (“irregular” because the durational proportions between the dux and comes are not uniform) whereas measures 18–21 project a three-voice

Alegant.indd Sec2:188

4/5/2010 10:21:36 PM

an mathilde 189 canon whose lines relate by 6:4:3 proportions. The canon accelerates and then fades away, gently transitioning into the next section. The second stanza contrasts two different soundscapes, which I take to signify the present and future tense. The outer portions of the section, measures 10 and 18–21, are in the present. They are characterized by vocal fragments (not complete rows), instrumental canons (of complete rows), pp dynamics, and a tempo of a half-note equal to 54. But the halting text and quasi-parlato delivery in measure 10 bring a projection into the future on “Wenn das Wetter schön.” The daydream is characterized by vocal rows (not fragments), instrumental fragments (not rows), even softer dynamics, and an acceleration in tempo. The return to the original tempo occurs precisely on the A♭4 of “Ma-thil-de,” in measure 18. In a sense, this pitch associates the two episodes: for the repetition on A♭4 on “solchem Tage” in measure 11 signals the end of the first canon whereas its downbeat arrival on “Ma-thil-de” in measure 18 initiates the second. The daydream is further distinguished by tetrachordal harmonies, created using what I call a dyadic complex, a strategy unique to this section of this work. Dyadic complexes are Schoenbergian constructs; they do not occur in Webern’s music at all. They populate Schoenberg’s larger American-period works, especially his Violin Concerto, Op. 36, and Piano Concerto, Op. 42.24 Schoenberg generates dyadic complexes by dividing inversionally combinatorial rows into dyads, then combining the dyads into tetrachords. As a rule, the tetrachordal set classes produced by dyadic complexes are not available as row segments; thus, they provide a way to generate new material. Figure 6.5(a) illustrates the dyadic complex of the Violin Concerto. Figure 6.5. Dyadic complexes (a) the dyadic complex for Schoenberg’s Violin Concerto, Op. 36 P-9 I-2

9t 21 [0145]

3e 80 [0347]

46 01 75 et [0123] [0123]

78 43 [0145]

25 96 [0347]

(b) the dyadic complex for Schoenberg’s Piano Concerto, Op. 42 P-3 I-8

3t 81 [0257]

25 94 [0347]

40 86 19 7e 35 t2 [0158] [0235] [0145]

e7 04 [0158]

(c) one dyadic complex in An Mathilde, ii (mm. 11–14) P-3 I-8

34 87 [0145]

17 t4 [0369]

98 23 [0167]

60 5e [0167]

5e 60 [0167]

t2 19 [0145]

(d) another dyadic complex in An Mathilde, ii (mm. 15–17) R-4 RI-9

Alegant.indd Sec2:189

3e t2 [0145]

06 17 [0167]

17 06 [0167]

9t 43 [0167]

82 5e [0369]

54 89 [0145]

4/5/2010 10:21:38 PM

190

more detailed analyses

It divides the home rows of the work, P-9 and I-2, into their discrete dyads, and shows the tetrachordal combinations that result. Three set classes are obtained: 4–1[0123], 4–7[0145], and 4–17[0347].25 Figure 6.5(b) does the same for the Piano Concerto, whose complex brings a different assortment of tetrachords, two of which are duplicated. The redundant tetrachords are indicated by asterisks. In practice, Schoenberg tends to present the tetrachords of the complex in order, traveling left to right or right to left. Figure 6.5(c) shows the complex that appears in measures 11–14 of this movement of An Mathilde. The design is different from Schoenberg’s in several respects. First, the rows of An Mathilde are not hexachordally combinatorial (they are Z-related). Second, the complex contains one member of 4–28[0369] and three of 4–9[0167], two of which are identical. Figure 6.5(d) shows the complex in measures 15–17. Even though this particular design features a different odd index number, it replicates the set-class content of (c), though in reverse order, since one construct uses R and RI rows and the other is comprised of P and I rows. Now, let us return to example 6.14 and examine the complexes in the second section. Two pitch-class diagrams are inserted into the annotated score. The first aligns the dyads of P-3 and I-8 into (unordered) tetrachords; the second does the same with the dyads of R-4 and RI-9. The tetrachordal sonorities are labeled [1] through [10]. Note that each complex contains two columns with the same pitch-class content. Dallapiccola could have repeated these sonorities on the surface; instead, he conflates them. Measures 11–14 realize the vertical tetrachords of the first complex in ppp dynamics and wide spacing, with the pitches of the tetrachords symmetrically disposed about the pitch axis B4/C5. The tetrachords in measures 15–19 are realized in a similar fashion, but are displaced about C5/C♯5. Whether Dallapiccola appropriated these complexes directly from Schoenberg is irrelevant. What matters is, first, that these complexes generate a new batch of tetrachordal set classes; second, that these set classes are duplicated neither by row segments nor by the verticalities of any of the four-row arrays; and third, that they appear only in this passage of the work, providing a unique harmonic setting for this daydream. Example 6.15 provides a reduction of third stanza, in which the poet imagines Mathilde placing wreaths on his grave. Once again, a change in partitioning strategy accompanies a shift in tone. The voice unfolds two linear row presentations, RI-6 and I-5; each row contains a full line of text. The highlight and the midpoint of the stanza is a parlato “Pauvre homme!” (mm. 26–27), which is realized as a negative climax, in a manner of speaking. (Prawer avers that “pauvre homme” was one of Mathilde’s pet names for Heine.) These words elicit an outpouring of grief that culminates in a ff ten-note chord in measures 32–33. This chord is a T1-transposition of the chord that punctuates the first section of this same movement (mm. 8–9).

Alegant.indd Sec2:190

4/5/2010 10:21:38 PM

Example 6.15. An Mathilde, ii, part 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:191

4/5/2010 10:21:38 PM

Example 6.15. An Mathilde, ii, part 3—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:192

4/5/2010 10:21:40 PM

an mathilde 193 The instrumental accompaniment is made from a pair of four-row arrays that recall the array textures of the first movement. These P/I/R/RI arrays, however, generate different tetrachordal set classes; they are also arranged in an arch form. Eight tetrachords (four each in mm. 22–25 and 30–31) are realized as chorales; the remaining portions of the arrays are realized polyphonically with occasional pitch inversions and echoes. These arrays recall text images in the first movement. One array in the first movement sets “Den Strauß, den mir Mathilde band” (the bouquet that Mathilde tied for me); another occurs on “daß ich verfallen dem Totenreiche, ich arme unbegrabne Leiche” (that I belong to the realm of the dead, I, poor unburied corpse). The arrays in the second movement bring together the images of “flowers,” “wreaths,” “corpse,” and “grave” into a single thought: “Mit dem Kranz von Immortellen kommt sie, mir das Grab zu schmücken” (With a wreath of immortelles [everlasting flowers] she’ll come to decorate my grave). The setting of the fourth stanza is as beautiful as it is exquisitely wrought. (See ex. 6.16.) It opens with a P/I/R/RI array that is presented as a double canon. The soundscape is remarkably similar to passages in Webern’s Symphony and Das Augenlicht, with transparent textures, recessive dynamics, axial symmetry, and pitches that are registrally frozen.26 The first canon presents rows R-4 and RI-4, which are realized symmetrically about the axis E4. The second canon presents P-5 and I-4 in a much slower tempo; these rows are realized about the axis E4/F4. Dallapiccola combines the rows to create whole-tone sonorities on the surface. Consider, for instance, the first dyads of R-4 and RI-4 in measure 34. The voice’s D♯4–B4 on “Leider” and its inversion by the English horn’s F4–A3 yields a 4–25[0268]. (And it goes without saying that the thin texture and the strict inversion make it easy to hear this sonority.) The same set class is produced by the next two dyads as well, with C5–F♯4 on “wohn ich” answered by G♯3–D4. The vibraphone’s E6, the initial pitch of I-4, adds another note from the even whole-tone collection. Shortly thereafter, beginning with the B♭5 of “zu” in measure 35, all four lines complete the even whole-tone collection. The presence of whole-tone tetrachords, pentachords, and hexachords is unique to this particular section. It creates an almost impressionistic soundscape. The surface changes dramatically on the third and fourth lines of the stanza: “Keinen Stuhl hier anzubieten; Ach! Sie schwankt mit müden Füssen” ([I’ll have] no chair to give her; Ah! She sways on weary feet). Nearly every parameter is altered: the texture thins from four rows to three; the dynamics increase from ppp to mf; dolcissimo is replaced by pesante; the pitch drops precipitously; and the instruments take up for the first time the discrete trichords of inversionally related rows. The slurred gestures are quite conspicuous, with their exaggerated leaps that involve the lowest registers of the bass, cello, and harp. It is easy to picture Mathilde swaying from side to side, teetering in a pendulum-like way. (She was, by all accounts, rather plump.) I find this a touching and vivid portrayal.

Alegant.indd Sec2:193

4/5/2010 10:21:42 PM

Example 6.16. An Mahilde, ii, part 4

Alegant.indd Sec2:194

4/5/2010 10:21:42 PM

an mathilde 195

Example 6.16. An Mahilde, ii, part 4—(concluded) The swaying trichords continue into the final section, which is reproduced in example 6.17. It begins with R-0 and RI-8 alternating trichords, then segues into a three-voice canon whose harmonies create flashes of octatonicism in measures 48 and 50. Above the canon the voice intones row R-5, whose last note serves as a drone on “an dem Barrieregitter” (mm. 52–53). (This is one of the very few times that the composer writes “non espressivo.”) The movement fades away,

Alegant.indd Sec2:195

4/5/2010 10:21:44 PM

Example 6.17. An Mathilde, ii, part 5

Alegant.indd Sec2:196

4/5/2010 10:21:45 PM

Example 6.17. An Mathilde, ii, part 5—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:197

4/5/2010 10:21:47 PM

198

more detailed analyses

with the desolate last phrase “Siehst du die Fiaker stehen” (You will see the cabs standing) entirely spoken. The concluding canon of the song recalls the threevoiced canon at the outset; preserving the contour and segmentation of the h1 hexachord makes a movement-level frame. By way of summary, figure 6.6 provides a formal diagram of the movement. Figure 6.6. An Mathilde, ii, formal diagram mm.

1

4

8

Text line: Voice: Acc.:

Stanza 1 1 2 3 4 P-0 I-6 canon P-2

Dynamic:

mf

p

ppp

mm.

21

23

25

Dynamic: mm.

34

36

28

f

39

Stanza 4 13 14 14 again R-4 I-5 P-6 RI-4 P-3 I-2 P-5/I-4 --------------------double canon Dynamics: pp 48

49

Text line: Voice: Acc.:

Stanza 5 17 18 17,18 R-5 tricanon chords I-7

16

18

[012]4 canon I-0

32

41

45

interlude 16 RI-t trichords --------------P-e + I-3 R-0,RI-8

Text: Voice: Acc.:

47

14

X 12 I-5 4-row array P-t, I-e, R-7, RI-e chorale ff > p

38

mm.

11

Stanza 2 (quasi recitative) 5 6 7 8 R-9 P-t canon dyads dyads I-t P-3, I-8 R-4, RI-9 + RI-e, h1 + RI-e, h2

X

Stanza 3 9 10 11 RI-6 4-row array P-e, I-3, R-2, RI-3 chorale imitation p ppp

Text: Voice: Acc.:

10

15

mf

mp

pp

52

53

55

58

19 recit. canon R-1

20 spoken

||

postlude

Dynamics: pp

canon P-5

X ppp

(“x” is a sound mass that functions as a punctuation marker.)

Alegant.indd Sec2:198

4/5/2010 10:21:49 PM

an mathilde 199

Example 6.18. Associations among canons It shows the aggregate formations, and how the partitioning strategies articulate the stanzas and individual lines. It also reveals the interplay of canons and four-row arrays, the dynamic levels, and other events such as the wide sonorities that punctuate the odd-numbered sections. I conclude by reconsidering the

Alegant.indd Sec2:199

4/5/2010 10:21:50 PM

200

more detailed analyses

canons in the first, second, and fifth sections. Example 6.18(a) shows the pitch realization of the h1 hexachord of P-0 in the opening. With one exception, the intervallic profile of this hexachord is preserved by every row in the movement’s canons, as seen by comparing the version in (a) with the variants in (b) through (f). (The exception occurs in measures 51–53, where the three-voice canon of R1 features uncharacteristically wide leaps.) A comparison of these canons shows the variations in proportions, timbre, delay time, and registral bandwidth, so to speak, in terms of low (L), medium (M), and high (H) registers. “L” describes an entry that occupies (roughly) the registral space C2–B3; “M” entries occupy C3–B4; and “H” entries occupy C4–B5. The canons as a whole are organized in an arch shape, with P rows in the outer sections and I rows in the center.

An die Engel (To the angels) The third poem is the longest and most complex. A translation is given in figure 6.7. Figure 6.7. Translation of the second poem I Das ist der böse Thanatos, This is the evil Thanotos, Er kommt auf einem fahlen Roß, He comes on a pale horse; Ich hör den Hufschlag, hör den Trab, I hear the hoofbeats, hear the gallop, Der dunkle Reiter holt mich ab – The dark rider fetches me – Er reißt mich fort, Mathilden soll ich lassen, He tears me away, I have to leave Mathilde, O, den Gedanken kann mein Herz nicht fassen! Oh, my heart cannot bear the thought! II Sie war mir Weib und Kind zugleich, She was both wife and child to me, Und geh ich in das Schattenreich, And if I go into the realm of shadows, Wird Witwe sie und Waise sein! She’ll be a widow and an orphan! Ich laß in dieser Welt allein I leave alone in this world Das Weib, das Kind, das, trauend meinem Mute, The woman, the child, who, trusting my courage, Sorglos und treu an meinem Herzen ruhte. Faithful and without a care rested on my breast.

Alegant.indd Sec2:200

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

an mathilde 201 III Ihr Engel in den Himmelshöhn, You angels high up in heaven, Vernehmt mein Schluchzen und mein Flehn: Hear my sobbing and my prayers: Beschützt, wenn ich im öden Grab, When I am in my desolate grave, Das Weib, das ich geliebet hab; Protect the woman that I have loved; Seid Schild und Vögte eurem Ebenbilde, Be a shield and guardian to your image, Beschützt, beschirmt mein armes Kind, Mathilde. Protect and defend my poor child, Mathilde. IV Bei allen Tränen, die ihr je By all the tears you ever Geweint um unser Menschenweh, Wept over our human suffering, Beim Wort, das nur der Priester kennt By the word that only the priest knows Und niemals ohne Schauder nennt, And never utters without shuddering, Bei eurer eignen Schönheit, Huld und Milde, By your own beauty, grace and gentleness, Beschwör ich euch, ihr Engel, schützt Mathilde. I implore you, you angels, protect Mathilde.

The stanzas in the third poem are unique: they contain six lines (instead of four), and they feature a–a–b–b–c–c rhyme schemes (instead of a–a–b–b or a–b– c–b). Dallapiccola’s setting mirrors the outer form of the poem. It divides into two parts that are precisely fifty measures in length and are based on a different soundscape. Each part is further divided into two sections, each of which contains a stanza.27 The first half of the song is violent and intense. It is characterized by staccato articulations and sforzandi; floating rhythms and frequently changing meters; agitated and disjunct lines that are based on complete rows; and a heavy use of trichordal derivation in the instrumental accompaniment. The second half is a mirror image in nearly every respect: the mood is dolcissimo, with pp and ppp dynamics and legato articulation; its metric framework is far more stable and grounded; its vocal lines are more conjunct; and its accompaniment is dominated by inverted canons in the third stanza and trichordal structuring (but not trichordal combinatoriality) in the fourth stanza. This movement is full of trichordal derivation. Each of the row’s disjunct trichords is used to generate aggregates. As a result, the surface is saturated with set classes 3–2[013], 3–1[012], 3–5[016], and 3–3[014]. From a partitional standpoint, each trichordal cell induces a distinct partition of the aggregate,

Alegant.indd Sec2:201

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

202

more detailed analyses

which in turn yields a distinct arrangement of hexachordal set classes. Figure 6.8 displays the partitions and their hexachords.28 Figure 6.8. Derived aggregates and their generated hexachords (a) this partition of [013] trichords: {{0 1 t}{9 8 e}{3 2 5}{6 7 4}} yields: {8 9 t e 0 1} {t 0 1 2 3 5} {2 3 5 8 9 e}

{2 3 4 5 6 7} {4 6 7 8 9 e} { 4 6 7 t 0 1}

∈ ∈ ∈

6–1[012345] 6–8[023457] 6–30[013679]

(b) this partition of [014]4: { {0 3 e } {1 2 t} {5 6 9} {4 7 8 } } {t e 0 1 2 3} {e 0 3 4 7 8} {9 e 0 3 5 6 }

{4 5 6 7 8 9} { 1 2 5 6 9 t} {1 2 4 7 8 t}

∈ ∈ ∈

6–1 6–20[014589] 6–30

(c) this partition of [012]4: { {0 t e } {1 2 3} {4 5 6} {7 8 9 } } {t e 0 1 2 3} {7 8 9 t e 0} {t e 0 4 5 6}

{4 5 6 7 8 9} {1 2 3 4 5 6} {1 2 3 7 8 9}

∈ ∈ ∈

6–1 6–1 6–7[012678]

(d) this partition of [016]4: { {067 }{1 2 8} {3 4 9} {5 t e} } {0 1 2 6 7 8} {0 3 4 6 7 9} {t e 0 5 6 7}

{3 4 5 9 t e} {1 2 5 8 t e} {1 2 3 4 8 9}

∈ ∈ ∈ and

6–7 6–27[013469] 6–Z6[012567] 6–Z38[012378]

Figure 6.8(a) shows that the pairwise unions of [013] trichords in the first partition form the all-combinatorial hexachords 6–1[012345] and 6–8[023457], plus a familiar octatonic subset, 6–30[013679]. Figure 6.9(b) shows that the partition of [014] cells yields 6–1[012345], 6–30[013679], and another all-combinatorial hexachord, 6–20[014589]. Figure 6.8(c) shows that the partition of [012] trichords generates two pairs of chromatic hexachords plus a fourth all-combinatorial hexachord, 6–7[012678]. And figure 6.8(d) shows that the partition of [016] cells forms 6–7[012678], 6–27[013469] (the other familiar octatonic subset), and a Z-related pair. Viewed from the standpoint of hexachords, 6– 1[012345] is formed by [012], [013], and [014] cells; 6–30[013679] is produced by [013], [014], and [016]; and 6–27[013469] is obtained by [016]. Figure 6.9 provides a formal analysis of the movement. The labels “[012]” and “[013]” denote the cells that are used to derive aggregates. The first half contains a few linear row presentations in the voice that are accompanied by derived aggregates; at key points these derived aggregates are punctuated by flurries of linear rows. (This reverses the events in the first movement, in which linear rows are occasionally broken up by derived aggregates.)

Alegant.indd Sec2:202

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

Figure 6.9. An Mathilde, iii, formal diagram Part I (mm. 1–49) Section 1 (mm. 1–27) mm.

1

Line: Voice: Instr.:

Ritornello Stanza 1 1 2 3 4 P-9 P-8 P-1 I-2

Deriv.:

6

[012] [013]--------

10

15

20

5 RI-0

6 R-0 P-e P-5 I-6

[012] [013]------[014] [014]

25

[014] [016]

Dyn.:

sf, sff

sempre ff sf

>

pp

Section 2 (mm. 28–49) mm.

28

33

Ritor.

Stanza 2

Line: Voice: Instr.:

7 I-0 P-1 I-2

35

36

40

43

46

10 P-e

11

12 RI-3

Ritor. 8

9

R-0 RI-1

P-9 P-3 I-4

discrete trichords Deriv.: [012] [014] Dyn.:

pp

[012]––[012] [014] ppp

pp

[016] ppp >

Part II (mm. 50–100) Section 3 (mm. 50–75) mm.

50

Line: Voice: Instr.:

52

55

60

63

67

70

13 P-0

14

15

16 R-0

17

P-0 I-0

R-0 RI-0

18 RI-e P-8 I-6 R-3

[016]

[016]

ppp

pp

[016] array

Dyn.:

Alegant.indd Sec2:203

<

mf

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

204

more detailed analyses

Figure 6.9. An Mathilde, iii, formal diagram—(concluded) Section 4 (mm. 76–100) mm.

76

78

Stanza 4 Line: 19 20 Voice: trichords Instr.: P-9 R-t

80

82

21 22 [013] trichords [013] trichords (not aggregates)

86

90

23 - - - - -

94

98

codetta 24 [012] trichords

[012] [016] Dyn.:

ppp

[016] pppp

The song opens with aggregates generated solely from [013] cells, then changes to aggregates that are formed by [012] and [014] trichords. The closing measures of the first and second stanzas feature derived aggregates of [016] trichords. The second half uses different constructs, including blocks of 6–27[013469], an extended passage based on retrograde and inversional symmetry, a four-row design that recalls texturally and textually the arrays in the previous movements, and a section with [013] trichords in a non-combinatorial setting. The bottom line of figure 6.9 surveys the dynamic plan: the first stanza opens with sf and sff markings and maintains the energy throughout. The rest of the movement, save for a short-lived outburst in the third section, is set in dynamic levels of pp, ppp, and, at the end, pppp. The dynamics thus reflect the narrator’s progression from terror and despair to resignation and prayer. Example 6.19 shows the first section, the most extensive application of trichordal derivation in Dallapiccola’s output. The label “[013] x 4” denotes a single aggregate derived from a quartet of [013] cells; similarly, “[013] x 8” and “[013] x 12” indicate double and triple aggregates generated by this same trichord. The initial aggregate has four 3– 2[013] trichords, the first of which suggests the head of P-0. The first and fourth and second and third trichords are T6-related in pitch space; the former pair projects an interval sequence of while the latter pair projects its inversion, . Together, the tritone-related trichords yield 6–30[013679] sonorities that give the surface an octatonic flavor. Additionally, one note from each of the [013] cells receives a sforzando attack. The accented notes in the first measure, {A3, C4, E♭4, F♯4), produce a member of 4–28[0369]. The second measure presents eight [013] trichords and a double aggregate; its trichords form a host of hexachords, among them 6–1[012345], 6–30[013679], and 6–32[024579]. The accented notes in the lower staff reiterate the 4–28[0369] heard in the first measure; the accented notes in the upper staff form a member of set class 4– 9[0167], {F4, F♯4, B4, C5}. The texture thickens from one to five voices until the

Alegant.indd Sec2:204

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

Example 6.19. An Mathilde, iii, part 1

Alegant.indd Sec2:205

4/5/2010 10:21:52 PM

Example 6.19. An Mathilde, iii, part 1—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:206

4/5/2010 10:21:54 PM

Example 6.19. An Mathilde, iii, part 1—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:207

4/5/2010 10:21:57 PM

208

more detailed analyses

Example 6.19. An Mathilde, iii, part 1—(concluded) third eighth note of measure 5, whereupon an aggregate derived from [012] trichords emerges. This aggregate paves the way for the vocal entrance. The voice enters in measure 5, with ff dynamics on “Das ist der böse Thanatos!” (It is the evil Thanatos).29 Each line of text is set with a different partitioning strategy. The voice’s P-9 row is accompanied by aggregates derived from [012] trichords; the next line features an aggregate derived from [014] trichords. “Ross” (horse) brings linear rows, P-1 and I-2, that mirror the sf hoofbeat gestures of the opening measures. These rows share their initial dyad, C♯– D, and illustrate the notion of polarity. (Throughout the song, the linear P and I flurries are offset by one semitone; in this way they maintain their incipit dyads. This pitch class invariance is a direct application of “polarity.”) The surface changes in measure 15, with aggregates derived from [014] trichords, followed by a trio of linear rows whose sforzando attacks recall the explosive attacks of the movement’s opening. The trio of rows includes P-5 and I-6 (which are polarized), plus row P-e. The third row enables Dallapiccola to outline [016] trichords by staggering the sf attacks: the first notes of the disjunct trichords of P-5, I-6, and P-e are , , and . The energy builds toward the concluding line of the stanza, “O, den Gedanken kann mein Herz nicht fassen!” (O, my heart cannot bear the thought of it). “O” is at first unaccompanied, then supported by accented 6–20[014589] hexachords in measures 20–21. The cessation of the triplet figures and the prolonged silence after “Gedanken” heighten the dramatic impact of the continuation: “kann mein Herz nicht fassen.” Each syllable of “fassen” (m. 24) is harmonized by an accented 6–27[013469] hexachord built from T3-related [016] trichords. The sustained hexachords, reinforced by the perfect fifth in the timpani, double the voice’s 5 and C5. The [013469] hexachord fades, bringing the frenetic first section to a close.

Alegant.indd Sec2:208

4/5/2010 10:21:59 PM

Example 6.20. An Mathilde, iii, part 2 The second section can be heard as a variation of the first, with a more recessive dynamic and a different arrangement of trichords and hexachords. Example 6.20 offers a reduction.

Alegant.indd Sec2:209

4/5/2010 10:21:59 PM

Example 6.20. An Mathilde, iii, part 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:210

4/5/2010 10:22:02 PM

Example 6.20. An Mathilde, iii, part 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:211

4/5/2010 10:22:04 PM

Example 6.20. An Mathilde, iii, part 2—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:212

4/5/2010 10:22:06 PM

an mathilde 213 This section also opens with a single aggregate, but built from [012] trichords. The texture thickens steadily to measure 32, where vertical [012] sonorities again herald the voice’s entrance. The [012] cells form numerous hexachordal sonorities, including 6–7[012678], which is realized by the inner and the outer trichords of the quartets. The accented notes within each aggregate form 4– 20[0158] and 4–23[0257] tetrachords (as opposed to the 4–9[0167] and 4– 28[0369] sonorities of the first section). The voice enters in measure 32, with a dolce statement of I-0 accompanied by many linear row presentations. A deluge of trichords begins again, this time with [014]. The intensity builds until measure 40, where the [014] aggregates are interrupted by vertical [012] trichords. The surface changes dramatically again on “allein” (alone): [014] is replaced by [012], staccato is replaced by legato, and the texture thins gradually from a total of sixteen [012] cells (m. 42) to four (m. 45). The section concludes with four sustained [016] trichords stacked into 6–27[013469] hexachords. Example 6.21 shows the parallelism between the ends of the first two sections. The passages in 6.21(a) and (b) can be seen as mirror images: they contrast ff and ppp dynamics; accents versus tenutos; and falling versus rising semitones on “fassen” and “ruhte.” Indeed, even the sustained 6–27[013469] hexachords that double the long notes in the voice move in opposite directions. The third section features one of Dallapiccola’s most elegant designs. Example 6.22 is a reduction of measures 51–74. The section opens with a series of [016] trichords and 6–27[013469] hexachords that recall the sustained chords that ended the first half of the song. These octatonic hexachords are the first part of an intricate compositional design using axial and temporal symmetries. Rosemary Brown describes the passage as follows: “the first part of the design features a perfect mirror canon with original and inverted forms of the row at the same transposition level. On completion of these row statements, the canon immediately reverses itself, utilizing the retrograde-inversion and retrograde form, again at the same transposition level. The net result is the production of a canon which, owing to the fact that the first half of the theme as a whole is retrograde-inversionally related to the second half, is simultaneously cancrizans and contrario motu.” To Brown, the palindrome paints the word “Ebenbilde,” which appears in the line “Seid Schild und Vögte eurem Ebenbilde” (Be a shield and guardian to your image). As the example shows, retrograde symmetry governs the pitch and rhythmic realization of the P-0, R-0, I-0, and RI-0 rows, the 6–27[013469] hexachords in measures 57–62, and the spoken realization of “Beschützt, wenn ich im öden Grab.”30 Here, the floating rhythms wane, and a sense of pulses emerges, with downbeats on “En-gel,” “Himmels-höhn,” “vernehmt,” and “Schluch-zen” in the first half of the palindrome, and “Grab,” “Weib,” ge-lie-bet,” “hab,’” and “Schild” in the second. The sparse writing allows us aurally to associate corresponding elements, even “Ihr Engel” (mm. 51–52) and “Seid Schild und ¨Vögte eurem” (mm. 66–68), the extreme edges of the symmetrical design. As soon as the palindrome is completed, the pp mood is shattered by

Alegant.indd Sec2:213

4/5/2010 10:22:09 PM

214

more detailed analyses

Example 6.21. Closing parallelism

the setting of “Beschützt, beschirmt mein armes Kind, Mathilde.” As example 6.23 reveals, this passage recasts a P/I/R/RI array from the first movement, specifically the explosive presentation of “Dass ich verfall dem Totenreiche” (That I belong to the realm of the dead). The sudden outburst ends with a rallentando on a single, sustained D♯4 that brings the section to a close.

Alegant.indd Sec2:214

4/5/2010 10:22:09 PM

Example 6.22. An Mathilde, iii, part 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:215

4/5/2010 10:22:10 PM

Example 6.22. An Mathilde, iii, part 3—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:216

4/5/2010 10:22:12 PM

Example 6.22. An Mathilde, iii, part 3—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:217

4/5/2010 10:22:14 PM

218

more detailed analyses

The third section is a loving portrayal of Heine’s plea for Mathilde. The hushed dynamics, rounded attacks, and gentle trichord imitations create a sonic pillow above which the voice’s rhythms are grounded, but not heavy. The harmonies also play a significant role in the passage. I have previously mentioned that the third section opens in measures 50–51 with four instances of 6–27[013469], produced by stacked [016]s. These octatonic subsets contrast with the setting of “Himmelshöhn” (m. 54) and its mirror image “geliebet” (m. 65): these words are colored by diatonic collections {C, D♭, E♭, F, G♭, A♭, and B♭}. The concluding section, reproduced in example 6.24, is even more introverted. It is characterized by sparse textures, pp and ppp dynamics, and markings of espressivo, molto espressivo, and, ultimately, con grande espressivo. It opens with a pair of rows that are partitioned into hexachords and two trichords; the voice takes the third trichord of P-9 and the second trichord of R-t. This pairing of T1-related rows highlights the semitone transpositions between the vocal fragments “Bei allen Thränen” and “die ihr je Geweint” (both of which are [016] trichords) and the sustained hexachords below. The surface changes in measure 78, with a recitative-like repetition of D♭4 on “je Geweint um unser Menschenweh.” From this point on, Dallapiccola completely abandons twelve-tone rows and generates all of the material from [012], [013], and [016] trichords. With the line “Beim Wort, das nur der Priester kennt” (By the word that only the priest knows), the vocal and accompaniment lines articulate [013] cells (which are largely absent during the third section). Unlike the other derived passages in the composition, however, these trichords do not form aggregates. (Or, to be more accurate, they combine to form weighted aggregates, with many pitch- and pitch-class duplications.) The texture thickens gradually until measure 91, whereupon the overlapped [013] trichords give way to two 6–27[013469] hexachords and a sustained ten-note sound mass. The final measures of the movement are dominated by [012] trichords. First the voice outlines a linear aggregate of [012] cells; then a quartet of instruments echoes these cells in measures 97–98, in “interrogative” trichords. A final, sospirato utterance of “Mathilde,” accompanied by one last pair of pppp 6–27[013469] hexachords, brings the song and the cycle to a close. The setting of “Mathilde” in the last three measures is intriguing. The name “Mathilde” is uttered on a repeated F♯4, which is doubled by the secondto-highest note in the sustained [013469] hexachord in measure 99. Unlike the previous concluding passages, in which the syllables of “fassen” (mm. 24–25) and “ruhte” (mm. 46–47) move by semitone, the voice retains F♯ throughout. The last sustained sonority superimposes the semitone above the voice; this irresolution underscores the helplessness of the poet’s plea. Additionally, it is worth pointing out that the first syllable of “Mathilde” is unaccompanied (m. 98), and thereby mimics the first utterance of “Mathilde” in the opening measures of the composition.

Alegant.indd Sec2:218

4/5/2010 10:22:16 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:219

4/5/2010 10:22:16 PM

Example 6.23. Recapitulation of a four-part array

Example 6.24. An Mathilde, iii, part 4

Alegant.indd Sec2:220

4/5/2010 10:22:18 PM

Example 6.24. An Mathilde, iii, part 4—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:221

4/5/2010 10:22:20 PM

Example 6.24. An Mathilde, iii, part 4—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:222

4/5/2010 10:22:22 PM

an mathilde 223 Let us take a closer look at the realization of [013] trichords in measures 80–91. Many authors (among them Brown, Nathan, Kiesewetter, and Fearn) have commented on the intertextual references to Bach and Wagner. Nathan asserts in “Fragments from Conversation” that the cell in this passage is an “allusion” to both Bach’s Sinfonia in f-minor, BWV 795 and the “Schicksalsmotiv” from Act III, Scene III of Die Walküre.31 Dallapiccola had this to say about these trichordal configurations: These tiny dodecaphonically derived elements serve to accentuate the German characters of that great civilization to which they belong; they are practically an homage to it. From a compositional point of view they are a kind of intellectual diversion—a mere personal construct. I agree, one cannot hear them” (295).

Example 6.25 highlights the correspondences. Level (a) reproduces the socalled “Fate” motive, with its defining profile; (b) displays the successive cells in the opening of Bach’s invention; and (c) highlights some of the [013] cells in the passage in question. Below the score, the annotations reflect the rhythmic permutations, the 1:1:2 and 2:2:1 proportions, and the contours. (Incidentally, I would respectfully disagree with Dallapiccola: it is not at all difficult to hear these thematic connections.)

Further Considerations One question that is certainly overdue: Why did Dallapiccola set these particular poems at this point in his career? Heine’s deeply personal poems illuminate different aspects of Mathilde’s persona; surely he was taking stock of his life, reflecting on the past and worrying about the future of his child-wife. In 1954 Dallapiccola was entering his sixth decade of life. He was beginning to enjoy the rewards of international fame and recognition. Perhaps he, too, was taking stock of his creative life, and thinking about his future compositions and his legacy. From a technical perspective, An Mathilde straddles the second and third phases. On the one hand, it has much in common with the works written in the first half of the 1950s, including an increased level of compositional rigor; symmetry; canon; trichordal derivation; cross partitions; and polarity. On the other hand, it looks ahead to the Cinque canti, the works of the latter half of the 1950s (such as Requiescant), and his magnum opus Ulisse, which imports verbatim entire passages of An Mathilde. With these works An Mathilde shares a more extensive scope, and an increased reliance on four-row arrays, hexachordal structuring, irregular partitions, sound masses and other timbral effects, and pitched and un-pitched percussion.

Alegant.indd Sec2:223

4/5/2010 10:22:24 PM

224

more detailed analyses

Example 6.25. References to Bach and Wagner

What I find most remarkable about An Mathilde is its inventive text painting: each movement uses different partitioning strategies to evoke emotions of whimsy, euphoria, nostalgia, helplessness, dread, and terror. The first song is sprinkled with a handful of linear rows, cross partitions of even sizes (62, 43, 34, 26), P/I/R/RI arrays, and linear aggregates generated by [012] trichords. The central song is saturated with three-voice canons accompanied by variants of P/ I/R/RI arrays, dyadic complexes, and a double canon in the penultimate stanza, at “Leider wohn ich viel zu hoch.” The final song inhabits two separate soundscapes. One is dominated by trichordal derivation, as each of the row’s discrete

Alegant.indd Sec2:224

4/5/2010 10:22:24 PM

an mathilde 225 cells is used to generate aggregates as well as Dallapiccola’s “signature”octatonic hexachords, 6–30[013679] and 6–27[013469]. (The latter hexachord in particular functions as an agent for change.) The second half of the third song incorporates new elements—a symmetrical design that features inversion and canon, and an extended passage of [013] trichords with ties to Bach and Wagner. It then recapitulates elements from the previous movements, including a literal recapitulation of a four-row array, a linear aggregate of [012] trichords, and sustained 6–27[013469] sonorities. Another important feature that distinguishes An Mathilde from the Goethe-Lieder and Quaderno—and one that receives a great deal of attention in phase 3—is tetrachordal structuring. The tetrachordal material in this work is obtained by cross partitions, dyadic complexes, and P/I/R/RI arrays. The first two procedures are “fixed” with respect to set-class content, because the harmonies (the columns) are always comprised of the discrete segments of a row. Thus, 43 configurations can only project [0236] and [0147] as chords. Similarly, the tetrachordal inventory for the dyadic complex is rather small. But the four-row arrays are much freer with respect to harmonic content, because they can, in theory, generate every tetrachordal set class. Indeed, we can find more than a half-dozen P/I/R/ RI arrays in the piece, forming many four-note collections. And yet, An Mathilde is the only one of Dallapiccola’s works that invokes P/I/R/RI arrays. I find it quite unusual that a composer who is so fond of self-quotation and borrowing would abandon a construct that is so harmonically mutable and texturally distinct. It would seem he preferred the internal consistency of the later four-row arrays, which combine pairs of P and I (or R and RI) transforms. One final aspect of An Mathilde that I would like to mention is the recurrence of thematic material. Several rhetorically charged events appear in each of the three movements, perhaps suggesting cyclical thinking on Dallapiccola’s part. Such constructs include P/I/R/RI arrays, the atmospheric ten-note sound masses, the punctuations of 6–27[013469] sonorities, and linear aggregates that are built from [012] trichords. These aggregates represent an intriguing subplot. The first appearance of this idea occurs in the opening movement, where the bass clarinet and English horn accompany the poet’s first expression of grief. Soon, however, these linear aggregates formed from [012] trichords are used in the waltz apotheosis of the first movement. They return early in the second movement, on a melismatic presentation of “Mathilde”; and they constitute the final vocal utterance of the composition. Together, these linear aggregates come close to achieving the status of a “Mathilde leitmotive.” Certainly, there is great deal more to say about An Mathilde. I conclude this chapter with the hope that I achieved what I set out to accomplish: to provide a fuller account of this extraordinary work. I hope, too, that this chapter might spur someone to record it: for this is a cantata that truly deserves to be sung.

Alegant.indd Sec2:225

4/5/2010 10:22:26 PM

Chapter Seven

Parole di San Paolo “A Performance under a Glass Bell” This chapter offers a reading of Parole di San Paolo, a fourth-phase work that, like An Mathilde, has been virtually ignored by scholars. The analysis examines this work in particular and the fourth phase in general. It models the twelve-tone techniques and strategies, the small-scale and large-scale form, and the pitchclass and set-class associations on the surface. Particular emphasis is placed on showing how changes in partitioning strategies articulate changes in the form. Parole is written for medium voice and an instrumental ensemble that includes two pairs of woodwinds (flute/alto flute, and clarinet/bass clarinet), pitched percussion (celesta, piano, harp, vibraphone), and viola and cello.1 On the whole, its soundscape is more Webernian than Schoenbergian, and recalls the linear orientation and polyphonic textures of such first- and second-phase compositions as the Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, Goethe-Lieder, and An Mathilde. A few passages look forward to the sound ideal of Sicut Umbra, the first work completed after Ulisse.2 One of its most striking attributes is a mutable approach to text setting: virtually every line of the text evokes a change in dynamics, texture, rhythmic profile, and partitioning strategy. As a result, the surface changes frequently, and cantabile passages with soft dynamics and thin textures are juxtaposed with furioso passages with loud dynamics and thick textures. From a technical standpoint, Parole draws its techniques from all four serial phases. First-phase features include the use of cross partitions, periodic structuring, and a transparent orchestration and ethereal atmosphere. Second-phase features include floating rhythm (schwebender Rhythmus), a prohibition against octave doublings, and the (Webernian) procedures of trichordal derivation and axial symmetry (with both even and odd index numbers). Features common to third- and fourth-phase works are a fluid approach to row handling and aggregate formation, some rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie, a prevalence of ultra-soft dynamics, and, especially, the Schoenbergian ideal of associating segmental and nonsegmental harmonies. (These procedures are explained in due course.) By the same token, Parole spurns many procedures that are found in the surrounding compositions (namely, Preghiere, Three Questions with Two Answers, and Ulisse), avoiding hexachordal inversional combinatoriality, leitrhythms,

Alegant.indd Sec2:226

4/5/2010 10:22:26 PM

parole di san paolo 227 un-pitched percussion, and thick sound masses. Furthermore, only a handful of aggregates on the surface are “pure,” or un-weighted (meaning that they have no pitch-class or pitch duplication); as a result, aggregate boundaries for much of the work are blurred (or nonexistent). The source row for Parole is not like most of the rows found between the Liriche Greche (1942–45) and Commiato (1972). Dallapiccola’s rows can be grouped into three broad categories. Some rows are hexachordal combinatorial (or semicombinatorial). Other rows are palindromic or “derived,” insofar as they are invariant under some twelve-tone operation (often an RI transform). Still others rows are marked with octatonic tendencies. As we observed in chapter 5, such rows feature set classes 6–27[013469] and 6–30[013679].3 Parole’s row, however, possesses none of these characteristics. Example 7.1 examines some of the characteristics of Parole’s P-t transform. (I use P-t instead of the default P-0 because the former row saturates the work; it functions, in a sense, as the “home” row.) Example 7.1(a) shows the row’s interval-class (ic) structure. The row contains many instances of ic 1 and at least one instance of every other interval class save for 5. Interval class 4 opens P and I and closes R and RI transforms. Example 7.1(b) highlights some ic 1 connections between contiguous elements. Examples 1(c) through (e) display the row’s disjunct (non-overlapping) hexachords, tetrachords, and trichords. The hexachords, in (c), are 6–Z17[012478] and 6–Z43[012568].4 The tetrachords, in (d), are 4–2[0124], 4–3[0134], and 4–12[0236]. Finally, as (e) reveals, the row contains four different trichordal set classes belonging to the [01] family: 3–2[013], 3–1[012], 3– 5[016], and 3–3[014]. The ensuing analysis reveals that set classes [014], [016] and [0236] play leading roles. From a topological standpoint, the source rows of Parole, An Mathilde, and Sicut Umbra are oddly similar. Example 7.2 compares rows from these works. Example 7.2(a) shows that the h1 and h2 hexachords of these rows belong to the same Z-related pair. Example 7.2(b) shows some of the correspondences among the disjunct trichords. Observe that the P-t form of Parole and the R-e form of An Mathilde are virtually identical, save for the placement of the C♯; the rows from An Mathilde and Sicut Umbra are closely matched as well. Finally, 7.2(c) addresses the similarities among tetrachords. Each row contains at least one instance of set class 4–12[0236], and the rows of An Mathilde and Sicut Umbra share set class 4–18[0147] as well.

The Text and the Outer Form Figure 7.1 provides a translation of the text, which is excerpted from 1 Corinthians 13.5

Alegant.indd Sec2:227

4/5/2010 10:22:26 PM

228

more detailed analyses

Example 7.1. The row of Parole and its properties The subject of the text is “caritas,” which has been translated variously as “charity” and “love”; I take the latter.6 Dallapiccola arranges the Biblical verses 1–4, 6, 7, and 13 into five stanzas that are labeled 1 through 5 on the left-hand side of the figure. The first three stanzas describe the absence of love, using the construction “While I might have [some attribute], if I do not have love, then . . .” In contrast, the fourth and fifth stanzas describe positive attributes of love: the penultimate stanza

Alegant.indd Sec2:228

4/5/2010 10:22:26 PM

parole di san paolo 229

Example 7.2. Comparing the rows of An Mathilde, Parole, and Sicut Umbra

speaks of love as patient, kind, and able to protect, trust, hope, and endure; the fifth stanza prizes love above the other virtues of faith and hope. Figure 7.2 shows the large-scale form. The first two columns show the disposition of individual lines within the stanzas. They highlight the parallelisms in the text and indicate the placement of several codettas and an interlude. I use the term “codetta” to refer to a closing or summary passage that has a recessive dynamic. The codettas are typically characterized by a decrease in energy,

Alegant.indd Sec2:229

4/5/2010 10:22:28 PM

230

more detailed analyses

Figure 7.1. Translation of the text 1 [1] Si linguis hominum loquar et angelorum, If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, [2] caritatem autem non habeam, but have not love, [3] factus sum velut aes sonans, aut cymbalum tinniens. I am only as a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. 2 [4] Et si habuero prophetiam, et noverim mysteria omnia, et omnem scientiam: And if I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and knowledge, [5] et si habuero omnem fidem ita ut montes transferam, and if I have a faith that could remove mountains, [6] caritatem autem non habuero, nihil sum. but have not love, I am nothing. 3 [7] Et si distribuero in cibos pauperum omnes facultates meas, And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, [8] et si tradidero corpus meum ita ut ardeam, and if I should deliver my body to the flames, [9] caritatem autem non habuero, nihil mihi prodesi. but have not love, I gain nothing. 4 [10] Caritas patiens est, benigna est: Love is patient, love is kind: [11] Non gaudet super iniquitate, congaudet autem veritati: love does not rejoice in evil but rejoices with the truth; [12] Omnia suffert, omnia credit, omnia sperat, omnia sustinet. it always protects, always trusts, always hopes, endures. 5 [13] Nunc autem manent fides, spes, caritas, tria haec: And now abide faith, hope and love, these three: —tria haec: fides, spes, caritas [composer’s insertion] —these three: faith, hope, love, [14] major autem horum est caritas. but the greatest of these is love.

a thinning of texture, and a ritardando. In contrast, I use the term “interlude” to refer to a passage that has a progressive dynamic—an increase in energy that is often achieved by an accelerando and thickening of texture. The remaining columns show partitioning strategies, dynamics, and other features. Note the extensive use of 34 cross partitions and derived aggregates, the latter of which are identified by the set-class cell of the generator. In the column labeled “Inversion,” two-row inversional designs are represented by single asterisks; four-row designs, by two. The column labeled “silence” highlights two extended rests in measures 32 and 50 that occur before the final lines of the

Alegant.indd Sec2:230

4/5/2010 10:22:29 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:231

4/5/2010 10:22:30 PM

Interlude Stanza 5

Codetta Stanza 4

Codetta Stanza 3

Codetta Stanza 2

Introduction Stanza 1

Section

[13] of these three: [14] (these three again): [15] love is the greatest.

[10] love is patient … [11] love rejoices …, [12] love protects …

[7] though I might … [8] and though I might … [9] if I have not love, I gain nothing.

[4] though I might … [5] and though I might … [6] if I have not love … I am nothing.

[1] though I might … [2] but if I have not love [3] I am like a cymbal.

Line summary

Figure 7.2. Formal overview

****

* ****

****

* * *

**** * * *

34 configs.

[016]

[014]

[014]

[014]

Deriv.

** ** **

*

(*)

(*)

Inv.

m. 32

Silence

pp

< ff ff

pp ppp pp

ff m. 50

pp ppp

pp < < ff

pp ppp

Dyn.

RI-5 I-8 R-t

I-7 pp pp

RI-3

pp I-5 pp

RI-3

R-7 RI-5

P-t RI-1 I-6

Voice

(I-7) [016]

I-e, P-9

232

more detailed analyses

second and third stanzas. These silences participate in a “boundary play,” as the material that follows them serves both as a rebeginning and a conclusion.7 The “dyn.” column shows the pervasiveness of pp and ppp dynamics, counterpoised by fortissimo outbursts during lines [5], [8], and [13]. Finally, the right-most column lists the rows or materials in the voice part. The voice sings only a handful of (complete) rows throughout; and only a few of these rows (plus their retrogrades) are stated more than once. Repeated rows include P-t and R-t, which appear in lines [1] and [14]; RI-3, in lines [6] and [9]; and RI-5 and I-5, in lines [5], [8], and [13]. I would underscore three features of the compositional design: a saturation of cross partitions (with twenty-four 34 configurations in just 100 measures); trichordal derivation, notably at the conclusion of the first three stanzas and throughout the fourth; and the use of inversion, which plays an increasingly larger role as the composition unfolds. My analysis pays particular attention to the ways in which partitioning strategies articulate the large-scale and small-scale form. It freely invokes both metaphorical and non-technical description (“soft” discourse) and technical description (“hard” discourse). When appropriate, I will draw connections between the soundscapes of Parole and those in other works by Dallapiccola, Schoenberg, and Webern that have been discussed in previous chapters. Finally, I will on three occasions digress from the analysis to explore the theoretical and analytical implications of such topics as cross partitions, derived aggregates, and four-row arrays.

The Opening Ritornello and Tetrachordal Structuring Example 7.3 provides a reduction of the opening eight measures. This reduction (like that of the previous chapter) is designed to show as clearly as possible the rows and the aggregate formations on the surface. As a rule, labels for rows and cross partitions appear in boxed text, and derived aggregates are identified by their set-class generator. Individual rows and cross partitions are placed on a single staff, which makes it much easier to follow the handling of rows and aggregates. The atmosphere of the opening is sparse, delicate, and ethereal. The soundscape is defined by a thin texture, pp dynamics, a high tessitura, and an extremely slow tempo (the half-note = 30–32) without a sense of pulse; time is suspended. This is the ideal floating rhythm, with changing meters, frequent ties and syncopations, three-against-two subdivisions, and especially a steadfast avoidance of downbeat attacks. The tenuto articulations in measures 1–3 and 6–8 contribute a sense of tentativeness and precariousness to the attacks. Dallapiccola asks that the articulations be played “as sostenuto as possible, with no more than a sixteenth-note between attacks.”8

Alegant.indd Sec2:232

4/5/2010 10:22:30 PM

parole di san paolo 233

Example 7.3. The opening ritornello

The opening consists of four gestures, each of which is based on a 34 cross partition. (Recall that a 34 cross partition is a two-dimensional aggregate configuration that presents four vertical trichords and three horizontal tetrachords, with no pitch class duplication in the rows or columns. Cross partitions are Schoenbergian constructs, and they occur in nearly every one of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone compositions.) This opening idea returns several times during the course of the work, with similar pitch and rhythmic configurations. For this reason I designate it a “ritornello.” The ritornello’s gestures are arranged in a symmetrical pattern with respect to articulation, contour, instrumentation, and rhythm.9 The outer gestures (a and a’) present their trichords in long note values; each trichord features two woodwind instruments accompanied by a low string. In contrast, the inner gestures (b and b’) use shorter note values; their trichords are assigned to pitched percussion (harp, celesta, vibraphone). The corresponding gestures (a–a’ and b–b’) are transposed retrogrades of each other, and thus appear as contour inversions in pitch space. Observe that the last trichord of each cross partition sustains over the entrance of the next one.

Alegant.indd Sec2:233

4/5/2010 10:22:30 PM

234

more detailed analyses

The first cross partition is built from row P-t. Its constituent trichords are clearly heard, in part because they are in open position and sustained. The semitones (ic 1) lend a sense of “crunchiness” to the sonorities, especially the third trichord, which combines the viola’s D♯5 with the flute’s E5. The primary tune is the flute’s ascending tetrachord, , which is a member of set class 4–12[0236]. A diminuendo on the fourth trichord completes the cross partition (and the aggregate). The second gesture is based on a 34 cross partition of row I-1; it is played by the celesta. The first trichord of this configuration overlaps with the last trichord of the P-t cross partition; there is no pitch-class duplication between these sonorities. The set classes in the I-1 cross partition, which (naturally) replicate those in the first, are also clearly asserted. Dallapiccola instructs that the upper line of the cross partition be placed into relief (“la nota superiore appena in rilievo”); this emphasizes the upper tetrachord, , which is also a member of 4–12[0236]. In fact, this tetrachord is a strict pitch inversion of the flute’s tetrachord in the previous 34 configuration. The third cross partition is based on row RI-5, and introduces the remaining percussion instruments. It also duplicates the rhythmic values of the second configuration by a (nearly exact) 2:1 ratio. The uppermost line (the vibraphone) articulates , another version of 4–12[0236]. The fourth cross partition is built from row R-2. It recaptures the rhythm of the initial configuration, framing the ritornello. The rhythmic match between the first and fourth gestures is nearly exact; the exception is the eighth-note rest before the fourth trichord in measure 8, after the entrance of the voice. The upper tetrachord of this fourth configuration, played by the clarinet, is another 4–12[0236]. The ritornello performs a variety of functions. It introduces each instrument, except for the piano, which is reserved for the loudest passages.10 It shows the symmetry, the rigor, and the concentrated expression that are the hallmarks of Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone praxis. It establishes the 34 cross partition as a vital textural and partitioning strategy. And it emphasizes, or marks, the trichords and tetrachords of these configurations. Example 7.4 summarizes the pitch and set-class structure of the quartet of cross partitions, preserving their pitch content but normalizing the rhythms. Example 7.4(a) displays the trichords in the vertical dimension. The progression of trichords in the Pt- and I-1 configurations, [014]–[016]–[012]–[013], is (naturally) reversed in the formations of RI-5 and R-2. Example 7.4(b) profiles the melodic tetrachords in the upper, middle, and lower lines of the cross partitions. It shows the pattern of intervals in the upper tetrachords, all of which belong to set class 4–12[0236]. The tetrachords share similar intervallic profiles. On closer inspection we can see that the ascending tetrachord in the P cross partition outlines the interval string ; the descending tetrachord in I, ; the RI tetrachord, ; and the R tetrachord,

Alegant.indd Sec2:234

4/5/2010 10:22:31 PM

parole di san paolo 235

Example 7.4. Pitch-class and set-class details of the ritornello

, instead of , which is “due.” (Based on the intervallic patterns of the first three configurations, the final melodic note of the R-2 cross partition should be D4, not D5. Presumably, D4 would create a “bottomheavy” spacing in the sonority.) The similarities in these intervallic patterns establish set class [0236] as a motive. One other aspect of the ritornello’s structure should be mentioned, namely that the cross partitions are not realized in an isomorphic fashion. The differences in their spatial realizations arise from “slot machine” transformations, which vary the pitch classes in the vertical

Alegant.indd Sec2:235

4/5/2010 10:22:31 PM

236

more detailed analyses

dimension and therefore alter the content of the horizontal lines. (This shows, yet again, how easily cross partitions can achieve harmonic consistency and melodic variety.) The first cross partition has set classes 4–12, 4–13, and 4–20; the second has 4–12, 4–22, and 4–26; the third has two members of 4–12 and one of 4–18; and the fourth has 4–12, 4–13, and 4–27. There is at least one plausible reason why set class 4–12[0236] is so prominent in the ritornello: it is the only discrete segment of the row that is able to appear as a melody in a 34 cross partition. Figure 7.3 illustrates these two modes of generation.

Figure 7.3. Segmental and nonsegmental correspondences (a) row P-t:



(b) P-t, realized as a 34 cross partition t 1 4 0 6 8 3 9 7 2 5 e

⇐ 4–12[0236] ⇐ 4–13[0136] ⇐ 4–27[0258]

(c) P-e, divided into discrete tetrachords < e789 3256 4–2[0124] 4–3[0134]

4t10 > 4–12[0236]

(d) I-8, configured as a 34 cross partition 8 5 2 6 0 t 1 7 e 4 3 9

⇐ 4–12[0236] ⇐ 4–13[0136] ⇐ 4–16[0157]

(e) I-7, divided into tetrachords < 7et9 3410 4–2[0124] 4–3[0134]

2856 > 4–12[0236]

For reference, 7.3(a) restates the P-t row, with several nonadjacent pitch-classes {t, 1, 0, 4} in boldface. Figure 7.3(b) reproduces the first 34 cross partition, with the pitch classes of the upper line in boldface. Figure 7.3(c) divides row P-e into discrete tetrachords. The key is that the third segment of P-e replicates the content of the uppermost line in 7.3(b). Thus, the same unordered [0236] tetrachord occurs as a line in a 34 cross partition of one row, and as a discrete segment of another row. This segmental/nonsegmental association occurs between any two rows that are related by T1 (or T-1). Figures 7.3(d) and (e) show a similar association between a segment of I-7 and a nonsegmental tetrachord of I-8: here, the collection is {2, 5, 6, 8}.11

Alegant.indd Sec2:236

4/5/2010 10:22:33 PM

parole di san paolo 237 Although the following points might be obvious to many readers, I raise them nevertheless. First, not every twelve-tone row is able to project a 4– 12[0236] in a cross partition: certain combinations of trichords in the columns permit some tetrachords but not others. Second, those rows that have the potential to outline [0236] tetrachords in their 34 cross partitions will not automatically yield it: these rows have to be partitioned, or arranged, in a particular way. That Dallapiccola takes pains to associate segmental and nonsegmental harmonies is crucial in two respects. First, it provides further evidence of Schoenberg’s influence on Dallapiccola’s fourth phase.12 Second, the associations among these segmental and nonsegmental [0236] tetrachords are vital to the fabric of the work. Moreover—and this is conjecture—I believe that Dallapiccola constructed the row of Parole specifically to associate the segmental and nonsegmental tetrachords of this set class.

Part 1 Having explored the salient characteristics of the row and the ritornello, let us now consider the first section. Example 7.5 offers a reduction of part 1 (mm. 1–20). (Each of the five parts of the work sets a complete stanza; thus, for all intents and purposes, “part,” “stanza,” and “section” are synonymous.) The initial section is characterized by sparse textures, ppp dynamics, and floating rhythm. Its “raw materials” include three vocal rows, three cross partitions, and a codetta of derived aggregates. Each vocal row sets a line of text, as shown below: Si linguis hominum loquar et angelorum, P-t Caritatem autem non habeam, RI-1 Factus sum velut aes sonans, aut cymbalum tinniens. I-6 Dallapiccola sets the text somewhat freely. He eschews a syllabic setting, and incorporates melismas on “angelorum” (angels) and “caritatem” (love), and repeats single pitches, dyads, and a trichordal segment, , in measures 8–10.13 The realization of “Si linguis” is especially captivating. “Si” emerges tentatively on a ppp B♭4, the same pitch as the flute’s entrance in the first cross partition of the ritornello. “Linguis” is distinguished in two ways by a “negative accent”: it is spoken, and unaccompanied, because the fourth trichord of R-2 is delayed. This silence—the first break in the stream of trichords—is filled by a ppp F4 that emerges only after the {G♭–C–F} trichord begins to decay. When the last trichord of the R-2 cross partition sounds, the voice recaptures B♭4 and unfolds row P-t, accompanied only by an F4 pedal.

Alegant.indd Sec2:237

4/5/2010 10:22:33 PM

Example 7.5. Parole, part 1

Alegant.indd Sec2:238

4/5/2010 10:22:33 PM

parole di san paolo 239

Example 7.5. Parole, part 1—(concluded) Now let us examine the trio of vocal rows in the first section. Dallapiccola uses the same row for the first cross partition and the first vocal phrase.14 (This is especially significant given his statements regarding Proust, Joyce, and character development discussed in the first chapter.) It is easy to hear the pitch connections between P-t as a cross partition and a row. Example 7.6(a) normalizes the rhythms of the aggregate formations, and uses open note heads to reveal the invariant pitches, nine in all. Example 7.6(b) highlights some of the associations between the three vocal rows in the section.15 An examination of the three pairs (P-t and RI-1, P-t and I6, I-6 and RI-1) reveals many commonalities. The segmental invariance between P-t and RI-1 is striking: these rows share five segments in common, including the {C5–B4} dyad that serves as a pivot between the rows. A glance back to measures 10–11 of the score (in ex. 7.5) shows that this dyad serves (conspicuously) as the tail of P-t and the head of RI-1. Other segments shared by P-t and RI-1 include two tritones, designated b and d, and a [014] trichord, labeled a. The P-t and I-6 rows share fewer common segments. However, they begin with the same initial

Alegant.indd Sec2:239

4/5/2010 10:22:35 PM

Example 7.6. Some invariant relationships in part 1

Alegant.indd Sec2:240

4/5/2010 10:22:37 PM

parole di san paolo 241 dyad, F♯4 and A♯4, and they share eight pitches—as do RI-1 and I-6, which appear at the bottom of the example. All of this shows the high degree of pitch redundancy among the vocal rows. The instrumental accompaniment in the opening section is based on 34 cross partitions, derived aggregates, and a sustained pedal point. The cross partitions recall the gestures of the ritornello (especially the P-2 configuration, whose fourth trichord is isolated), and mark the completion of the vocal rows. They also double select pitches that occur at the boundaries of the vocal phrases. Prominent doublings include B♭4 on “Si (linguis) ho-minum” in measures 7– 8; {C5, B4} in measure 11; E4 at “habeam” in measure 13; and {E♭5, C4} on “sonans” in measure 16. Another intriguing facet of this section is the extended pedal point on F4, which recalls the experiments with rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie in Dialoghi and Ulisse.16 Example 7.7 takes a closer look at the inner workings of this pedal point. Every instrument (except the harp and piano) participates. The entrances are dovetailed, with an eighth-note overlap between entering and exiting instruments; and the durations are governed by an arithmetic series, . As shown in the bottom of the example, the alto flute sustains F4 for a total of 10 eighth notes, the flute sustains it for 12 eighths, the bass clarinet for 15, the clarinet for 20, the viola for 25, and the cello for 29 (not 30, as we might expect). Although the floating rhythm and slow tempo obscure the arithmetical increments in the durations, one can sense that the durations are lengthening. Further, the continuous presence of this pitch serves as a reference point for the winding vocal lines; as soon as the voice ends its third phrase on this F4 ( “tinniens” in measure 17), the pedal point dissolves. Part 1 concludes with a codetta in measures 17–20. The codetta presents two aggregates derived from 3–3[014] trichords.17 Each aggregate (by definition) is based on a trichordal partition. Figure 7.4(a) displays the first partition, using the labels a, b, c, and d to denote its components.18 A brief note on terminology: angled brackets signify that pitch classes of the individual trichords are ordered; curly brackets indicate that the order of the individual trichords is not specified (that is, they may appear in any arrangement). These [014] trichords combine into three pairs of complementary hexachords, shown in figure 7.4(b). Figure 7.4(c) labels the trichords in the second aggregate a,’ d, c,’ and b. The partitions in (a) and (c) are pitch-class inversions of each other: their corresponding trichords are governed by the index number of 11.19 This index number preserves the (unordered) content of trichords b and d, and toggles two pitch classes in the other pair of trichords, mapping a into a,’ and c into c.’ As a result, these partitions maintain the same unordered 6–20[014589] hexachords, which are underlined in (b) and (d). Here I offer an item of partitional trivia. Figure 7.4(e) shows the partition that opens Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24; 7.4(f) lists its hexachordal inventory. The interesting thing is that the partition in the Concerto is distinct from the partitions in Parole—even

Alegant.indd Sec2:241

4/5/2010 10:22:38 PM

242

more detailed analyses

Example 7.7. The pedal point

though all three partitions are generated by [014] trichords. Consequently, these partitions in Parole and the Concerto are said to be “Z-related.”20 Example 7.8 takes a closer look at the interplay of [014] trichords in the codetta. Perhaps the first thing to mention is the formation of two “composite sonorities” produced by the sustained notes in measures 17–19 and 20–21. The first sonority includes the bass clarinet’s F3, the clarinet’s C♯4, and the cello’s E4; the second is formed by the alto flute’s B3, the flute’s D4, and the viola’s B♭4. Both sonorities are members of set class 3–3[014], which means that the codetta has ten instances of [014], eight produced by the trichordal partitions and two as composite sonorities. The composite trichords are inversions of each other in pitch space.21

Alegant.indd Sec2:242

4/5/2010 10:22:39 PM

parole di san paolo 243 Figure 7.4. Derived aggregates in the first codetta (a) the partition of [014] trichords in mm. 17–19 { a

b

c

} d

(b) the combinative hexachords produced by the trichords above {123457}+{689te0} {e03478}+{12569t} {34679t}+{e01258}

a+b, c+d a+c, b+d a+d b+c

6–2[012346] 6–20[014589] 6–Z42[013467] 6–Z13[012369]

(c) the partition of [014] in mm. 19–20 { a’

d

c’

} b

(d) the combinative hexachords produced by the trichords in (c) { 4 6 7 8 9 t } + { e 0 1 2 3 5} {e03478}+{12569t} {124578}+ {9te036}

a’+d, c’+b a’+c’, d+b a’+b d + c’

6–2[012346] 6–20[014589] 6–Z42[013467] 6–Z13[012369]

(e) the partition of [014]s that opens Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24 { e

f

g

} h

(f) the hexachords produced by the trichords in (e) {2367te}+{014589} {2458te}+{013679} {9te012}+{345678}

e+f, g+h e+g, f+h e+h, f+g

6–20[014589] 6–30[013679] 6–1[012345]

Example 7.9 details other, subtler relationships among the [014] trichords. Example 7.9(a) reproduces the viola’s flautando gesture in measure 19; (b) divides this gesture into two T2-related [014] cells; and (c) highlights a [014] within the viola gesture. This trichord comprises the first note of the slur, G4, the last note of the slur, F♯4), and the B♭4 that sits atop the second composite sonority. I label it “x.” As examples 7.9(d) and (e) reveal, “x” is also the first sonority of the ritornello and the first vocal trichord. Thus, it frames the first section: the first trichord we hear is also the last.

Alegant.indd Sec2:243

4/5/2010 10:22:40 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:244

4/5/2010 10:22:40 PM

Example 7.8. Interplay of [014] trichords in the codetta

parole di san paolo 245

Example 7.9. A closer look at [014] trichords

Part 2 The second section projects a very different soundscape than the first. Its textures and partitioning strategies are more variegated, its contrasts more pronounced. Its outer structure varies, too: whereas the first stanza contains three lines of roughly similar length, the second stanza progressively shortens its lines and accelerates toward the final “nihil sum,” as shown below. Et si habuero prophetiam, et noverim mysteria omnia et omnem scientiam: And if I have prophecy and know all mysteries and all knowledge, Et si habuero omnem fidem ita ut montes transferam, And if I have all faith so that I might move mountains, Caritatem autem non habuero, nihil sum. But if have not love, I am nothing.

The key to this section is the opposition of “si habuero” and “non habuero”; this is reinforced by the framework: and though I might have [something], and though I might have [something else], if I do not have, then [lack of something].

Example 7.10 is a reduction of measures 21–38. Broadly speaking, the first line of text brings a steady increase in dynamics, from pp, somewhat spoken to mf. The second line extends the crescendo to a fortissimo and culminates on the conclusion of the second line, “ita ut montes transferam.” The intensity is sustained by a torrent of trichords that breaks off abruptly in measure 32, at which point the initial cross partition of the work returns, with the same pitches and rhythms. This cross partition is accompanied by another row, which ultimately carries the pivotal

Alegant.indd Sec2:245

4/5/2010 10:22:42 PM

Example 7.10. Parole, part 2

Alegant.indd Sec2:246

4/5/2010 10:22:43 PM

Example 7.10. Parole, part 2—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:247

4/5/2010 10:22:45 PM

248

more detailed analyses

Example 7.10. Parole, part 2—(concluded)

“caritatem autem non habuero, nihil sum.” The section concludes with a codetta that contains three cross partitions and a derived aggregate. Now let us examine the surface more closely. “Et si habuero” emerges quasi parlato on a pp G4 that echoes the flute’s recitative-like flourish in the previous measure.22 “Prophetiam” is accompanied by three linear rows. The primary row, I-7, extends until the downbeat of measure 29; the other rows, P-1 and I-3, are somewhat buried in the texture. These rows begin as an inverted canon, with their h1 hexachords arranged symmetrically (in pitch space) about C5. The imitation between them is difficult to hear, however, given the ppp dynamics and the fleeting sextuplets. Note the way in which “prophetiam” is made

Alegant.indd Sec2:248

4/5/2010 10:22:47 PM

parole di san paolo 249 parenthetical: it is stripped of pitch content, surrounded by rests, and framed by the first tetrachord of I-7, which is played by the alto flute and harp.23 The second line of text culminates in measure 28 on “ita ut montes transferam” ([and though I might have faith] to remove mountains). Rosemary Brown and Dana Richardson suggest that the oscillations in the vocal line and the fortissimo chord in the accompaniment symbolize an immense mountain.24 Example 7.11 takes a closer look at the “mountain chord.” Except for the xylophone’s C♯5, every note in this sonority is not only doubled but tripled: A♭4 is shared by the alto flute, viola, and harp; F4 by the clarinet in A, viola, and harp; D4 by the flute, cello, and harp; and G♭3 by the clarinet in B♭, cello, and harp—all at a ff dynamic.25 This chord is easily the fullest and most intense sonority thus far. It is also a 4–12[0236] tetrachord.26 Example 7.12 provides a reduction of measures 28–37. It highlights six instances of set class 4–12[0236]: two of these are segments of individual rows; the remainder are projected by the upper lines of four 34 cross partitions. To facilitate the discussion the example labels the tetrachords [1] through [6]. The mountain chord, [1], replicates the spacing of the flute melody in the opening ritornello. From bottom to top, the ordered pitch intervals of the chord are , which is a contour inversion of the initial flute tetrachord in the opening ritornello. Admittedly, it is extremely difficult to link the opening flute line with this chord after a gap of twenty-five measures. However, the P-t cross partition returns only two measures later (m. 32), where it has the same pitches, rhythms, pp dynamics, and tenuto indications. It also projects the flute’s melody in its uppermost line. The literal return of this P-t configuration strengthens the connection between the flute melody and the mountain chord. This recapitulation of the 34 cross partition of P-t is embellished with a single linear row, RI-3. The harp begins the row by conspicuously repeating two dyads three times each, first and then . The repetitions underscore the row’s incipit 4–12[0236] tetrachord, labeled [3] in example 7.12. RI-3 then travels from the harp to the voice, which echoes three pitches of this tetrachord on “caritatem autem.” Rounding out the passage, the upper lines of the I-8, R-e, and P-2 cross partitions contribute three more [0236] tetrachords, labeled [4], [5] and [6]. (For the sake of clarity, the example shows only the upper lines of these 34 configurations.) As a summary, example 7.13(a) represents the [0236] tetrachords as simultaneities in order to show the similarities in their spatial configurations; 7.13(b) traces pitch- and pitch-class threads among some of the chords. The remaining discussion of the second section looks more closely at the pivotal phrase “caritatem autem, nihil sum” and the two passages with derived aggregates. The onset of “caritatem autem” is the first metrically grounded passage; its steady quarter-note pulse allows us to perceive and even anticipate the arrivals on the downbeats of measures 33–35 (see ex. 7.12). One intriguing detail concerns the cross partition that accompanies “nihil sum.” This configuration

Alegant.indd Sec2:249

4/5/2010 10:22:49 PM

250

more detailed analyses

Example 7.11. The “mountain” chord is generated from I-8, not from I-1, which was the second configuration of the opening ritornello. One explanation for this substitution is provided by the melodic tetrachord in the upper line of the cross partition, : this tetrachord replicates the pitch-class content of the mountain chord. (This entire passage is restated at the conclusion of the third stanza, in another formal parallelism.)

Alegant.indd Sec2:250

4/5/2010 10:22:49 PM

Example 7.12. A network of 4–13[0236] tetrachords

Alegant.indd Sec2:251

4/5/2010 10:22:50 PM

252

more detailed analyses

Example 7.13. A closer look at the [0236] tetrachords

Figure 7.5 models the pitch-class structure of the derived aggregates in measures 29–31 and 38–39. Figure 7.5(a) arranges the [014] trichords in rectangles; the spatial orientation of the trichords is arbitrary. Figure 7.5(b) outlines the hexachords produced by the trichords in the first aggregate. (The partitions in the second and third aggregates are members of the same mosaic, which means that the hexachords they yield belong to the same set classes.) The inventory contains two all-combinatorial hexachords, 6–1[012345] and 6–20[014589], and 6–30[013679], a familiar octatonic subset. Figure 7.5(c) highlights the 6–20 hexachords formed by the trichordal partitions of measures 29–31. Note that, despite differences in pitch-class content, each pair of trichords produces the same (unordered) collections of hexachords, namely {e 0 3 4 7 8} and {1 2 5 6 9 t}. Figures 7.5(d) and (e) show the trichordal partition and resultant hexachords of the derived aggregate in measures 38–39. The partitions in (a) and (d) are Z-related: they are both derived from set class [014] but they are unrelated by Tn or TnI. The trichordal partitions in figure 7.5(e) recapitulate the pitch-class content of the derived aggregates in the first codetta (mm. 17–20), and provide further evidence of periodic structuring. (Incidentally, such literal repetition was for the most part strenuously avoided by the serial composers in the Second Viennese School).27

Part 3 The third section continues to ruminate on the absence of love, and follows the outer structure of the part 2.

Alegant.indd Sec2:252

4/5/2010 10:22:52 PM

parole di san paolo 253 Figure 7.5. Derived aggregates in the codettas (a) Pitch-class design of the derived aggregates in mm. 29–31 487 965 3e0 t21 aggregate 1

562 437 t91 e08 aggregate 2

043 e78 512 6t9 aggregate 3

(b) Hexachords generated by the trichords in aggregate 1: { 4 8 7 } + {9 6 5} { 4 8 7 } + {3 e 0} { 4 8 7 } + { t 2 1}

{3e0}+{t21} {956}+{t21} { 3 e 0 } + {9 6 5 }

6–1[012345] 6–20[014589] 6–30[013679]

(c) Invariance among 6–20[014589] tetrachords agg. 1: agg. 2: agg. 3:

+ + + {e 0 3 4 7 8 }

+ + + {1 2 5 6 9 t}

(d) The trichordal partition of the derived aggregate in mm. 38–39 {





}

(e) Hexachords generated by the partition of trichords in (d): { 4 5 1 } + { 3 e 2} {451}+{908}

{67t}+{908} {67t}+{3e2} {451}+{67t} {908}+{3e2}

6–2[012346] 6–20[014589] 6–Z13[012369] 6–Z42[013467]

Et si distribuero in cibos pauperum omnes facultates meas, And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, Et si tradidero corpus meum ita ut ardeam, And if I should deliver my body to be burned, Caritatem autem non habuero nihil mihi prodest. But if I have not love, it profits me nothing.

Example 7.14 provides a reduction of measures 21–38. The section begins with pp gestures and opaque textures. The voice enters on a single, repeated B4 that is supported by a sustained [0167] composite sonority. As the text describes the distribution of goods to the poor, the texture thickens from three lines to six; the trichords proliferate and the dynamic swells to ff. The second line of text

Alegant.indd Sec2:253

4/5/2010 10:22:53 PM

Example 7.14. Parole, part 3

Alegant.indd Sec2:254

4/5/2010 10:22:53 PM

Example 7.14. Parole, part 3—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:255

4/5/2010 10:22:56 PM

Example 7.14. Parole, part 3—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:256

4/5/2010 10:22:58 PM

parole di san paolo 257 varies the previous section’s realization of the mountain chord. After a full measure of rest in measure 50 (the precise midpoint of the composition) the rest of the section follows section 2 almost exactly, with a recapitulation of the P-t cross partition, a flirtation with a regular pulse, many 4–12[0236] tetrachords, and a codetta passage. Looking more closely, the opening of the section (mm. 38–44) is based on an eight-row design, with six taken by the instruments and two taken by the voice. (To my knowledge this is Dallapiccola’s only eight-line design.) The array is a perfect vehicle with which to portray the notion of “distribution.” The instrumental rows are divided among four groups (flutes, clarinets, percussion, and strings).28 Each row is fragmented into two- and three-note segments, making it virtually impossible to trace them. For the first time, the voice abandons linear row presentations, instead using the discrete hexachords of two non-combinatorial rows: I-e and P-9. (Because the hexachords of the source row are Z-related, hexachordal combinatoriality is only possible under retrogression.) The overlapped segments cause so many pitchclass doublings that it becomes impossible to locate (and hear) aggregate boundaries. Despite what might appear to be anarchy, the eight-row design is tightly controlled. As example 7.14 shows, the instrumental rows are initially grouped into three inversionally related pairs, each pair governed by a different even index number. P-8 and I-t enter in measure 40; their [014] trichords are displaced symmetrically about E♭4. P-t and I-0 follow in measure 41; their [014] cells are arranged about F4. The third pair of rows, RI-1 and R-7, unfolds in imitation, with the cello’s dyad mirrored by the viola’s . (The cello’s C2 activates the lowest register of the work; this open string is more than an octave below anything previously heard.) The strict axial symmetries are disrupted by a single, ppp trichord on “omnes” (m. 41); this 3–5[016] sonority unleashes a torrent of trichords. The underlying harmonies in the passage shift subtly but perceptibly. At first the surface is infused with whole-tone flavors. The pitch-class content in measure 40 (not counting the voice) begins with five notes of the even whole-tone collection, {C, D, E, G♯, B♭}; the second half of the measure brings a sustained 3–8[026] trichord, {B, D♭, F}, from the odd collection. In time, the surface becomes more chromatic: six vertical 3–5[016] trichords in measures 42–43, and six 3–1[012] cells in measures 43–44 increase the number of semitones. Figure 7.6 summarizes the pitch-class design of the underlying array. It reassigns the row pairings in order to highlight the governing influence of a single index number, 8, which relates the vocal hexachords of P-9 and I-e as well as the couplings of P-8 and I-0, P-t and I-t, and R-7 and RI-1. The reduction also shows the pitch-class duplication in the columns. Only the first column contains an aggregate (and a heavily weighted one at that).

Alegant.indd Sec2:257

4/5/2010 10:23:00 PM

258

more detailed analyses

Figure 7.6. Structure of the arrays in part 4 Vocal hexachords I-e P-9

e32178 956710

54609t 3428et

Instrumental trichords P-8 I-0 P-t I-t RI-1 R-7

845 043 t67 t21 0e2 896 [1]

60e 289 821 067 867 021 [2]

231 657 453 435 t93 te5 [3]

7t9 1te 90e e89 451 437 [4]

Example 7.15. Palindromic associations between parts 2 and 3 Example 7.15 reveals the strict palindromic relationship between the central lines of sections 2 and 3. As 7.15(a) and (b) reveal, the passages are literal pitch retrogrades of each other. (The rhythms are not exact.) Save for a repeated dyad in the presentation of I-5, the pitch mirror is strict. The

Alegant.indd Sec2:258

4/5/2010 10:23:00 PM

parole di san paolo 259 repetition of the mountain chord is unmistakable, owing to the fact that it appears at the same pitch level, with the same ff dynamic, and with the same instrumental triplings (although these are not shown in the example). It is impossible to miss the parallelism between “ita ut montes transferam” and “ita ut ardeam.”29

Part 4 The soundscape shifts dramatically in the fourth stanza, as the text depicts the positive virtues of love. Example 7.16 provides a reduction of the setting of the first two lines of text. It recalls the ethereal atmospheres of first-phase works (such as the Liriche Greche triptych), with cantabile lines, soft dynamics, and transparent textures. At the same time, the row handling is more variegated, the technique more refined, the expression more concentrated. The setting of the first line (mm. 58–61) is based on three layers. The lowest stratum features a pedal point on E3 that is played alternately by the clarinet and bass clarinet. (Unlike the F4 pedal of the first stanza, this note is not subjected to rhythmic procedures; it is simply a pedal.) In the middle stratum the alto flute patiently—as the text suggests—unravels row P-3, which links up with the last trichord of the previous codetta. Over time, the alto flute articulates every note of P-3 but the final one, E, which is in the pedal. This row presentation is far from a one-through-twelve presentation: the alto flute skips notes, retraces segments, and fixates on certain intervals, such as the oscillation between C4 and D♭4 in measure 59. These detours are shown by the order numbers placed above the pitches. The top layer of the texture projects two hexachords in strict imitation. The voice sings the h1 hexachord of I-7 extremely slowly, repeating the pitches on “caritas patiens” in a dream-like fashion. The viola and celesta echo the voice, projecting the h1 hexachord of row I-6 eleven semitones higher and one sixteenth note later. The effect is magical, and creates an almost celestial aura.30 The h1 hexachords conclude with the spoken word “est” in measure 61; the hexachordal boundaries are punctuated by an aggregate derived from 3–5[016] trichords. Predictably, the next line of text, “Non gaudet super iniquitate, congaudet autem veritati” (Love does not rejoice in evil but rejoices with the truth) brings a change in surface realization. The E3 pedal point returns and is joined by elements of three different rows. The voice’s R-3 row begins as a literal pitch retrograde of the alto flute’s P-3; the retrograde between the rows breaks at “veritati” (truth). The voice is accompanied by the h2 hexachords of I-7 and I-6; these hexachords are partitioned into trichords and presented in note-against-note fashion to emphasize ic 1 dyads. The final dyad, , shifts to interval class 2 and leads smoothly into the third line of text.

Alegant.indd Sec2:259

4/5/2010 10:23:01 PM

Example 7.16. Parole, part 4, beginning

Alegant.indd Sec2:260

4/5/2010 10:23:01 PM

Example 7.16. Parole, part 4, beginning—(continued)

Alegant.indd Sec2:261

4/5/2010 10:23:03 PM

262

more detailed analyses

Example 7.16. Parole, part 4, beginning—(concluded) The melodic realizations of the voice and alto flute rows in this passage have far-reaching implications. Example 7.17(a) reproduces the pitch setting of the first vocal row in the work, P-t. Example 7.17(b) shows that the alto flute’s P-3 row in part 4 is a literal transposition of the row in (a). Although the transpositional relationship is partially obscured by the meandering presentation, as shown in (c), it is not difficult to hear the connection between the row statements. Example 7.17(d) reproduces the voice’s h1 hexachord of I-7, which carries “Caritas patiens est benigna est.” This hexachord is a strict inversion of the hexachords in (a) and (c). The association between the opening hexachord (“Si linguis hominum loquar”) and the hexachord of part 4 (“Caritas patiens est, benigna est”) is strong. The thematic inversion of these hexachords matches the textual inversion between not having love and having love. In addition, the hexachord of “Caritas patiens est benigna” is foreshadowed; indeed, one might even say that this hexachord is prophesied. Example 7.17(e) shows the voice’s spoken declamation of “prophetiam” in measure 22 (one of only a handful of spoken words), along with the first tetrachord of I-7, , which is played by the alto flute and

Alegant.indd Sec2:262

4/5/2010 10:23:05 PM

Example 7.17. The “prophecy”

Alegant.indd Sec2:263

4/5/2010 10:23:06 PM

264

more detailed analyses

harp. The prophecy is fulfilled in measures 58–60 when the voice sings “Caritas patiens est benigna” to the same pitches that the alto flute and harp have in measure 22 (and at the same pp dynamic level). The association between the passages is further reinforced by the timbre of the alto flute. Example 7.18 shows the second line of text and the subsequent interlude of part 4. The setting of measures 67–76 is delicate and introverted, with pp dynamics, thin textures, a slow pulse, and a faint suggestion of triple meter. Downbeat attacks on measures 69, 70, 73, and 75 reinforce the normal accents of the text and highlight the inherent parallelism among the attributes of love: “omnia suffert, omnia cre-dit, omnia spe-rat, omnia su-stinet.” Notes are grouped by twos and fours. The voice abandons rows in favor of [016] trichords that generate an aggregate; these trichords are presented as pairs so as to combine “suffert” with “credit,” and “sperat” with “sustinet.” The voice is accompanied by two fourrow arrays in which P and I transforms are paired. The instrumental rows have ic 2 dyads, and they tend to move in parallel or similar motion. The first array concludes in measure 72, whereupon the tempo shifts and the row pairs are inverted registrally. The second array transforms the first by T4, as follows: P-t + P-0 ⇐ I-5 + I-7 ⇐

T4 T4

⇒ ⇒

P-2 + P-4 I-9 + I-e

The second array opens with a composite sonority, a sustained 4–1[0123] tetrachord that continues from the last quarter note in measure 71. It is followed by a molto drammatico interlude that features two inverted canons, one with an even index number and one with an odd. The h1 hexachords of the inversionally paired rows unfold in strict (pitch) inversion; the strict inversion breaks down in the h2 hexachords, though the mood of the section continues. Let us pause at this point to consider more closely the structure and realization of the four-row designs.31 (Readers who are uninterested in the details of the array realization should feel free to skip ahead to the discussion of part 5, on page 270.) The row pairs in the arrays move in parallel motion and with vertical ic 2 dyads appearing, for the most part, as minor sevenths. The rhythmic framework resembles first- and fourth-species counterpoint.32 Figure 7.7(a) models the array’s structure, arranging the four rows in spirals that move in opposite directions. The “soprano” and “alto” lines relate by T2 and increase by interval-class 1; the “tenor” and “bass” lines also relate by T2, but decrease by ic 1. The lines in the array have four index numbers: the soprano and tenor pitch classes sum to 1; soprano and bass to 3; alto and tenor to 3; and alto and bass to 5. (The label 22/1335 is a short-hand description of the internal relationships among the rows: “22” denotes that the array contains two T2-related pairs; “1335” represents the four index numbers among the inversional pairings.) The design has three vertical tetrachordal set classes, with four instances each of 4–1[0123], 4–10[0235], and 4–23[0257]. These are the only harmonies possible in note-against-note

Alegant.indd Sec2:264

4/5/2010 10:23:08 PM

Example 7.18. Parole, part 4, continuation

Alegant.indd Sec2:265

4/5/2010 10:23:08 PM

Example 7.18. Parole, part 4, continuation—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:266

4/5/2010 10:23:11 PM

parole di san paolo 267 Figure 7.7. Structure of the arrays (a) a spiral arrangement of a “22/1335” setting sop.: alto: tenor: bass:

0 1 2 3 1 0 3 2 4–1[0123]

2 4 e 1

3 5 t 0

4 5 6 7 9 8 e t 4–23[0257]

4–10[0235]

6 8 7 9

7 9 6 8

… … … …

4–1[0123]

(b) pitch-class representation of the first array (mm. 67–68) P-t: P-0: I-5: I-7: [0123]: [0235]: [0257]:

t 0 5 3

6 8 9 e

7 9 8 t * *

8 t 7 9 * *

2 4 1 3

1 3 2 4

4 6 e 1

* *

*

5 7 t 0

3 5 0 2

9 e 6 8

*

*

*

*

0 2 3 5

e 1 4 6

*

(c) pitch-class reduction of the second array (mm. 72–73) P-2: P-4: I-9: I-e:

2 4 9 e [0257]

t 0 1 3 [0235]

e 0 1 2 0 e 2 1 [0123]

6 5 8 7 5 6 7 8 [0123]

… … … …

(d) first-species model of Webern’s Op. 29/1 (mm. 14–19) sop.: alto: tenor: bass: [0123]: [0235]: [0257]:

9 8 7 6 *

5 0 3 t

8 9 6 7 *

7 t 5 8

e 6 9 4

* *

t… 7 8 5

… … …

* *

presentations.33 By definition, every four-row design that is based upon these relationships will produce the same tetrachordal set classes; only the ordering of tetrachords will change. Figure 7.7(b) models the pitch-class design of the first array in Parole. Although the index numbers here differ from those in the design at (a)—the pairs sum to 3, 3, 5, 7 rather than 1, 3, 5, 5—the design in (b) is a transformation of (a). As a result, it is also a member of the 22/1335 universe, which means that it contains the same harmonies: four instances each of [0123], [0235], and [0257]. The third and fourth, and fifth and sixth columns are identical. (These

Alegant.indd Sec2:267

4/5/2010 10:23:13 PM

268

more detailed analyses

are underlined in the figure.) Figure 7.7(c) offers a pitch-class reduction of the second array in part 4. This variation of the first array also yields the same firstspecies harmonies. For the sake of comparison, (d) displays the first-species model of a passage drawn from the opening movement of Webern’s Cantata No. 1, Op. 29. It too belongs to the 22/1335 universe. The following discussion explores the structural properties of the arrays and their realization. Example 7.19(a) illustrates the set classes that would arise if the four voices were arranged in a note-against-note arrangement. This design contains a pair of back-to-back statements of the same 4–1[0123] tetrachord in the first half and a “minipalindrome” involving three instances of 4–10[0235] in the second half. In practice, duplications of the same set class are quite conspicuous; they also tend to prevent a sense of forward motion. One way that a composer can avoid these reiterations is through syncopations, which stagger the voices and obscure (to a degree) the repeated pitch-class collections. Example 7.19(b) shows the harmonies that result when one pair of rows is staggered by a single attack. (It doesn’t matter which pair is shifted; the set-class structure will be the same.) The presentation in (b) shows several sonorities with pitch-class doublings, including two [02] dyads and two 3–6[024] trichords. These doublings would be conspicuous, and would represent “holes” in the prevailing tetrachordal fabric. Additionally, the one-note shift creates three members of set class 4–25[0268], a wholetone sonority that is foreign to the tetrachordal inventory. Staggering the voices by two attacks, as shown in 7.19(c), introduces a trio of [0268] tetrachords and single occurrences of [02] and [024]. And staggering the voices by three attacks, as shown in (d), gives rise to a single [0268] tetrachord and consecutive [024] trichords. Finally, (e) models the rhythmic and set-class structure of the passage in question. This version resembles a fourth-species transformation of the design in (d); here, the underlying triple meter helps us perceive the ties and syncopations. I would point out several details. First, the harmonic rhythm, in a manner of speaking, accelerates as the design progresses. This acceleration is aided by the fact that the {C–D} dyad, the third-to-last sonority in the lower staff, performs double duty. Similarly, the last two dyads of the lower staff are conflated. Second, except for a single [024] and a single [0268], the tetrachords of the verticalities belong to the 22/1335 universe. Thus, the fourth-species presentation maintains and enhances the first-species inventory, with the [024] sonority representing the only break in the design. Finally, just two sonorities are attacked simultaneously: the sliding 4–23[0257] tetrachords that move in parallel motion. (These are marked by asterisks in the example.) I return to these tetrachords shortly. Thus, the realization of the four-row array emphasizes the inversional relationship between the row pairs, and staggers the voices in order to avoid some of the redundancies that would otherwise arise from pitch-class doublings. The entire array is then transposed and subjected to invertible counterpoint; naturally, the transformation is identical from a set-class standpoint. Example 7.20 uncovers another facet of the array realizations.

Alegant.indd Sec2:268

4/5/2010 10:23:13 PM

Example 7.19. Hypothetical realization of the arrays

Alegant.indd Sec2:269

4/5/2010 10:23:13 PM

270

more detailed analyses

Example 7.20. Associations among the arrays The bottom portion of the example redraws the staggered pitch class arrangements of the rows. The lower pair of the first array and the upper pair of the second array both end with the same tetrachord, {3, 4, 5, 6}. These [0123] tetrachords are sustained on the surface, and function as composite sonorities. They also effect a rhyme between the endings of the arrays. At the same time, the second array transposes the {Eb, F} dyad so that it recaptures the pitch F4; recall that this pitch served as a pedal point in part 1.

Part 5 The fifth stanza (mm. 83–100) contains the poetic climax and the heart of the composition. Dallapiccola adds an extra line of text to it, so that it (like the others) has three lines: Nunc autem manent fides, spes, caritas, tria haec: And now abide faith, hope, and love, these three: Tria haec: fides, spes, caritas: [Dallapiccola’s addition] These three: faith, hope, and love: Major autem horum est caritas. But the greatest of these is love.

Example 7.21 gives the setting of the section’s first two lines of text. The voice returns to linear row presentations, with RI-5 in measures 83–87 and I-8 in

Alegant.indd Sec2:270

4/5/2010 10:23:15 PM

Example 7.21. Parole, part 5, beginning

Alegant.indd Sec2:271

4/5/2010 10:23:16 PM

Example 7.21. Parole, part 5, beginning—(concluded)

Alegant.indd Sec2:272

4/5/2010 10:23:19 PM

parole di san paolo 273 measures 88–91. Its fervent declamation is enhanced by ff dynamics and strategic pitch doublings. The vocal rows are accompanied by four-row arrays, the first of which presents P and I rows in a note-against-note fashion. This first-species arrangement intensifies and concentrates the staggered, inverted canons of Part 4. The word “fides” (faith) (m. 84) begins a four-part chorale in strict axial symmetry. Instrumental doublings support the attacks on “fi-des” and “spes,” but not “caritas,” at which point the note-against-note arrangement disintegrates. The repeated line of text (“tria haec: fides, spes, caritas”) is set with another fourvoice array in measure 87. This second array is a retrograde of the first array. (I would conjecture that the extra line of text was added in order to fashion a large-scale palindrome of set classes and textures.) The second array pairs R and RI rows, and also realizes them symmetrically in pitch space. It opens polyphonically (mm. 86–87), returns to first species on the word “fides” (m. 89), and doubles the vocal pitches on “spes” and “ca-ritas.” The wedge-like motion in the outer lines in measures 89–90 is particularly striking, as a chromatic ascent in the lowest line, is counterbalanced by the chromatic descent in the highest line, . Figure 7.8 displays the pitch-class structure of the arrays in Part 5. These arrays are constructed and realized differently from those in part 4. Figure 7.8(a) indicates that the arrays in part 5 are equivalent, because their corresponding rows relate by RT3. Figure 7(b) lists the set classes that would arise in a note-againstnote setting of the first array. The labels x, y, z, and * are used as tokens for set classes 4–23[0257], 4–20[0158], 4–9[0167], and 2–5[05] respectively.34 The array contains four instances of x, four of y, and two each of z and *. Two aspects of the design are conspicuous: the back-to-back versions of z in the fourth and fifth columns (which are underlined) and the dyads (marked *) in the h2 hexachords that result from pitch-class doublings. It is fascinating to see how Dallapiccola’s realization solves these “problems.” First, he sidesteps the repeated z tetrachords by combining them into a single, sustained sonority; then he avoids the dyads by breaking first species and staggering the lines. As Figure 7.7(c) reveals, the first array begins with a chorale presentation of five sustained tetrachords, then splinters into four-voice imitative counterpoint. Figure 7.7(d) shows that the second array reverses this process: the staggered h1 hexachords avoid the dyads, and the first-species presentations again combine the z tetrachords into a single sonority. The four-part designs in sections 4 and 5 are constructed to generate different note-against-note harmonies. The 22/1335 designs in the penultimate section yield set classes 4–1[0123], 4–10[0235], and 4–23[0257], while the 55/055t designs in section 5 yield 4–9[0167], 4–20[0158], 4–23[0257], and two [05] dyads. Dallapiccola takes pains to associate the one set class that is common to both inventories: 4–23[0257]. To illustrate, examples 7.22(a) and (b) excerpt the heads of the arrays in part 4.

Alegant.indd Sec2:273

4/5/2010 10:23:21 PM

274

more detailed analyses

Figure 7.8. Trichordal structuring in the first codetta (a) relationships among the rows in the 55/055t design P-e I-1 P-6 I-8

⇐ ⇐ ⇐ ⇐

RT3 RT3 RT3 RT3

⇒ ⇒ ⇒ ⇒

R-2 RI-4 R-9 RI-e

(b) pitch-class realization of the first array P-e I-1 P-6 I-8

e 7 8 9 3 2 5 6 1 5 4 3 9 t 7 6 6 2 3 4 t 9 0 1 8 0 e t 4 5 2 1 x1 x2 y1 z z y2 x2 * * = [05]; x = 4–23[0257]; y = 4–20[0158]; z = 4–9[0167]

4 8 e 3 y1

t 2 5 9 y2

8 5 21

2 3

chorale t 8 5 3 x

2 4 9 e x

1 e 8 6 x1

0 0 7 7 *

(c) pitch-class representation of the first array P-e I-1 P-6 I-8

chorale e 7 8 1 5 4 6 2 3 8 0 e x x y

sim. 9 3 3 9 4 t t 4 z

2 t 9 5 y

staggered 56 4 01

(d) pitch-class representation of the second array staggered ch. sim. R-2 34 1 7 98 5 6 0 RI-4 32 5 e 9t 1 0 6 R-9 te 8 2 43 0 1 7 RI-e t9 0 6 45 8 7 1 y z

t 76 e

e 7 6 2 y

10 e0 87 9

67

As (a) reveals, soon after the entrance of the comes the dyads of the inversionally related lines form back-to-back [0257] tetrachords. These tetrachords—the only four-note attacks in the passage—are boxed in the example. Examples 7.22(c) and (d) show the beginning of the first array and the end of the second array in part 5. The arrays in part 5 replicate the tetrachords of part 4, with the same pitches but with inverted dynamics (pp versus ff). These associations are made possible by the harmonic flexibility of the arrays, which are pliable, whereas the 43 cross partitions and dyadic complexes are not. Example 7.23 gives the conclusion of part 5. The final measures return us to the quiet dynamics, high tessitura, transparent texture, and floating rhythm of the opening. Measures 91–93 contain four overlapping cross partitions, each

Alegant.indd Sec2:274

4/5/2010 10:23:21 PM

parole di san paolo 275

Example 7.22. Invariance among the arrays

derived from a different type of transform (P, I, R, RI). Example 7.24 highlights these 34 cross partitions and their tetrachords. The tetrachords represent set classes 4–12[0236] and 4–18[0147], which share a common trichordal subset, 3–10[036].35 Example 24(b) highlights the invariant pitches and pitch classes among the [036] trichords. These 34 configurations also serve to tie up some loose ends. Recall that the opening ritornello has four cross partitions: P-t, I-t, RI-5, and R-2. As we have seen, these configurations return throughout the work. Example 7.25(a) shows the RI-5 configuration that appears near the end of the first section. Example 7.25(b) shows the conclusion of the second section, where a trio of 34 cross partitions punctuates the third line of text, “caritatem autem non habuero, nihil sum.” Note that this passage lacks an RI configuration. The close of the third stanza, in example 7.25(c), restates at pitch the configurations in (a) and (b). P-2, however, is left incomplete. The final ritornello statement, shown in (d), reiterates all four previous cross partitions in their entirety. At the same time it forms a double palindrome: the cross partitions are retrograded (the first configuration is drawn from R-2 instead of P-2; the second, from I-5 instead of RI-5, and so forth), and presented in reverse order: R-2, I-5, P-e, and RI-8 as opposed to I-8, R-e, RI-5, and P-2.

Alegant.indd Sec2:275

4/5/2010 10:23:21 PM

Example 7.23. Parole, part 5, conclusion

Alegant.indd Sec2:276

4/5/2010 10:23:22 PM

parole di san paolo 277

Example 7.24. Tetrachordal structuring in the final measures

Dallapiccola also applies retrograde symmetry to the vocal line, framing the entire work. Example 7.26 compares the voice’s first phrase with its last. The framing relationship is solidified by the F4 pedal and the pitch palindromes that govern the 34 cross partitions and the vocal rows. The cross partition derived from P-2 in measures 97–100 is a pitch retrograde of the P-2 configuration of the opening. The opening and closing vocal statement are also pitch retrogrades of each other, even with respect to the spoken words “linguis” and “est.” This “retrograde frame” is perfectly suited to an ending that fades away in a pppp dynamic.36

Final Considerations This chapter began by surveying Parole’s primary techniques and considering them within the context of Dallapiccola’s four serial phases.37 It explored some of the salient characteristics of its row: its intervallic profile and set-class inventory; its lack of octatonic, inversionally combinatorial, and symmetrical properties; and its affinity with the series of An Mathilde and Sicut Umbra. It then examined the distribution of partitioning strategies, textures, and dynamics on the large scale, and considered the five sections of the composition in turn. The discussion of the opening ritornello highlighted the presentation of vertical trichords and horizontal tetrachords, especially set class 4–12[0236], the only tetrachord that is able to appear as both a row segment and as a line in a 34 cross partition. The commentary on section 1 focused on the invariant pitches among the rows, the Klangfarbenmelodie of the F4 pedal, and the derived aggregates in

Alegant.indd Sec2:277

4/5/2010 10:23:24 PM

Example 7.25. Strategies among 34 cross partitions

Alegant.indd Sec2:278

4/5/2010 10:23:25 PM

Example 7.26. Structural frame Alegant.indd Sec2:279

4/5/2010 10:23:27 PM

280

more detailed analyses

the codetta. The discussion of section 2 highlighted the setting of “prophetiam” and “ita ut montes” (the mountain chord), and the derived aggregates at its close. The examination of part 3 considered the text painting of “distribuero” and the properties of its eight-row design, and the borrowing of thematic materials from part 2. The analysis of parts 4 and 5 focused on the properties and realizations of the four-row arrays, and explored various subjects, including the text painting of “prophetiam,” the cross partitions in the dénouement, and the retrograde frame between the voice’s first and last phrases. By way of conclusion, I will share my thoughts on three compositional strategies, which involve inversion, cross partitions, and composite sonorities. The influence of pitch inversion becomes stronger as the work unfolds. In the opening ritornello, contour inversion is found in the rise and fall of the trichordal sonorities, and pitch inversion is present in the symmetrical presentation of the 4–12[0236] hexachords in the upper lines. The opening of part 2 offers a hint of pitch inversion in the (fleeting) inverted canon between the h1 hexachords on the word “prophetiam”; the inversion is barely audible, however, owing to the fast rhythms and ppp dynamics. The opening of part 3 shows a stronger influence of pitch inversion, as the incipit segments of three pairs of rows are arranged in note-against-note fashion (on the word “distribuero”). This axial symmetry is also fleeting, however, as the first-species framework quickly dissolves in a torrent of trichords. It is not until parts 4 and 5 that the impact of pitch inversion is fully felt. Dallapiccola uses axial symmetry in the arrays to concentrate the delivery of text and to control the tetrachordal sonorities. While the pitch inversion in part 4 is muted to a degree by the staggering of voices and the pp dynamics, the same is not true in part 5—where axial symmetry anchors the pitch organization of the climax, and effectively channels the ff tetrachords that accompany “fides,” “spes,” and “caritas.” Cross partitions are another important subplot: this modest composition of 100 measures contains two dozen 34 configurations. Formally, cross partitions serve as punctuation markers that announce the ends of rows and sections. Harmonically, they inundate the surface with the row’s discrete trichords (3–1[012], 3–2[013], 3–3[014], and 3–5[016]), many of which project the same spacing as well as the same durations, articulations, and dynamics. And melodically, the cross partitions generate a wealth of tetrachordal ideas. In this light, example 7.27 summarizes the tetrachordal motives that appear in the upper lines of the cross partitions. It also includes the mountain chord sonorities in parts 2 and 3, which (as we have seen) also represent set class 4–12[0236].38 For the sake of simplicity the example normalizes the rhythms, using half notes to depict tetrachords with longer note values, and eighth notes to designate tetrachords with shorter note values. (“Shorter” is relative, however: no note in a melodic tetrachord is ever shorter than an eighth note.) Just three set classes appear in the upper lines of the two dozen tetrachords, the vast majority of which belong to set class

Alegant.indd Sec2:280

4/5/2010 10:23:29 PM

Example 7.27. Summary of tetrachordal ideas

Alegant.indd Sec2:281

4/5/2010 10:23:29 PM

282

more detailed analyses

4–12[0236]. These [0236] sonorities are complemented by a few versions of 4–18[0147] and a single 4–5[0126]. Additionally, the 34 configurations reinforce the outer structure of the text: the first three stanzas (which speak of the absence of love) are saturated with cross partitions and their trichordal simultaneities, while the last two stanzas (which extol the virtues of love) are dominated by the tetrachordal harmonies of the four-row arrays. Finally, Parole’s applications of cross partitions reasserts the claim that the cross partition is one of the composer’s signature devices. In this vein, it interesting that Parole features only 34 configurations—whereas the surrounding works (such as An Mathilde, Requiescant, Preghiere, and Ulisse) are represented by all four even sizes. Perhaps Dallapiccola felt that the intimate scope of Parole would best be served by a single type of configuration. Of course, not all of the trichords and tetrachords are produced by cross partitions and four-row arrays. The composite sonorities in Parole are formed by sustaining certain notes of different rows or trichords. In a sense, the composite sonorities exist independently of rows and their cross partitions. Formally, they function as punctuation markers at the end of sections, and as bridges (or links) between sections. Example 7.28 summarizes the composite sonorities that arise in addition to the pedal points (which are also form-defining). Part 1 is represented by the F4 pedal and a pair of inversionally related [014] trichords. Parts 2 and 3 contain three composite sonorities that are members of

Example 7.28. Composite sonorities

Alegant.indd Sec2:282

4/5/2010 10:23:31 PM

parole di san paolo 283 set class 4–9[0167]. (This set class is also a key component in the arrays of part 5.) Part 4 features a composite sonority at the conclusion of each line of text. Moreover, after the move from a [0123] tetrachord in measure 66 to a [0167] tetrachord in measures 71–72, the remaining composite sonorities in this section are made to wedge inward, thereby converging on the final F4 pedal. Finally, despite its modest scope, I find Parole to be one of Dallapiccola’s most lyrical, heartfelt, and intricately woven compositions. I hope that this close reading of its structure has shown convincingly that it will reward careful study and attentive listening.

Alegant.indd Sec2:283

4/5/2010 10:23:33 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:284

4/5/2010 10:23:33 PM

Afterword There is still a great deal left to explore in Dallapiccola’s music. For one thing, many works of high quality continue to languish in anonymity. Virtually nothing has been written about the Due studi and its orchestral counterpart, Due pezzi, Tre Poemi (which he dedicated to Schoenberg), Piccola musica notturna, Concerto per la notte di Natale, Three Questions with Two Answers (an orchestra sketch for Ulisse), and Sicut Umbra (a stunning work whose last movement incorporates contour representations of various constellations). And there is so much more to say about the larger works of the first, second, and fourth phases, like Il prigioniero, Dialoghi, Ulisse, and Commiato. From a theoretical standpoint, we have only begun to explore the ramifications of such techniques as cross partitions (particularly concerning their influence on row construction), axial symmetry, irregular canons, and non-adjacent partitioning schemes, the control of harmony, orchestration, texture, self-quotations and symbolism, the delightful intricacies of text setting, and connections to the music of Berg, Vogel, and other predecessors and contemporaries, both within Italy and outside it. By way of conclusion I should like to return to a quotation from the first chapter: the entry in Dallapiccola’s diary that recounts his impression of the premiere of Webern’s Das Augenlicht in 1938. It reads: What struck me forcibly in Das Augenlicht, at a first and—alas—single hearing, was the quality of the sound. . . .Webern shows us how, even when one is not working in a strictly contrapuntal way, two notes on a celesta, a light touch on glockenspiel, a scarcely audible mandolin tremolo, are able to encompass distances which at first sight seem to be divided by unfathomable spaces. Sound, color, articulation, instrumental distribution, it is all invention: just as important therefore as the overall construction. Das Augenlicht, when one hears it, shows itself full of poetic harmoniousness: voices and instruments, often at the greatest distances from each other, counterpoise each other’s levels of sound. The score seems to be enriched by those mysterious vibrations that suggest a performance under a glass bell. The musical construction has its own internal rhythm, which has nothing in common with a mechanical rhythm. The refined writing would merit a discussion by itself; looking, for example, at how Webern avoids at all costs that brusque recall to reality represented by the strong beats, and which, in this case, would break the dream atmosphere that permeates the whole of this most poetic composition.1

Alegant.indd Sec2:285

4/5/2010 10:23:33 PM

286

afte r word

This quotation serves in several ways as an appropriate coda. For one thing, it underscores the allure for Dallapiccola of a Webernian soundscape: thin textures; floating rhythm; a refined orchestration, with a judicious use of percussion; and an ethereal, hyper-expressive, and dreamlike atmosphere. As we have seen, these become staples of Dallapiccola’s serial language—so much so that this quotation perfectly describes the opening and close of Parole di San Paolo. I am also struck by the phrase: “Sound, color, articulation, instrumental distribution, it is all invention.” For me, it is precisely this invention that makes Dallapiccola’s music so compelling and so rewarding to analyze and experience: a seemingly limitless variety of twelve-tone formations, a remarkable depth of lyricism and expression, and an extraordinary skill in text setting. I hope I have helped to make the case for this important composer’s music, whose enchantments and challenges are so richly rewarding.

Alegant.indd Sec2:286

4/5/2010 10:23:33 PM

Notes Introduction 1. Fondo Dallapiccola, LD.LIV. 24. 2. In fact, these Schoenbergian influences themselves create other intertextual associations: for instance, the same hexachord conspicuously featured in Schoenberg’s Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31, is also prominent in Requiescant, Ulisse, Commiato, and a few other works.

Chapter One 1. Luigi Dallapiccola, “Sulla strada della dodecafonia,” trans. Deryck Cooke as “On the Twelve-Note Road,” Music Survey 4 (1951): 318–32: “In general, when people mention my name, they speak of me as a musician who has adopted the twelve-note technique; and one authority has not hesitated to point out the singularity of my position. The singularity, that is, of having adopted the twelve-note technique at a time when I had no contact with the masters of the Viennese school (Schoenberg, Berg, Webern), nor with their disciples” (319). 2. See Christopher Wilkinson, Theory and Practice: An Interpretation of Serialism in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola (PhD diss., Royal Holloway College, University of London, 1982), and Giordano Montecchi, “Attualità di Dallapiccola,” in Letture e prospettive, ed. Milo De Santis (Lucca, 1997): 389–416. Montecchi states that Dallapiccola’s twelve-tone method arose from “a compositional thought that was already autonomously oriented to formal rigor, to canon, to contrapuntal challenges. . . .For Dallapiccola the growth of serial technique, . . . the recourse to a parametric organization that competed with that of the young Darmstädter, are not the results of adopting twelve-tone technique, but are, so to speak, already inscribed a priori in his poetic horizon” (402). “La dodecafonia di Dallapiccola (così lui la chiamava, noncurante, in fondo, delle remore terminologiche schönberghiane) si impianta come strumento espressivo privilegiato e elettivo su un pensiero compositivo che è già autonomamente orientato al rigore formale, al canone, alle sfide contrappuntistiche ed è nutrito dalla grande ammirazione per il magistero dei fiamminghi. Per Dallapiccola la maturazione della tecnica seriale, l’approssimarsi a un rigore tanto indiscutibile quanto problematico, il ricorso a una organizzazione parametric ache gareggia con quella dei giovani Darmstädter, non conseguono all’adozione della tecnica dei dodice suoni, ma, per così dire, sono un a priori gia inscritto nel suo orizzonte poetico.” 3. Michael Eckert, “Review of Dietrich Kämper, Gefangenschaft und Freiheit: Leben und Werk des Komponisten Luigi Dallapiccola,” Journal of Musicology 5.4 (1987), 562–71, 562. 4. Ideally, readers will have been exposed to the “classical” serial constructs of Webern and Schoenberg, in particular axial symmetry in the former and hexachordal

Alegant.indd Sec2:287

4/5/2010 10:23:33 PM

288

notes to pp. 9–13

inversional combinatoriality in the latter, though I will introduce these procedures through the following chapters. Interested readers wishing to brush up on their set theory might consult John Rahn, Basic Atonal Theory (New York: Longman, 1980), Robert Morris, Composition with Pitch-classes: A Theory of Compositional Design (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), or any one of a number of textbooks (and web sites) on posttonal theory. 5. Detailed descriptions of the early works include Rosemary Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola (PhD diss., University of Wales, 1977); Raymond Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola (Rochester: The University of Rochester Press, 2003), 1–50; and Roman Vlad, Luigi Dallapiccola, trans. Cynthia Jolly (Milan: Suvini Zerboni, 1957). 6. This four-fold overview of the serial works contrasts with the approaches taken by Fearn and most other scholars. Fearn’s orientation is shaped mainly by historical and biographical events, such as the Second World War, and the events surrounding Ulisse. Fearn identifies six eras: The beginnings (1904–38); Self-exile and discovery (1939–45); Towards the light of freedom (1945–48); The serial idea (1948–53); Text and symbol (1954–64); and Ulysses, wanderer and discoverer (1965–75). Michel advances three divisions: a “tonal-modal” period that includes the earliest works to Divertimento in quattro esercizi (1934); a period of “impregnated” twelve-tone writing from Tre laudi (1936–37) to Job (1950); and a period of strict serialization, from the Quaderno musicale di Annalibera (1952) to Commiato (1972). In contrast, my divisions are heavily influenced by factors such as row characteristics, compositional techniques, large-scale and small-scale formal devices—so that the phases’ soundscapes are audibly different. 7. This quotation appears in Dallapiccola’s program notes to Tartiniana seconda, found in the document LD.LIV.24, in the Fondo Dallapiccola, Archivio Contemporaneo “Alessandro Bonsanti,” Gabinetto Vieusseux, Firenze. A related quote appears in Hans Nathan, “Luigi Dallapiccola: Fragments from Conversations,” Music Review 27 (1966): 294–312: “After each tonal episode, my dodecaphonic procedures have gained in severity” (296). 8. Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 83: “The decisive step forward into wholly new and unexplored territory that Dallapiccola would take in the postwar period was preceded by a moment of creative reflection, by the exploration of contrapuntal territory within a modal language in the Sonatina canonica.” There are many points of similarity between the opening of the Sonatina (especially mm. 1–16) and movements of the Liriche Greche, notably the use of pedal points and the use of canons with superimposed, overlapping meter signatures. 9. So, too, we can find exceptions to the three-fold division of Beethoven’s music into early, middle, and late periods. Nevertheless, many features of his music support this taxonomy. 10. Dallapiccola’s exposure to Webern’s music before 1942 was quite limited. He had heard Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24, at a 1935 I.C.M.C. concert in Prague, and “Das Augenlicht,” Op. 26, at a 1938 I.C.M.C. concert in London. He had also played through the Variations for Piano, Op. 27. 11. Dallapiccola, “On the Twelve-Note Road,” which is a translation of “Sulla strada della dodecafonia,” 458 (italics in the original). 12. At times, these multiple rows evoke a sense of intertextuality, especially in the Liriche Greche. 13. Vlad, Luigi Dallapiccola, 30–31 makes this point in a discussion of Rencesvals, in which he finds evidence of G minor in the opening and A minor at the close. Indeed, major and minor triads and seventh chords also permeate these works, reminiscent of

Alegant.indd Sec2:288

4/5/2010 10:23:34 PM

notes to pp. 13–21 289 Berg’s synthesis of “tonal remnants” and twelve-tone ideas. Such vertical sonorities are often rhetorically charged and function as referential sonorities. 14. The Sex carmina alcaei were dedicated to Webern, with an inscription on the score, signed on September 5, 1945, that reads “Quest’opera, dedicata ad ANTON WEBERN nel giorno del suo sessantesima compleanno (3 dicembre 1943), offro oggi, con umiltà e devozione, alla di Lui memoria” (This work, dedicated to Anton Webern on the day of his sixtieth birthday [December 3, 1943], I offer today with humility and devotion, to his memory). Graham Phipps, “The Classical Italian Vocal Tradition Meets the New Vienna School,” in Italian Music During the Fascist Period, ed. Roberto Illiano (Cremona: Fondazione Locatelli, 2004), 633–55, offers a provocative analysis that examines text setting, symbolism, and row construction in selected passages of the Liriche greche through the lens of a “quasi-Verdian use of remembrance motives coupled with specific tonal references” (655). 15. I use the following conventions throughout: pitch-class integers are notated in “fixed do,” with C = 0, C♯ or D♭ = 1, D = 2, . . . , B♭ =“t,” and B♮ = “e” (“t” and “e” represent 10 and 11). P and I rows are identified by their first pitch classes; R and RI rows by their last pitch classes. Thus, P-1 begins with C♯ or D♭; R-2 ends with D♮. Angled brackets, < >, denote ordered segments; curly brackets, { }, denote unordered collections; and square brackets, [ ], indicate prime forms. Prime forms are usually listed with both Forte names and Rahn/Morris labels, such as “4–1[0123]” for the set class of the chromatic tetrachord. See Allen Forte, The Structure of Atonal Music (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), or Rahn, Basic Atonal Theory, or Morris, Composition with Pitch-Classes. 16. Steven Peles, “‘Ist Alles Eins’: Schoenberg and Symmetry.” Music Theory Spectrum 26.1 (2004): 57–85 makes similar observations about pitch-space symmetry in the opening of Schoenberg’s Op. 27, no. 1; see Peles’s example 2 on page 62. 17. One might hear the penultimate note of P-1 as a “leading tone” to the final note, in a tonal allusion. 18. Specifically, “Expositio” and “Canon perpetuus” are strict (with the exception of the piano’s rows at the end of the first movement that recall the Cinque frammenti di Saffo); “Canones diversi” starts loose and turns strict after a climax in m. 47. “Canon contrario motu” is strict; “Canon duplex contrario motu” is loose; “Conclusio” is strict. 19. A final (and perhaps recondite) observation: most of Dallapiccola’s attention in the first phase seems directed toward the canonic succession of rows, and not toward issues of partitioning. There is at least one intriguing aspect of the row class that Dallapiccola does not exploit: tetrachordal invariance. As shown below, any rows P-x and I(x+4) will maintain the content of their (unordered) tetrachords. Naturally, the same condition applies to their retrogrades, R-x and RI-(x+4). P-0: < 0 3 5 6 2 9 8 7 4 1 t e > I-4: < 4 1 e t 2 7 8 9 0 3 6 5 > 20. Some of the analytical and theoretical implications of cross partitions are discussed in Brian Alegant, The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate: Analytical and Theoretical Implications (PhD diss., University of Rochester, 1993), and “Cross Partitions as Harmony and Voice-Leading in Twelve-Tone Music,” which examines cross partitions in Schoenberg’s Piano Concerto, Op. 42, a single variation in Webern’s Op. 24 Concerto (to my knowledge the only intstance of cross partitions in his output), and the fourth movement of Dallapiccola’s Cinque frammenti di Saffo, whose pitch-class content is based on an ostinato that arises from a referential 34 cross partition. 21. Andrew Mead, “Some Implications of the Pitch-Class/Order Number Isomorphism Inherent in the Twelve-Tone System: Part One,” Perspectives of New Music 26: 96–163 (1988).

Alegant.indd Sec2:289

4/5/2010 10:23:34 PM

290

notes to pp. 21–29

22. See also Hans Nathan, “On Dallapiccola’s Working Methods,” Perspectives of New Music 15.2: 34–57 (1977), which sheds light on the process by which he formed rows and “gained chords through the verticalization of the previously established segments” (page 38). Indeed, many of the facsimiles in Nathan’s study are renderings of what I call 62, 43, 34, and 26 cross partitions. 23. See Dallapiccola, “On the Twelve-Note Road,” 325, as well as Joachim Noller, “Dodekaphonie via Proust und Joyce: Zur musikalischen Poetik Luigi Dallapiccolas,” Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, 51.2 (1994): 131–44, which explores connections between Dallapiccola, Joyce, and Proust. 24. 4–Z15 is one of the two all-interval tetrachords; the other is 4–Z29[0137]. By definition, Z-related set classes have the same interval-class content but are unrelated by transposition and/or inversion. See Forte, The Structure of Atonal Music, and Rahn, Basic Atonal Theory. 25. Structural framing is the reference to initial material at the end of a formal unit; this formal unit might be a theme, section, movement, or even a multimovement work. Frames are commonplace in Dallapiccola’s works. For a discussion of framing techniques, albeit it in nineteenth-century repertoire, see Brian Alegant and Don McLean, “On the Nature of Structural Framing,” Nineteenth-Century Music Review 4.1 (2007): 3–29. 26. The row has a strong octatonic flavor, which is to say that the nonoverlapping hexachords of the row are subsets of complete octatonic collections: {C, C♯, D♯, E, F♯, G, A, B♭}, {C, D, E♭, F, G♭, A♭, A♮, B}, or {C♯, D, E, F, G, G♯, A♯, B♮}. Dallapiccola’s fondness for octatonic elements is noted by Vlad, Luigi Dallapiccola; Michael Eckert, “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola,” Music Review 46 (1985): 35–48; Dana Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture (PhD diss., New York University, 2001); Jamuna S. Samuel, Music, Text, and Drama in Dallapiccola’s Il Prigioniero (PhD diss., City University of New York, 2005); and Brian Alegant and John Levey, “Octatonicism in Luigi Dallapiccola’s Twelve-Note Music,” Music Analysis 25.1/2 (2006): 39–88. Chapter 5 of this book is devoted to this subject. 27. Subsequent cross partitions in Dallapiccola’s compositions are invariably more “orthodox” in their construction: they present a given row’s discrete segments as verticals, without order-number deviations. In a sense, then, the configuration of the second Machado song can be viewed as an experiment. 28. Analytically, this song shares a strategy with the third of Schoenberg’s Five Pieces for Orchestra, Op. 16 (“Sommermorgen an einem See”). Both pieces establish a referential sonority (a 43 cross partition in the Dallapiccola and the referential sonority {C3– G3♯–B3–E4–A4} in the Schoenberg), transpose it to various pitch levels, and restate it (literally) as the final sonority. 29. A similar effect concludes the first movement of An Mathilde, as a clarinet echoes the voice’s final E♭5 and fades away on it for an entire 4/2 measure. 30. For instance, the songs of the Due liriche di Anacreonte, each thirty-six measures in length, are conjoined by the word “Eros,” which stretches across a rallentando and a full measure of rest.

Chapter Two 1. An Mathilde is the outlier: its twelve-tone procedures, rhythmic features, and larger scope and design resemble the works of the third serial phase. I will have more to say about An Mathilde in chapter 6.

Alegant.indd Sec2:290

4/5/2010 10:23:34 PM

notes to pp. 29–31 291 2. Such as Charles Burkhart and William Rothstein, Anthology of Music Analysis, Postmodern Update, 6th ed. (Cengage Learning, 2008), Miguel Roig-Francolí, Anthology of Music Analysis (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2007); and Mary H. Wennerstrom, Anthology of TwentiethCentury Music (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1988). 3. Michael Eckert describes the compositional developments in the 1950s as “more rigorous (orthodox)” in “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola,” Music Review 46 (1985): 35–48. He notes “single rows usually with no octave doublings; an avoidance of false relations; and durational ‘quasi-cells’ that realize ‘schwebende Rhythmus’,” and suggests that the quasi-cells are influenced by Messiaen’s idea of “canon with dotted values.” See also Graham Phipps, “Webern studiato da Dallapiccola: Fonti per procedimenti tonali nel Quaderno musicale di Annalibera,” in Dallapiccola: Letture e prospettive, ed. Milo De Santis (Lucca, 1997): 183–202. Phipps avers that the Contrapunctus primus marks the initial step in Dallapiccola’s progressive rhythmic and metric explorations of the time, and that these tendencies continue with the Goethe-Lieder and Cinque Canti and peak in the canonically saturated Concerto per la notte di Natale dell’anno 1956. 4. It would be fair to say that Dallapiccola, unlike many Darmstadt composers, who consciously—indeed, self-consciously—took up the more radical aspects of Webern’s practice, took a more conservative route. He did not experiment with electronic, aleatoric, or performance-art music; nor did he embrace collage, pastiche, neoclassicism, non-Western or irregular tunings, or (it would seem) any other trappings of postmodernism. Such paths were left to the younger generation of artists: Berio, Boulez, Maderno, Nono, Stockhausen, and others. 5. Leibowitz inscribed the book “Pour Luigi Dallapiccola, avec tout ce que ce livre implique, Son ami, René Leibowitz, Paris 2/XII. 49.” One correction appears on page 137, where Dallapiccola changed the designation for example 49 to example 48; other annotations appear in the margins of pages 31, 296, and 303. Dallapiccola’s reaction to page 296 (Leibowitz’s example 114) is intriguing. On this page he highlights the row , which is comprised of two 6–20[014589] hexachords. These hexachords appear—surprisingly and seemingly without preparation—at critical moments of An Mathilde (1954). Dallapiccola’s review of Schoenberg et son école appeared in “Le Tre Venezie: rivista d’umanità lettere ed arti,” XXI: 7–9 (1947): 287–90. The review mentions several atonal compositions (Schoenberg’s Op. 19, Berg’s Op. 5, and Webern’s Op. 7), and the second movement of Webern’s Op. 27. 6. “Non sono un teorico: sono soltanto un compositore. Ma, a proposito dei teorici, mi sia lecito esprimere una certa meraviglia di fronte al fatto che il dott. Eimert—negli esempi musicali del suo piccolo libro—abbia transcurato del tutto quella che—almeno per me—è una delle conquiste fondamentali della musica dodecafonica, cioè l’eliminazione delle ottave e delle false relazioni di ottava.” This quotation appears in Luigi Dallapiccola, Parole e musica, ed. Fiamma Nicolodi (Milan: Il Saggiatore, 1980, 475). 7. Even index numbers preclude the possibility of hexachordal inversional combinatoriality, and by extension, un-weighted aggregates (an un-weighted aggregate is an aggregate without pitch class doubling; a weighted aggregate contains some duplicate pitches or pitch classes). 8. See Milton Babbitt, “Twelve-Tone Invariants as Compositional Determinants,” Musical Quarterly 46.2 (1960): 24. Analyses of the movement include (among many others) Kathryn Bailey, The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern: Old Forms in a New Language (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991); Andrew Mead, “Webern, Tradition, and ‘Composing with Twelve Tones’,” Music Theory Spectrum 15.2 (1993): 173– 204; and Robert Wason, “Webern’s Variations for Piano, Op. 27: Musical Structure and the

Alegant.indd Sec2:291

4/5/2010 10:23:35 PM

292

notes to pp. 31–39

Performance Score,” Intégral 1 (1987): 57–103. Basart also examines in some detail the close relationship between the Quaderno and the Canti di liberazione in The Twelve-Tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola (PhD diss., University of California, 1960). 9. See Milton Babbitt, “Some Aspects of Twelve-tone Composition,” The Score and IMA Magazine 12 (1955): 53–61. An extended treatment of pitch-class inversion is found in Brian Alegant, “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion,” Journal of Music Theory 43.2 (1999): 193–230. This article demonstrates that even and odd index numbers create different set-class inventories, and that the inventories for these even and odd settings are unique—which is to say that passages that are based on even and odd designs truly have different “sounds.” It is worth noting that index numbers can be used to model tonal, atonal, or twelve-tone contexts. 10. Chapter 1 of David Lewin, Musical Form and Transformation: 4 Analytic Essays (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993) offers a transformational reading that highlights the network of associations among BACH motives. 11. I have always been amused by the fingering in the opening ostinato, which asks that each note be played by the third finger of the left hand. This yields a very different affect than, say, the expected and safer alternation of thumb and fifth finger. 12. Dallapiccola’s Canti di liberazione are based on the same row as the Quaderno. Fittingly, the climax of its second movement, which begins in measure 168, unveils a BACH idea. 13. At the same time, a careful examination of the orchestration reveals a subtler understanding of partitioning—which is to say that the timbres highlight other melodic and harmonic aspects that are somewhat hidden in the piano version. 14. Analyses of the Variations include Ethan Haimo, Schoenberg’s Serial Odyssey: The Evolution of his Twelve-Tone Method, 1914–1928 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), and John Covach, “Schoenberg’s ‘Poetics of Music,’” in Schoenberg and Words: The Modernist Years, ed. Charlotte M. Cross and Russell A. Berman (New York: Garland Publishing, 2000), 309–46. 15. John Covach discusses at length the families of rows that are joined by specific members of 4–28[0369] in “Schoenberg’s ‘Poetics of Music.’” 16. From this perspective, the Quaderno makes use of both modes of organization. Several movements preserve the same thematic contour of the row’s initial segment (just as the initial five-note segment of the Sex carmina alcaei is steadfastly maintained throughout its canonic movements). These include “Contrapunctus primus,” no. 3, “Contrapunctus secundus,” no. 5, “Andantino amoroso e contrapunctus tertius,” no. 7, and “Quartina,” no. 11. Even on first hearing we can identify the thematic associations between the rows of these movements. We can also pick up on the repetition of certain rows, such as P-t. In contrast, the other movements of the Quaderno obscure or partially hide the linear elements of the rows; many of these movements feature irregular partitioning schemes (such as BACH), and exploit nonsegmental elements of their rows. 17. Hans Nathan, “Luigi Dallapiccola: Fragments from Conversations,” Music Review 27 (1966): 294–312, especially 301–2. 18. Sonically, the Goethe-Lieder share many features with Webern’s Five Canons on Latin Texts, Op. 16, written for soprano, clarinet, and bass clarinet: a heavy reliance on canonic techniques, translucent textures, compact forms, the pairing of voice and clarinets, and a less-is-more aesthetic. 19. See Michael Eckert, “Text and Form in Dallapiccola’s Goethe-Lieder,” Perspectives of New Music 17 (1979): 98–111; John Perkins, “Dallapiccola’s Art of Canon,” Perspectives of New Music 1.2 (1963): 95–106; and Thomas DeLio, “A Proliferation of Canons: Luigi Dallapiccola’s “Goethe-Lieder No. 2,” Perspectives of New Music 23.2 (1985): 186–95. This

Alegant.indd Sec2:292

4/5/2010 10:23:35 PM

notes to pp. 39–47 293 song appears in several anthologies and is an ideal example with which to introduce basic twelve-tone techniques and explore issues of row technique and text setting. 20. The palindromes in Webern’s Symphony (Op. 21), Saxophone Quartet (Op. 22), and Variations for Piano (Op. 27) might well have been the inspiration for the mirrors in the Goethe-Lieder. Pitch and rhythmic palindromes lie behind the so-called development section of Op. 21, i, nearly all of Op. 21, ii, the climax of Op. 22, i, and the entirety of Op. 27, i. 21. Discussions of Webern’s Op. 24 include Robert Gauldin, “Pitch Structure in the Second Movement of Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24,” In Theory Only 2.10 (1977): 8–22, Christopher Wintle, “Analysis and Performance: Webern’s Concerto op. 24, Second Movement,” Music Analysis 1.1 (1982): 73–99, and Bailey, The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern. (Gauldin and Wintle focus on the second movement while Bailey discusses in detail the row and the first movement.) Interestingly, Bailey’s article opens with three quotations by Dallapiccola, drawn from the 1935, 1942, and 1943 entries from the composer’s Pages from a diary. The first quotation is germane: “This evening Heinrich Jalowetz presented the Concerto Op. 24 by Anton Webern, a work of incredible conciseness . . . and of unique concentration. . . .Although I did not understand the work completely, I had the feeling of finding an aesthetic and stylistic unity as great as I could wish for” (Prague, Sept. 5, 1935). 22. Those familiar with group theory will notice that a Klein group of operations relate the (unordered) trichords in the derived aggregates: the “four-group” in the Webern includes the operations T0, T6, I5, and Ie, while the group in the Dallapiccola includes T0, T6, I3, and I9. For more on groups, see David Lewin, Generalized Musical Intervals and Transformations (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1987) and Morris, Composition with Pitch-Classes. 23. This observation has been made by Wilkison, Theory and Practice: An Interpretation of Serialism in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, and Graham Phipps, “Webern studiato da Dallapiccola.”

Chapter Three 1. Some surface characteristics of these works are mentioned in Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, and Dietrich Kämper, Gefangenschaft und Freiheit: Leben und Werk des komponisten Luigi Dallapiccola (Cologne: Gitarre und Laute Verlagsgesellschaft, 1984). In addition, a few aspects of formal organization and row handling in Requiescant are discussed in a chapter of Thomas Merrill, Luigi Dallapiccola’s use of the Serial Technique in Four Choral Works: Canti di prigionia, Canti di liberazione, Requiescant, and Tempus Destruendi/Tempus Aedificandi (DMA thesis, Cincinnati College Conservatory of Music, 1995). 2. Even a cursory glance at the outer movements of the Concerto per la notte shows a juxtaposition between strict symmetrical presentations involving two and four rows and clearly distinct pitch content, and loose passages containing four or six simultaneous lines whose pitches seem to blur together. 3. Stylistically, the rapid shifts and the breaks in continuity are un-Webernian. Webern’s twelve-tone designs tend to be grounded on one procedure for each variation or movement, as in Opp. 21, ii; 22, i; 27, ii; 29, i. In contrast, Dallapiccola’s third-phase efforts change settings with much greater frequency.

Alegant.indd Sec2:293

4/5/2010 10:23:35 PM

294

notes to pp. 47–56

4. Webern used palindromes to structure the central (“development”) section of his Op. 21, i, and they appear in the theme, coda, and seven variations of the second movement as well. The first movement of Op. 27, as is well known, is based upon the idea of mirrors: each row appears simultaneously with its retrograde. Palindromes are conspicuous in the fourth of Dallapiccola’s Cinque Canti and the first movement of the Concerto per la notte; the opening material of each movement returns in retrograde form at its close. 5. Symmetrical rows reduce the number of unique rows in the row chart and they lend a sense of intervallic/set-class redundancy to the pitch-class design. The row of Webern’s Symphony, for instance, is invariant under RT6, meaning that it maps into itself under T6 (transposition by a tritone) and retrogression. 6. For instance, a composer might emphasize the whole-tone pentachords that are contained within the disjunct hexachords of single rows or invoke irregular partitioning schemes or cross-partitions to cut across the hexachordal boundaries and obscure the whole-tone flavors. A composer could also combine rows in order to saturate the surface with chromaticism (effectively combining the even and odd whole-tone collections). 7. Leibowitz, Schoenberg and his School, 223–25, especially example 72. 8. This is a diary entry for June 17, 1938, in Dallapiccola’s “Incontro con Anton Webern (Pagine di diario 1935–1945),” first published in Il Mondo, No. 15.3, 1945, and translated into English by John Waterhouse as “Meeting with Anton Webern (Pages from a Diary),” Tempo 99 (1972): 2–7. 9. Some examples of extremely soft dynamics in the second phase: the second Machado song ends with a pppp that is followed by a decrescendo; the prisoner’s innermost dialogues in Il prigioniero are ppp and pppp; and the second and fifth Goethe-Lieder and a few movements of the Quaderno end with a dynamic of ppp. The ppp dynamics in Il prigioniero are concentrated in the second scene (mm. 276–311) and the fourth scene (mm. 860–940). 10. Similar cluster chords and quiet dynamics appear, later, in some of György Ligeti’s compositions like Atmosphères and the Concerto for Cello. 11. This same passage is retrograded at the beginning of the movement, creating yet another structural frame. 12. Jacques Wildberger, “Dallapiccola’s Cinque Canti,” Melos 26, 1959, 7. Another example of a “timbric solution” occurs at the conclusion of Cinque canti, i, (mm. 20–28), where imitative trichords are assigned fixed durations. In this passage, the rhythmic values of the P trichords relate by 2:1:1; those from I rows, by 1:2:2; R, 1:1:2; and RI, 2:2:1. This is a stricter rendering of the procedure utilized in “Contrapunctus primus” from the Quaderno. Such proportional techniques evolve throughout the phase and culminate in Dialoghi. Ann Basart devotes a considerable amount of attention to the Cinque canti in The Twelve-Tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola (PhD diss., University of California, 1960). 13. A similar design of four rows moving in parallel is used in the opening of the fourth movement of Webern’s Second Cantata. 14. Variants of this design return in mm. 7–10 and 12–14 of the fifth song, where it receives a similar harmonic and rhythmic treatment. 15. This has been noted by many, including Basart, The Twelve-tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola, Roberto Zanetti, La musica italiana nel novencento (Busto Arsizio: Bramante, 1985), 1174, n. 44; Brown, Continuity and Recurrence; and Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 30 and 201–2. Ideograms (a type of Augenmusik) appear in the circles that represent divine love in the lauda in the fourth movement of the Concerto and in the star constellations in the fourth movement of Sicut Umbra.

Alegant.indd Sec2:294

4/5/2010 10:23:35 PM

notes to pp. 58–66 295 16. Most discussions of Requiescant focus on the rhythmic cells of the second and fourth movements. See Brown, Continuity and Recurrence; Kämper, Gefangenschaft und Freiheit; Merrill, Luigi Dallapiccola’s use of Serial Technique in Four Choral Works; and Nathan, “On Dallapiccola’s Working Methods.” Merrill’s chapter on the work provides a mostly correct account of the row usage of the movements and makes several observations on text setting. However, he does not discuss the underlying arrays, the sketches, or the structural and sonic similarities to Webern’s—or Schoenberg’s—music. 17. For details on the movement see Alegant, “Cross Partitions in Harmony and Voice Leading”; Bailey, The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern; Jonathan Kramer, “The Row as Structural Background and Audible Foreground: The First Movement of Webern’s First Cantata,” Journal of Music Theory 15 (1971): 155–81; Mead, “Webern, Tradition, and ‘Composing with twelve tones . . .’”; and George Rochberg, “Webern’s Search for Harmonic Identity,” Journal of Music Theory 6 (1962): 109–22. Alegant discusses the structural characteristics of the four-voiced designs, examines the first choral passage in detail, and shows that the outer sections of the first movement represent designs that each have unique setclass inventories. 18. Linkage, or elision obtains for all P-0 and P(x-3) and all I-x and I(x+3). For instance, P-0 can be linked with P-9 by using as a pivot; P-9 can be linked with P-6 by the dyad , and so on. 19. The sketches are housed in the Dallapiccola archives in the Fondo Dallapiccola, Archivio Contemporaneo “Alessandro Bonsanti,” Gabinetto Vieusseux, Firenze, LD Mus. 85 and 87. 20. This argument is advanced in Alegant, “Cross Partitions as Harmony and Voice Leading in Twelve-Tone Music.” 21. Dallapiccola did not make row charts for the first-period compositions. In fact, there are virtually no sketches for the first- and second-phase compositions. Sketches are more commonplace in the third phase and fourth phases, when partitioning, symmetry, and array designs are more prevalent. Incidentally, Dallapiccola spent a great deal of time traveling, often by train, and his sketchbook was a constant companion. 22. Merrill, in Luigi Dallapiccola’s Use of Serial Technique in Four Choral Works, observes the tetrachordal overlaps in measures 61–63 of the first movement (97) and again in the fourth (104). He also discusses the tetrachordal set classes in the second and fourth movements (although he incorrectly labels [0369] as 4–26 instead of 4–28) and summarizes Dallapiccola’s comments about the orchestration of the passage (83–85). 23. Morris, Composition with Pitch-Classes refers to these commonalities as “pitch-class equivalence sets.” 24. Nathan, “Luigi Dallapiccola: Fragments from Conversation,” 307. The sketches for Requiescant, located in the source LD MUS 86 in the Fondo Dallapiccola, reveal a great concern with rhythmic cells and rhythmic ratios. On the left-hand side of one of the pages is a chart with metronome markings and note values. An eighth-note is assigned a MM = 180; quarter note = 90; dotted-quarter note = 60; half note = 45; and so on. On the righthand side of the page are sketches for the main rhythmic cells. 25. Haimo discusses this procedure in Schoenberg’s Serial Odyssey, 37–41, 91–93, 131– 33, 155–57, 173–80. He also explores the topic of “isomorphic partitioning,” where the same partitioning scheme is applied to successive rows. Covach, “Schoenberg’s ‘Poetics of Music,’” also discusses this procedure in the fifth variation of Op. 31 in relation to the notions of developing variation, Grundgestalt, and musikalische Gedanke. 26. Haimo, Schoenberg’s Serial Odyssey, 39–40.

Alegant.indd Sec2:295

4/5/2010 10:23:36 PM

296

notes to pp. 68–84

27. Schoenberg uses this procedure in the Klavierstück Op. 33b, mm. 46–48, and more extensively in the outer movements of the Piano Concerto, op. 42. For more on the enlargement procedures that structure the Concerto see Brian Alegant and Don McLean, “On the Nature of Enlargement,” Journal of Music Theory 45.1 (2001): 31–71. 28. A subtle connection, to be sure, but this same pitch-class set, {1, 4, 7, t}, also appears in the opening of Schoenberg’s Variations, whose first four measures unfold B♭ and E, the first dyad of P-t, and G and C♯, the first dyad of I-7. 29. After Morris and Alegant, “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music,” a twelvetone partition is an unordered collection of pitch-class sets that comprise an aggregate. Items within angled brackets, < >, are ordered; items within curly brackets, { }, are unordered. Therefore, if {a}, {b}, {c} are unordered pitch-class collections, the representation < {a} {b} {c} > indicates that the individual elements of {a}, {b}, {c} can be reordered, but that the elements of {a} must precede those of {b}, which must precede those of {c}. 30. Nathan, “On Dallapiccola’s Working Methods,” views Requiescant as a “contemporary Kindertotenlied” that deals with death come too soon. He describes the opening of the fourth movement as follows: “The noise pattern—dry, urgent—may invoke in our imagination the stirring of the dead girl, her vain heaving against the load on top of her” (39–40). 31. Fortunately, there is at least one recording of the work: Stradivarius STR 33698. 32. Dana Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture (PhD diss., New York University, 2001), refers to the hexachordal pairs in mm. 1–3 and 9–10 as “tonal pillars.” 33. See Dietrich Kämper, “Ricerca, ritmica e metrica: Beobachtungen am Spätwerk Dallapiccolas” (Neu Zeitschrift für Music LXXX: 94–99) and Brown, Continuity and Recurrence. Both observe that the sections have 40 (mm. 1–56), 80 (mm. 57–134), 120 (mm. 135–80), 80 (mm. 181–264), and 40 (mm. 265–315) tacti. 34. This passage is restated verbatim in measures 301–12, just three measures from the conclusion. The final pitch is also E4, played ppp by the vibraphone. 35. Brown 1977 (chapter 11, 649–53) also points out that the un-pitched percussion instruments (tam-tams, cymbal, maracas) have six identical interjections of a double-dotted quarter-note, unfolding a descending arithmetic series: 17½, 14, 10½, 7, 3½. (Kämper does not follow up on this observation.) Additionally, three suspended cymbals rotate their cells every 4½ quarter notes, while the tam-tams play for 8 quarter notes; thus the un-pitched percussion parts are in a relation of 7:18:32. Finally, Brown observes that the wind and brass tend to have fixed, long durations while the pitched percussion and string instruments have variable, shorter ones. 36. Examples of total serialism include Boulez’s Structures; Stockhausen’s Kreuzspiel; Maderna’s Improvvisazione N. 1 and Serenata no. 2; and many of Milton Babbitt’s works, which apply serial procedures (and permutations) to time points, dynamics, and modes of articulation. Babbitt describes the basic features of a time point system in “Twelve-Tone Invariants as Compositional Determinants,” Musical Quarterly 46.2 (1960): 246–59. Andrew Mead, An Introduction to The Music of Milton Babbitt, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), discusses the inner workings of many of Babbitt’s time-point applications.

Chapter Four 1. I am assuming that readers are familiar with hexachordal combinatoriality and recognize its implications for establishing hierarchical relationships among regions and generating a sense of harmonic coherence and a surface syntax.

Alegant.indd Sec2:296

4/5/2010 10:23:36 PM

notes to pp. 84–91 297 2. From Nathan, “On Dallapiccola’s Working Methods,” note 6, 46. The original: “Io ho voluto tenere una costante ferma . . . I due esacordi non cambiano mai. L’ordine dei suoni cambia.” Full-length studies of Ulisse include Michael Biondi, Compositional Process in Dallapiccola’s Ulisse: A Survey and Analysis of New Findings in the Dallapiccola Archive, Florence, Italy (PhD diss., City University of New York, 1994), and Julie van Hees, Luigi Dallapiccolas Bühnenwerk Ulisse: Untersuchungen zu Werk und Werkgenese (Kassel: Gustav Bosse, Verlag, 1994). Both authors address such topics as the complex of row forms, the overall arch design that governs the large-scale form, symbolism (including the notion of “interrogative” or “questioning” trichords), and the rich interplay of leitmotivs. Neither explores in any depth issues of texture, orchestration, partitioning strategies, harmony, or set-class structure beyond the trichordal stage. 3. See Kämper 1985, especially his example 38; Biondi 1994, 28–70; and van Hees 1994, 121–58. 4. For instance, the three movements of Preghiere comprise 130 measures; the four movements of Parole di San Paolo contain 100 measures; and the aphoristic first movement of Sicut Umbra contains just nine measures, which last just under a minute. 5. See Brown, “Dallapiccola’s Use of Symbolic Self-Quotation” and Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, both of which build on the discussion of “tonal allusions” in Vlad, Luigi Dallapiccola; see also Hans Nathan, “The TwelveTone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola,” Musical Quarterly 44.3 (1958): 289–310. 6. Brown, “Dallapiccola’s Use of Symbolic Self-Quotation,” 277. 7. Nathan, “The Twelve-Tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola,” is perhaps the first to make this observation. He adds: “The imitations, especially at one place where they overlap in an apparently haphazard manner, act like the mumbling of sympathetic companions” (306). 8. This derived aggregate appears no less than nine times in the opera, invariably with ppp dynamics, a high tessitura, and a heightened sense of drama: Act I, mm. 579 (which, at a mf dynamic, is the sole appearance at a loud dynamic), 794–95, 778–79, 863– 94, and 879–99; Act II, mm. 94, 195, 209–12, and 469–71. Some of these are mentioned in Brown, “Dallapiccola’s Use of Symbolic Self-Quotation,” 291. Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 245 mentions references to other works that appear in the epilogue of Ulisse. 9. Preghiere, iii, mm. 98–108, applies this procedure to the pitch A4; Parole di San Paolo features similar pedal points, as well. (These are addressed in chapter 7.) 10. Brown, “Dallapiccola’s Symbolic Use of Self-Quotation,” 288–92. 11. For example, Mead, The Music of Milton Babbitt, 162–71 shows that the same array underlies Tableaux, Arie da Capo, Playing for Time, An Elizabethan Sextette, and Melismata. 12. Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, 256–57 and Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 216–21 address several issues of text setting, including the wonderful observation that the extended palindrome in the center of the second movement realizes the metaphor of an “immense wheel which grinds souls and bodies.” Mancini, “Twelve-Tone Polarity in the Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola,” 217–22 focuses on “dyadic recombinations” and invariant tetrachords in the opening and in measures 15–19 of the first movement. 13. In a similar fashion, members of 4–28[0369] are shared by large families of rows in Schoenberg’s Variations, Op. 31. 14. This point is made by Mancini, “Twelve-Tone Polarity in the Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola,” who uses the term “polarity” to describe the invariant relationships between elements of P-1 and I-0 in the opening. Mancini discusses Dallapiccola’s use of polarity in a number of works from different periods.

Alegant.indd Sec2:297

4/5/2010 10:23:36 PM

298

notes to pp. 93–109

15. The extraction of these tetrachords results from what Haimo in Schoenberg’s Serial Odyssey calls isomorphic partitioning. To illustrate, below the same partition is invoked on R-3 and RI-0. The instrumental tetrachords that are emphasized in the ritornello are italicized: R-3: ; RI-0: < 2 8 7 e 6 5 3 9 t 1 0 >. 16. This yields an even more segmented presentation than the setting of the seventh of the Goethe-Lieder, for instance, which is based entirely on derived aggregates. In that work, the saturation of the same trichordal set class lends a high degree of consistency (and one that is lacking in Preghiere). 17. CDs of the work include Stradivarius B000007TDD and RCOL 08005 (volume 5 of an anthology of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra). 18. For discussions of Commiato see Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, Dietrich Kämper, “Commiato: Bemerkungen zu Dallapiccolas letztem Werk” (Schweizerische Musikzeitung–Revue Musicale Suisse 4 (1975): 194–200); Mancini, “Twelve-Tone Polarity in the Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola”; Sergio Sablich, Luigi Dallapiccola (Palermo: Edizioni Epos, 2004); Mario Ruffini, L’Opera di Luigi Dallapiccola: Catalogo Ragionato (Milano: Suvini Zerboni, 2002); and Misha Donat, “About Some Harmonic and Textural Choices by Dallapiccola in Commiato,” in Luigi Dallapiccola nel suo secolo: atti del convegno internazionale, ed. by Fiamma Nicolodi (L. S. Olschki, Firenze, 2007, 449–66). Save for Mancini, who documents the pitch-class invariance in selected passages of second movement (mm. 209–16), there is little detailed analytical discussion of the work. 19. A total of four measures in the fifth movement are reconfigured; otherwise, the mirror is exact. 20. Together, eight rows share the same unordered hexachords (and thus comprise a region). One group of eight includes P-0 and P-6 and their retrogrades along with I-1, its tritone partner, I-7, and their retrogrades). The row class thus contains six unique regions of eight rows apiece. 21. In another, subtle, example of borrowing, this same pitch class plays a vital role in the conclusion of Act II of Ulisse. The unison, fff G♯4 in measures 1023–25, just nine measures before the curtain falls, is the moment of epiphany in the second act. It ushers in the final line of text: “Signore! Non più soli il mio cuore e il mare”—(Lord! No longer alone my heart and the sea). The peeling away of instruments results in a written-out decrescendo that resembles the rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie in Dialoghi. It also interrupts a flashback to the multidimensional set presentations and 5–4–3 rhythmic ideas taken from the second and fourth movements of Requiescant. Finally, the “Ploratus” movement of Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, which is written two years earlier, also opens with “Ah!” Its first note, sung by the tenor, is A♭4, the enharmonic equivalent. 22. See in particular the sketches LD Mus. 129, 132, 136, 137, 138, and 143 in the Fondo Dallapiccola in Firenze.

Chapter Five 1. As is well known, the scale appears in the works of many nineteenth-century composers, too, such as Berlioz, Liszt, Mussorgsky, and Rimsky-Korsakov. Among the many analytical and theoretical explorations of the octatonic collection are Arthur Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization in Stravinsky,” Perspectives of New Music 2.1 (1963): 11–42, Pieter van den Toorn, The Music of Igor Stravinsky (New Haven: Yale

Alegant.indd Sec2:298

4/5/2010 10:23:37 PM

notes to pp. 109–113 299 University Press, 1983), Richard Taruskin, “Chernomor to Kashchei: Harmonic Sorcery; or Stravinsky’s ‘Angle,’” Journal of the American Muiscological Society 38 (1985): 72– 142; and Dmitri Tymoczko, “Stravinsky and the Octatonic: A Reconsideration,” Music Theory Spectrum 24.2 (2002): 68–102. 2. Among those instances previously noted, Richard Cohn, “Bartok’s Octatonic Strategies: A Motivic Approach,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 44.2 (1991): 262–300, points out instances of set class 6–30[013679] in variation two of the second movement of Webern’s Symphony, Op. 21. Brian Alegant, The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate: Analytical and Theoretical Implications (PhD diss., University of Rochester, 1993), Mead, The Music of Milton Babbitt, and Morris and Alegant, “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music” variously examine the roles played by this same hexachord in the four-part arrays of Babbitt’s first-period compositions (namely Du and The Widow’s Lament in Springtime), although it must be said that 6–30 is often subsumed beneath an avalanche of all-combinatorial hexachords. A complete octatonic scale is formed by the middle tetrachords of the complementary rows in Schoenberg’s Op. 33a Klavierstück (the tetrachords of the P and I rows are clearly exposed in measures 10 and 11). And octatonic subsets are occasionally projected by the verticals in the rotational arrays of Stravinsky’s serial compositions (see, for instance, the discussion of the “Chords of Death” from the Requiem Canticles in Robert Craft, Stravinsky: Chronicle of a Friendship [Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1972, 415]; Joseph Straus, “Stravinsky’s ‘Construction of Twelve Verticals’: An Aspect of Harmony in the Serial Music,” Music Theory Spectrum 21.1 (1999): 43–73; or Richard Taruskin, Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions: A Biography of the Works through Mavra (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996, 1669–73). It is important to note, however, that octatonic formations occur rather infrequently in Stravinsky’s serial works. 3. Vlad, Luigi Dallapiccola, 41. 4. I have modified the translation from “the mode” to “a mode,” since Messiaen identifies seven different modal types. See Olivier Messiaen, La Technique de mon langage musical (Paris: A. Le Duc, 1944). 5. Michael Eckert, “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola,” Music Review 46 (1985): 35–48 argues that Dallapiccola’s first exposure to the octatonic collection most likely occurred while he was studying composition with Vito Frazzi. Frazzi’s booklet “Scale alternate per pianoforte” identifies two types of octatonic scales and includes examples from works by Beethoven, Mussorgsky, Debussy, and Verdi. See Vito Frazzi, Scale alternate per pianoforte (Florence: A. Forlivesi & Co., 1930) and I vari sistemi del “linguaggio musicale” (Siena: Quaderni dell’Accademia Chigiana, 1960) as well as Paolo Fragapane, “Le scale alternate di Vito Frazzi,” Rassegna Dorica 4 (1933): 65–71. 6. Eckert, “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola,” 39. 7. Dana Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture (PhD diss., New York University, 2001). 8. Specifically, Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, notes that 10 of 30 measures, and 68 of 102 beats in Piccola are non-octatonic (p. 74). Further, little is said about harmonic rhythm or the shifts among the different octatonic collections. The analysis of Tempus fares little better: significant portions of the surfaces of its movements are also labelled nonoctatonic. I do not think it is a coincidence that the octatonic approach works 2/3 of the time: this is the precise ratio of the octatonic collection to the twelve-tone collection. 9. Allen Forte, “Debussy and the Octatonic,” Music Analysis 10.1–2 (1991): 125–69. Forte makes a distinction between ordered and unordered collections; I am concerned here only with the latter.

Alegant.indd Sec2:299

4/5/2010 10:23:37 PM

300

notes to pp. 113–124

10. Z-related hexachords share the same interval-class vectors, but are unrelated by transposition and/or inversion. See Allen Forte, The Structure of Atonal Music (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973, 21). In other words, a member of 6–Z13[013467] cannot be transposed or inverted into its complement, 6–Z42 [012369]. In “Debussy and the Octatonic” Forte refers to those Z-related hexachords which are not purely octatonic as “octatonic by complementation” (129, 146). Their inclusion within the octatonic universe is theoretically and aurally problematic, however, since these hexachords cannot be extracted from an octatonic scale. Nor do they sound octatonic, since each contains pitch classes drawn from all three 4–28 tetrachords. 11. Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, 130 ff. The rows here match those in Richardson’s example 6.1, with two exceptions: Richardson includes as rows the twelvetone strings found in Canti di prigionia and Rencesvals. I do not consider these rows, in part because they come into being as a by-product of chromatic accretion; further, they are not subjected to transposition, inversion, or retrograde. At any rate, if these rows are included, the series of Canti di prigionia, , would be placed in group 3, and the row of the second part of Rencesvals, < C, E♭, F♯, F, A, B, B♭, G, A♭, E, D, C♯>, would be in group 2. 12. See Robert Morris, “Recommendations for Atonal Music Pedagogy in General; Recognizing and Hearing Set-Classes in Particular,” Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy 8 (1994): 75–134, especially 116–18. 13. Not all of Dallapiccola’s rows feature hexachords with octatonic properties. The row of the Concderto per la notte di Natale . . . , for instance, is a “whole-tone minus one” row; other works have rows that divide into 6–1[012345] or 6–2[012346] hexachords. 14. To summarize a similar discussion in chapter 2: we can model each inversional operator by the construct of an index number, which represents the sum of the corresponding pitch classes that are related by inversion. For instance, the label “I-6” means that the elements of two rows are governed by an index number of 6; this index number induces the following pitch-class mappings: 0⇔6, 1⇔5, 2⇔4, 7⇔11, 8⇔10, 3⇔3 and 9⇔9. Even index numbers produce five pairs and two singletons, which serve as pitchclass and, potentially, pitch axes; odd index numbers produce six pairs. 15. Jamuna S. Samuel, Music, Text, and Drama in Dallapiccola’s Il Prigioniero (PhD diss., City University of New York, 2005) examines the background of Il prigioniero, surveys the handling of twelve-tone and other materials, and identifies many of its octatonic formations. Her octatonic approach, like Richardson’s, is also focused on membership in the three basic collections. 16. As in the first chapter, “strict” connotes regimented presentations of rows within a consistent framework (such as order and harmonic rhythm), while “loose” described less regimented presentations (such as those that cut across hexachordal boundaries, or cycle or repeat certain row elements in a seemingly ad-hoc fashion). The terms are inspired by William Caplin, Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), who examines “loose-knit” and “tight-knit” organization in the Classical period. See in particular pp. 13, 75, and 111–21 for loose-knit organization, and pp. 84–85, 197–99 for tight-knit organization. 17. Dallapiccola, “Sulla strada della dodecafonia,” 325–26. Mancini, “Twelve-tone Polarity in Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola” also addresses the issue of polarity. 18. Any two rows in this movement in the relation P-(x) and I-(x+5) exhibit this degree of dyadic invariance and polarity. The row pairings in the A and A’ sections

Alegant.indd Sec2:300

4/5/2010 10:23:37 PM

notes to pp. 124–141 301 include P-6/I-e (mm. 93–101); P-7/I-0 (mm. 111–19); P-6/RI-e (mm. 120–36); R-3/RI-8 (mm. 153–60); P-7/I-0 (mm. 171–81); and P-e/RI-4 (mm. 183–200). Coincidentally, the formula P-(x) and I-(x+5) also generates the inversionally combinatorial rows employed throughout Schoenberg’s mature serial works. 19. The original scoring was for soprano and piano; Dallapiccola orchestrated the cycle in 1964. The aphoristic poems and the ethereal atmosphere are reminiscent of Berg’s Altenberg Lieder, Op. 4. 20. Fearn (The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 131–32) likens the fanfare figure to the sound of trumpets that “seem to herald the arrival of spring,” while the “ensuing transposed statement conveys the impatient scurrying of the renewal of life in spring.” He observes that the row beginning in measure 5 “comes remarkably close to a ‘mode of limited transposition,’” Again, I would say that a hexachordal filter is a better model than an octatonic one: from a six-note standpoint it is clear that the opening measures and the linear row that begins in measure 5 are harmonically equivalent. 21. For discussions of the genesis and dramatic thrust of Il prigioniero see Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 115–27, and Samuel, Music, Text, and Drama in Dallapiccola’s Il Prigioniero, 13–121. Fearn summarizes the philosophical underpinnings of the opera, Dallapiccola’s thoughts on “the opera problem,” and the basic row forms and large-scale dramatic organization. Samuel’s main focus is on the basic procedures of text setting and the completion of aggregates and (complete) octatonic collections. 22. The three variants (in their P-0 versions) are the “Prayer” row, (which contains discrete 6–27 hexachords); the “Liberty” row ; and the “Hope” row , which is based on 6–2[012346] hexachords. 23. The conclusion of scene 3 recapitulates this entire passage with a few changes. One is the prisoner’s delivery, which is more forceful: whereas his lines in scene 2 are con voce tremola and parlato, here they are quasi parlato. Another is the addition of the so-called “Liberty” row, whose presentation adds foreign notes to the underlying 6–27 hexachords. 24. These measures reveal a marvellous handling of motivic development and a wide variety of textures; they are a case study in the “composing out” of 6–27 hexachords and various fragments from the work’s many rows. 25. The tetrachord {A, F♯, D, B♭} is the same set class as the sonority of Berg’s “wir arme Leut” from Wozzeck: 4–19[0158]. 26. In a sense, this procedure reminds me of the relationship between the row and the invocation of Bach’s “Es ist genug” chorale in Berg’s Violin Concerto: once we hear the “Es ist genug” chorale we realize, retrospectively, that the whole-tone head of the chorale matches the whole-tone tail of the row. In the same manner, the countless statements of the “Prayer” row serve to reinforce the “Fratello” idea—if only subliminally. 27. This discussion reviews some of the material in chapter 3 and anticipates some of the discussion in chapter 6. This repetition is deliberate, and is intended to allow each chapter to stand more or less independently. 28. Since the hexachords are realised as simultaneities, each 62 configuration can be represented by any one of eight labels. For this reason I use the “lowest” prime row as a token; thus the label “P-3” is assigned to the first aggregate, whose hexachords belong to P-3, P-9, RI-0, RI-6 and their retrogrades. It is also worth noting some of the horizontal associations that arise among these verticalities. The uppermost pitches in the first two chords, for example, project A♭4–G4; this interval class 1 is echoed by the first two vocal pitches, G♭3–F3, and restated by the G♯5–G5 pitches of the chords in measure 5.

Alegant.indd Sec2:301

4/5/2010 10:23:38 PM

302

notes to pp. 141–147

29. As mentioned previously, an ideogram is an example of Augenmusik, a strikingly visual example of text painting. Ideogram configurations appear in measures 1–3, 9–12, 16–23, 33–37, 44, and 52–59 of the central movement of Cinque canti; other ideograms appear throughout Dallapiccola’s career, from the Prima serie dei cori di Michelangelo Buonarroti il giovane (1933–36) to the constellations represented in the fourth movement of Sicut umbra (1970). 30. For analyses of the work see Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, 258–65; Thomas Merrill, Luigi Dallapiccola’s use of Serial Technique in Four Choral Works: Canti di Prigionia, Canti di Liberazione, Requiescant, and Tempus Destruendi/Tempus Aedificandi (DMA thesis, Cincinnati College Conservatory of Music, 1995), 109–29; and Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, 105–24. Fearn’s discussion centers mostly on broad issues of text setting; he does not address hexachords or harmony at all. Merrill’s chapter on Tempus charts the various twelve-tone presentations (single rows, derived aggregates, and stretto), and offers a formal diagram and a translation; it, too, avoids any mention of hexachordal or octatonic organization. Richardson does address some of the octatonic elements: he examines the surfaces through an eight-note filter (as representations of the three basic collections), and raises several points that are also made here (see his example 5.4 on p. 113 and example 5.7 on p. 117). My main objection with Richardson’s analyses concerns his “long-range linear structures” and “voice-leading reductions” (see ex. 5.9, p. 121). In my view, voice leading needs to be normative. I would argue that we can’t really talk about voice leading in posttonal music without the ability to clearly define scale degrees and to distinguish consonance from dissonance. 31. This translation is by Tom van Nortwick and Kendra Eshleman of Oberlin College. It differs slightly from Fearn’s and more substantially from Richardson’s. 32. Further avenues that might be explored include the nature of pitch and pitch-class connections between specific chords; the role of invertible counterpoint; and the network of transformations between the various instances of 6–30[013679]. Appropriate analytical methods which might be applied include those found in Henry Klumpenhouwer, “The Inner and Outer Automorphisms of Pitch-Class Inversion and Transposition: Some Implications for Analysis with Klumpenhouwer Networks,” Intégral 12 (1998): 81–93; David Lewin, “A Tutorial on Klumpenhouwer Networks, Using the Chorale in Schoenberg’s Opus 11, No. 2,” Journal of Music Theory 38 (1994): 79– 102, and “Some Ideas About Voice-leading Between Pcsets,” Journal of Music Theory 42 (1998): 15–72; Robert Morris, “Voice-leading Spaces,” Music Theory Spectrum 20.2 (1998): 175–208; John Roeder, “Voice Leading as Transformation,” in Musical Transformation and Musical Intuitions: Essays in Honor of David Lewin, ed. Raphael Atlas and Michael Cherlin (Roxbury: Ovenbird Press, 1994, 41–58); and Joseph Straus, “Uniformity, Balance, and Smoothness in Atonal Voice Leading,” Music Theory Spectrum 25.2 (2003): 305–52. Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, 113 offers a similar chart that shows many of these same hexachords, their governing octatonic collections, and the trichordal cells of derived aggregates. 33. No assumption is made that this voice exchange is in any sense responsible for prolonging set class 6–30; rather, the intention is merely to show that the various unordered realizations of this collection create an opportunity to associate outer-voice pitch classes. 34. While a few passages from earlier works incorporate derived aggregates (namely, Rencesvals of 1946, Quaderno musicale di Annalibera of 1952, and the Goethe-Lieder of 1953, whose “questioning” configurations of [012] trichords are discussed in chapter 3), the derivation in An Mathilde is far more extensive in terms of scope and content. For an

Alegant.indd Sec2:302

4/5/2010 10:23:38 PM

notes to pp. 147–155 303 analysis of An Mathilde see Peter Kiesewetter, “Luigi Dallapiccola: An Mathilde,” Melos 50 (1988): 2–30, and chapter 6. 35. The literature on hexachords and their trichordal generators is extensive. It includes: Milton Babbitt, “Twelve-Tone Invariants as Compositional Determinants,” The Score and IMA Magazine 12 (1955): 53–61 and “Set Structure as a Compositional Determinant,” Journal of Music Theory 5.1 (1961): 72–94; Steven Rouse, “Hexachords and their Trichordal Generators: An Introduction,” In Theory Only 8 (1985): 19–43; Mead, “Some Implications in the Pitch-Class/Order-Number Isomorphism Inherent in the Twelve-Tone System: Part One”; Morris and Alegant, “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music”; and Alegant, The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate. 36. The term “marked” is used in the spirit of Robert Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 5, 34–38, and passim. 37. Verdi referred to such dramatic utterances as parole sceniche (scenic words) in a letter to Giulio Ricordi. Dallapiccola, who studied Verdi’s operas in detail and wrote extensively on them, cited this letter. See Luigi Dallapiccola, Dallapiccola on Opera: Selected Writings of Luigi Dallapiccola, Vol. 1, trans. and ed. by Rudy Shackelford (Exeter: Toccato Press, 1987), note n. 4, 136. 38. Five measures are deleted from the fourth movement; everything else is exact. 39. Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola, states that while working on Commiato the composer was suddenly taken seriously ill during a visit to Durham in the north-east of England. He was therefore made fully aware of the irony of composing “what might appear to be a ‘farewell to life’ at this time.” 40. The voice’s pitches are doubled by the instruments; in a sense, then, the voice is “covered by” the sustained 6–27 and 6–30 hexachords. Additionally, the voice projects two [016] trichords, and , which combine to produce a member of set class 6–5[012367]. As noted earlier, this set class appears in the first movement of Commiato as well as Requiescant, Preghiere, Ulisse, and Schoenberg’s Variations, Op. 31. 41. As an aside, set class 6–27 is a vital component of Ross Lee Finney’s Narrative in Argument (1991) whereas 6–30 is the core of the composer’s Narrative in Retrospect (1987). Each composition is based exclusively on one aggregate formation that contains one hexachord and its complement; no other transformations of the hexachord appear. The hexachords in Narrative in Argument, for instance, are shown as and . This is not to say that the work is monochromatic, however; elements of the hexachords are combined to produce a variety of non-octatonic harmonies.

Chapter Six 1. An Mathilde was followed by Tartiana secondo, the third of Dallapiccola’s “tonal translations,” and then by the Cinque canti (1956), which ushers in the third serial phase. 2. A recording exists in the Fondo Dallapiccola in Firenze. The 1978 performance is by the Sinfonieorchester des Südwestfunks, directed by Hans Rosbaud; the soprano is Magda László. The most in-depth study of the work is Kiesewetter, “Luigi Dallapiccola: An Mathilde.” See also Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, 254–55, 555 ff., and 625–26; Fearn, The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola; Kämper, “Ricerca, ritmica e metrica: Beobachtungen am Spätwerk Dallapiccolas”; and Ruffini, L’Opera di Luigi Dallapiccola.

Alegant.indd Sec2:303

4/5/2010 10:23:38 PM

304

notes to pp. 156–159

3. The Riemannian analysis appears on page 11. Kiesewetter divides the phrase into two hexachords, the first of which moves from the first note, C, which he labels as a tonic (“T”), through viiº7/iv to an F-minor chord, “S.” The second hexachord moves from a Cminor third, “T” through a D-major Wechseldominante to a Dominante sonority that includes G–D–A♭–B, which he interprets as V♭9 of C. While I can (with a bit of work) imagine the passage this way, I must question an analytic methodology that ascribes functions to chords but lacks rules for voice-leading in aggregate-based music, and does not specify the mechanism by which complex sonorities are reduced to triads and seventh chords. 4. Such twelve-tone strands are often referred to as “secondary sets.” I prefer to think of them as “linear aggregates” or, more generally, “derived aggregates,” in which the total chromatic is generated from a single set class. In An Mathilde, one common type of derived aggregate is made from four [012] trichords. From my perspective, the specific order of the twelve pitch classes is less important than the fact that the aggregate is saturated with one set class. Thus, the label “[012] x 4” both simplifies the bookkeeping process (since we don’t have to worry about uniquely labeling all of the different ordernumber variations) and better reflects my hearing. 5. A few aspects of the work are discussed in previous chapters, including derived aggregates and octatonic structuring. 6. In this regard the row of An Mathilde has much in common with the rows of Parole di San Paolo and Sicut Umbra. These commonalities are addressed in the next chapter. 7. The row of the Goethe-Lieder is also based on a pair of Z-related hexachords, but a different pair: its disjunct hexachords, , represent set classes 6– Z10[013457] and 6–Z39[013457]. (Incidentally, these match the discrete hexachords of the row of Webern’s Op. 23/1; see Brian Alegant, “A Model for the Pitch Structure of Anton Webern’s Opus 23/1, ‘Das dunkle Herz,’” Music Theory Spectrum 13.2 (1991): 127–46.) 8. I am not aware of any sketches that exist for the compositions of the first phase. Early in his career Dallapiccola reportedly said that row charts were unnecessary—one only needed to memorize the row. And this, apparently, sufficed for the earlier works, which are based mainly on the polyphonic realization of linear rows. But once he began more thoroughly to use cross partitions, and to associate the segmental and nonsegmental elements of various rows, row charts became more of a necessity. Not surprisingly, row charts and sketches of partitions abound for nearly all of the later serial works. The sketches for An Mathilde are found in LD Mus 63 and 64 in the Fondo Dallapiccola, Archivio Contemporaneo “Alessandro Bonsanti,” Gabinetto Vieusseux, Firenze. The charts display the rows in black pen and the row labels and hexachordal divisions in pencil. 9. Chapter 1 introduces and illustrates cross partitions. To summarize: a cross partition is a realization of an aggregate that places the elements of a row into a two-dimensional pitch-class design. The standard rectangular or “even” configurations are of two hexachords (62), three tetrachords (43), four trichords (34), and six dyads (26). Cross partitions contain no pitch-class duplication in their rows or columns; for the most part, the vertical elements in the cross partition are made up of the discrete segments of a row while the horizontal elements are free. Whether or not Dallapiccola came by cross partitions from Schoenberg, they are in my view his most identifiable serial procedure, and they occur in nearly all of his compositions. 10. It is important to reiterate that Dallapiccola had not yet settled on a systematic approach to controlling harmony while he was writing An Mathilde. The phase 3 works (beginning with Cinque canti and continuing through the Concerto per la notte di Natale d’anno 1956, Requiescant, and Dialoghi) rely heavily on axial symmetry and four-row compositional designs.

Alegant.indd Sec2:304

4/5/2010 10:23:39 PM

notes to pp. 159–185 305 11. Earlier chapters highlight the similarities between the application of derivation in Dallapiccola’s and Webern’s works (in particular the Concerto, Op. 24), and examine this technique in selected movements from the Goethe-Lieder, Requiescant, and Ulisse. 12. The study of contour, not only in the pitch domain, is relatively unexplored in Dallapiccola’s music. Two studies that explore contours of various compositional “spaces” are Elizabeth West Marvin, “A Generalization of Contour Theory to Diverse Musical Spaces: Analytical Applications to the Music of Dallapiccola and Stockhausen,” in Concert Music, Rock, and Jazz Since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1995), and Robert Morris, “New Directions in the Theory and Analysis of Musical Contour,” Music Theory Spectrum 15.2 (1993): 205–28. 13. Kiesewetter, “Luigi Dallapiccola: An Mathilde,” 13 compares this melisma to a string he marks “X” in measure 35 of the first movement. However, he does not relate it to the final gesture of the work. 14. The rows that create the cross partitions are governed by an RT1-transformation that pairs P-0 with RI-1 and I-7 with R-6. This row quartet is related by a mathematical group. 15. I presented some of this material in “Dallapiccola’s Array Experiments,” delivered at the 2003 annual meeting of the Society for Music Theory, held in Madison, Wisconsin. 16. Alegant, “Cross-Partitions as Harmony and Voice Leading in Twelve-Tone Music,” examines the set-class structures and the surface realizations of four-voiced arrays in various inversional contexts. 17. A point of clarification: some phase 3 compositions incorporate four-row arrays that contain P, I, R, and RI rows, but the source rows for these works are RI-symmetrical. Thus, the R and RI rows are duplications of P and I rows. So, to be more precise, I should say that An Mathilde alone features P/I/R/RI arrays that are built from nonsymmetrical rows. From this angle, the phase 3 arrays can be considered as refinements of the designs in An Mathilde, since their set-class and pitch-class structures are more redundant. 18. See Joseph Straus, “Stravinsky’s ‘Construction of Twelve Verticals’: An Aspect of Harmony in the Serial Music,” Music Theory Spectrum 21.1 (1999): 43–73, and Stravinsky’s Late Music (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). Straus details the pitch-class and set-class configurations of Stravinsky’s P/I/R/RI arrays and provides a theoretical background for understanding how the set classes are determined by the specific order of the original row. 19. The literature on Heine is too vast even to summarize. Two helpful sources on his life and poetry include Jeffrey Sammons, Heinrich Heine: The Elusive Poet (New Haven and London: Yale University Press), and S. S. Prawer, Heine: The Tragic Satirist: A Study of the Later Poetry, 1827–56 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1961. One irony: Mathilde, who was also known as Crescence Eugénie Mirat, did not speak German, and never knew that her husband was a great poet. 20. I am grateful to Howard Lubin for help on these translations. 21. This term is normally used to describe the correspondence among the closing passages of balanced binary and sonata forms. In general, a closing parallelism associates the end of one section with the end of another section. See Alegant and McLean, “On the Nature of Structural Framing,” for a discussion of the four types of motivic associations that are possible between the beginnings and endings of formal units. 22. See Prawer, Heine: The Tragic Satirist, 182–85. 23. In terms of phrase structure, I hear the vocal line in this section as a sentence, as outlined in Caplin, Classical Form—even though I realize that it is a stretch to argue for

Alegant.indd Sec2:305

4/5/2010 10:23:39 PM

306

notes to pp. 185–227

a “sentence” in twelve-tone space. Still, I hear h1 as a basic idea and h2 as the basic idea repeated, and measures 5–8 as the continuation phase. Overall, the phrase structure (even in this harmonic “vacuum”) matches the 1:1:2 proportional scheme of a typical sentence. 24. Lewin, “A Theory of Segmental Association in Twelve-Tone Music,” and Mead, “Large-Scale Strategy in Arnold Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Music” point out the dyadic formations in the cadenzas of the Violin Concerto, but not from the vantage point of the dyadic complex. Alegant, “Inside the Cadenza of Schoenberg’s Piano Concerto,” discusses trichordal complexes in Op. 42, which are generated by the like trichords of two inversionally related rows. Alegant, “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion,” enumerates the universe of tetrachordal set classes that arise in dyadic complexes among rows related by odd index numbers. These tetrachords include: 4–1[0123], 4– 7[0145], 4–9[0167], 4–10[0235], 4–17[0347], 4–20[0158], 4–23[0257], and 4–28[0369]. Only a fraction of this inventory is available within any given complex. 25. The interesting feature about the dyadic complex in the Violin Concerto is that the hexachords are invariant under T6—a property that Schoenberg takes full advantage of. See especially the virtuosic double-stop passages in measures 25–32 and 187–202 of the first movement, as well as other passages sprinkled throughout the concerto. 26. One important difference between this section and the exposition of Webern’s Symphony is the fact that the pitch structure of the Symphony is completely frozen, with all four inversionally symmetrical rows disposed about the axis A3. Analyses of the movement include (among many others) Mark Starr, “Webern’s Palindrome,” Perspectives of New Music 8.2 (1970): 127–42; Rahn, Basic Atonal Theory; and Bailey, The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern. 27. The scope of the third song of An Mathilde resembles that of Preghiere, of 1962, whose last movement also contains 100 measures. 28. Each partition is a member of a trichordal mosaic. All partitions that belong to the same trichordal mosaic produce the same collection of hexachordal set classes. 29. Thanatos, the Greek god of death, was the son of Nyx and Erebus, and the god of night and darkness. 30. This design is an expanded version of the symmetrical construct in “Die Sonne kommt,” the second Goethe-Lieder. Precedents can be found in the center of the development sections of Webern’s Symphony, Op. 21, and Quartet, Op. 22. 31. Nathan, “Luigi Dallapiccola: Fragments from Conversations,” 325.

Chapter Seven 1. The score indicates that the work can be sung by a mezzo or boy soprano; I can imagine the latter only because Parole is much easier to perform than most of the other vocal works. An Mathilde and Commiato, for instance, are more demanding. I should also add that Parole’s timbral palette is closely related to that of the Cinque canti in its use of pairs or families of instruments: the Canti are written for flute/alto flute, clarinet/bass clarinet, viola/cello, and harp/piano. 2. I submit that the soundscapes for these works are inspired by Webern’s Das Augenlicht, which Dallapiccola heard in 1938 and later described in a diary entry. Some of the key phrases from this account include: “even when one is not working in a strictly contrapuntal way, two notes on a celesta, a light touch on glockenspiel, . . . vibrations that suggest a performance under a glass bell.” 3. Chapter 5 explores these row types in some detail.

Alegant.indd Sec2:306

4/5/2010 10:23:39 PM

notes to pp. 227–237 307 4. 6–Z17[012478] is known as the all-trichord hexachord because it is the only six-note collection that includes all twelve trichordal set classes. For example, if we take the pitch-class collection {0, 1, 2, 4, 7, 8} and use the symbol “∈“ to mean “is a member of,” then: {012} ∈ 3–1[012]; {124} ∈ 3–2[013]; {014} ∈ 3–3[014]; {018} ∈ 3–4[015]; {017} ∈ 3–5[016]; {024} ∈ 3–6[024]; {247} ∈ 3–7[025]; {028} ∈ 3–8[026]; {027} ∈ 3–9[027]; {147} ∈ 3–10[036]; {047} ∈ 3–11[037]; and {048} ∈ 3–12[048]. This set-class appears in works by Milton Babbitt, Robert Morris, and especially Elliott Carter. See for instance Marguerite Boland, The All-trichord Hexachord: Compositional Strategies in Elliot Carter’s Con leggerezza pensos and Gra and a folio of original compositions (MA Thesis, La Trobe University, 1999); Mark Sallmen, “Listening to the Music Itself: Breaking Through the Shell of Elliott Carter’s ‘In Genesis’,”Music Theory Online 13.3 (2007); and David Schiff, The Music of Elliott Carter (London: Eulenburg Books, 1983). 5. The text also forms the basis of the last of Brahms’ op. 121, Vier ernste Gesänge (Four Serious Songs), which incorporates stanzas 1–3, 12, and 13. Some of the broader aspects of text painting in Parole are discussed in Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, and Dana Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture (PhD diss., New York University, 2001). 6. The original term in Greek is agape, which has a distinct meaning from eros. This gave rise to the Latin caritas, which became the English charity. 7. The rest in measure 50 of Parole reminds me of the fermata that occurs in the exact middle (also m. 50) of the second movement of Webern’s Symphony, Op. 21. 8. The tenuto marks often result in audibly asynchronous, or jagged attacks. There are two commercially available CDs of this work: Mode 166, which features chamber-music works by Petrassi and Dallapiccola; and Vox Box 5144, with works by Boulez, Crumb, Dallapiccola, and others. 9. In addition, the operation RT4 relates the corresponding pairs of configurations (a–a’ and b–b’). This operation maps the pitch classes of the trichordal verticalities of P-t onto those of R-2. It does the same for the trichords of I-5 and RI-1. 10. The piano appears only in the few passages with ff dynamics: measures 29–31, 44, and 85–89. 11. It is worth noting that the cross partitions in figures 7.3(b) and (d) are not literal transformations of each other. The (vertical) trichords in the first two columns of the cross partitions are strictly related by T6I (meaning that their corresponding pitch classes sum to the index number of 6), but the trichords in the last two columns are not: the lower two voices are exchanged. (A literal rendition would produce and in the bottom lines of the I-8 cross partition.) Exchanging the pitch classes in the last two trichords preserves set-class 4–13[0136] in the middle line but transforms 4–27[0258] into 4–16[0157]. 12. Much of the analytical work on Schoenberg’s twelve-tone music centers on the associations among segmental and nonsegmental elements of a row. See, for example, Alegant, “Unveiling Schoenberg’s Op. 33b,” and “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion”; Hyde, “Dodecaphony: Schoenberg,” and “Musical Form and the Development of Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Method”; Mead, “Large-Scale Strategy in Arnold Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Music,” and “Twelve-Tone Organizational Strategies: An Analytical Sampler”; Peles, “‘Ist Alles Eins:’ Schoenberg and Symmetry,” and “Interpretation of Sets in Multiple Dimensions: Notes on the Second Movement of Arnold Schoenberg’s String Quartet #3,” among others. 13. The process of “looping,” or returning to an earlier note in a row and continuing onward is common in Dallapiccola’s works. (Indeed, I would argue that looping within an all-interval row is perhaps the main idea in the Piccola musica notturna, written in 1954.) Needless to say, this procedure has the potential either to obscure the presentation of a lin-

Alegant.indd Sec2:307

4/5/2010 10:23:39 PM

308

notes to pp. 237–249

ear row or to enhance it (depending upon choices of pitch, rhythm, timbre, dynamics, and other parameters). 14. Indeed, the strategy of outlining a cross partition and gradually unfolding it into a row is one of Dallapiccola’s favorite opening gambits. Chapter 1 details this strategy in the second Machado song and Schoenberg’s Klavierstück Op. 33a. 15. Many of these pitch- and pitch-class associations exhibit the notion of polarity. See previous chapters as well as Mancini, “Twelve-Tone Polarity in Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola.” 16. This procedure is discussed in chapters 3 and 4; in Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola; and in Kämper, “Ricerca, ritmica e metrica: Beobachtungen am Spätwerk Dallapiccolas.” 17. As noted in Graham Phipps, “Webern studiato da Dallapiccola: Fonti per procedimenti tonali nel Quaderno musicale di Annalibera 1977,” Dallapiccola tends to use derived aggregates only after the linear presentation of complete rows. 18. For analytical applications involving a partitional approach, see Morris and Alegant, “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music”; Alegant, The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate, “Unveiling Schoenberg’s Op. 33b,” or “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion”; Mead, An Introduction to the Music of Milton Babbitt; and Richard Kurth, “Mosaic Polyphony: Formal Balance, Imbalance, and Phrase Formation in the Prelude of Schoenberg’s Suite, Op. 25,” Music Theory Spectrum 14.2 (1992): 188–208. Mead and Kurth use the terms “mosaic” and “mosaic class” instead of “partition” and “mosaic.” 19. In terms of partitional theory, the partitions that are related by transposition and inversion belong to the same mosaic. Thus, the relationship between pitch-class set and set class is analogous to the relationship between partition and mosaic. 20. Z-related partitions share the same set-class components but are not related by Tn or TnI. For more on Z-related partitions and mosaics see Morris and Alegant, “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music” and Alegant, The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate. 21. In this respect the composite sonorities provide another illustration of an association between segmental and nonsegmental elements. 22. This is a classic illustration of linkage, which occurs when the same idea appears at the end of one section and the beginning of another. Schenker’s term for it, “Knüpfentechnik,” is described in Oswald Jonas, Introduction to the Theory of Heinrich Schenker: The Nature of the Musical Work of Art, trans. and ed. by John Rothgeb (New York: Longman, 1982), and John Rothgeb, “Thematic Content: A Schenkerian View,” in Aspects of Schenkerian Theory, ed. by David Beach (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983). 23. The sketches are in LD Mus 90 and 91 in the Dallapiccola archives. Interestingly, there exists an earlier version of “prophetiam.” A sketch dated August 2, 1964 has the voice singing “prophetiam” to the first tetrachord of row I-9. The final version, written a month or so later, uses I-7 instead, and transfers the pitches of “prophetiam” from the voice to the alto flute and harp. I return to this point later on. 24. See Brown, Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola, 261–63, and Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, 102–3, who states: “The solidity of the chord . . . expresses the massiveness of the mountain.” Richardson points out that the chord is based on the first tetrachord of the local RI row, but does not connect this tetrachord to the upper line of the cross partition or to any other representation of 4–12[0236] in the composition. 25. The only instrument absent from the passage is the celesta/piano, perhaps to safeguard against the voice being overwhelmed by the full ensemble. In fact, the voice is silent during the only moment where the entire ensemble plays, in measure 44.

Alegant.indd Sec2:308

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

notes to pp. 249–285 309 26. Another detail: the entire mountain chord passage is based upon the collection {1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8}, which represents set-class 6–5[012367]. As I have shown in previous chapters, this set class matches the discrete hexachords in Schoenberg’s Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31, as well as the hexachords in Requiescant, Ulisse, Preghiere, and Commiato. Indeed, I would argue that [012367] is, along with [013467] and [013679], one of Dallapiccola’s signature hexachords. 27. A final detail in the derived aggregates is that they generate composite sonorities of set-class 4–9[0167]. 28. Brown, Continuity and Coherence, 261–63 makes this same observation. 29. Richardson, Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture, 103–4, vividly describes the repeated attacks on B7 as suggesting “the rarefaction of a solid body turning to smoke,” and the rising dyads as representing “the increasing agony of the condemned choked off by the high B scream.” 30. To my knowledge, this halo effect is unique in Dallapiccola’s oeuvre. 31. This discussion parallels the argument in Alegant, “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion,” 217–21. That article enumerates the universe of inversional designs, explores their salient characteristics, and considers the roles the designs play in selected posttonal and twelve-tone compositions, including the first movement of Webern’s Op. 29, no. 1. It is instructive to compare the array in part 4 of Parole to the array in measures 14–22 in the first of Dallapiccola’s Cinque Canti (1955–56), discussed in chapter 3, and to the array in the opening of An Mathilde (1954–55), discussed in the previous chapter. 32. I use the terms “first-species” and “fourth-species” only to describe note-againstnote versus staggered or syncopated presentations. I do not in any way mean to invoke notions of consonance and dissonance in the vertical or harmonic dimension. 33. There are a total of seven unique designs that incorporate two transpositionally related rows and four odd index numbers: 00/1111, 11/0112, 22/1335, 33/0336, 44/1559, 55/055t, and 66/1177. Each design brings a distinct collection of set classes (see Alegant, When Even Becomes Odd, 220–22). Other designs that are based on even index numbers or combinations of even and odd index numbers have unique set-class inventories, too. 34. Each sonority has a degree of symmetry greater than 1, and is invariant under at least one index number (that is, some TnI). For discussions about the degree of symmetry see Rahn, Basic Atonal Theory, Morris, Composition with Pitch-Classes, or virtually any textbook on twentieth-century analysis. 35. Incidentally, the operations that relate the cross partitions’ rows (R-2, I-5, P-e, RI8) form a mathematical group. 36. Similar “retrograde frames” appear in the Concerto per la notte di Natale dell’anno 1956 and Commiato (though the end of Commiato, on an anguished, ff “Ah!” engenders a progressive rather than a recessive dynamic). 37. An inventory of procedures and constructs includes: axial symmetry, composite sonorities, cross partitions, imitation, pitch, pitch-class, and contour inversion, invertible counterpoint, Klangfarbenmelodie, linkage, palindromes, trichordal derivation, structural framing, and Z-related partitions. 38. This example might well serve as an ear-training aid. In my experience, playing or singing these tetrachords makes it easy to identify them, even in real time. One note: the example shows only the tetrachords in the uppermost lines.

Afterword 1. Dallapiccola, “Incontro con Anton Webern (Pagine di diario 1935–1945),” trans. John Waterhouse.

Alegant.indd Sec2:309

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

Alegant.indd Sec2:310

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

Selected Bibliography Ahn, Sun Hyun. Musical Language and Formal Design in Dallapiccola’s Sicut Umbra. PhD diss., University of Maryland, 2004. Alegant, Brian. “Cross-Partitions as Harmony and Voice Leading in Twelve-Tone Music.” Music Theory Spectrum 23.1 (2001): 1–40. ———. “Inside the Cadenza of Schoenberg’s Piano Concerto.” Intégral 16/17 (2003): 67–102. ———. The Seventy-Seven Partitions of the Aggregate: Analytical and Theoretical Implications. PhD diss., University of Rochester, 1993. ———. “Unveiling Schoenberg’s Op. 33b.” Music Theory Spectrum 18.2 (1996): 143–66. ———. “When Even Becomes Odd: A Partitional Approach to Inversion.” Journal of Music Theory 43.2 (1999): 193–230. Alegant, Brian and Don McLean. “On the Nature of Structural Framing.” NineteenthCentury Music Review 4.1 (2007): 3–29. ———. “On the Nature of Enlargement,” Journal of Music Theory 45.1 (2001): 31–71. Alegant, Brian and John Levey. “Octatonicism in Luigi Dallapiccola’s Twelve-Note Music.” Music Analysis 25.1–2 (2006): 39–88. Amato, Joseph. The Works for Voice and Piano of Luigi Dallapiccola: An Eclectic Analysis. PhD diss., New York University, 1998. Antokoletz, Elliott. The Music of Béla Bartók. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Babbitt, Milton. “Set Structure as a Compositional Determinant.” Journal of Music Theory 5.1 (1961): 72–94. ———. “Some Aspects of Twelve-Tone Composition.” The Score and IMA Magazine 12 (1955): 53–61. ———. “Twelve-Tone Invariants as Compositional Determinants.” Musical Quarterly 46.2 (1960): 246–59. Bailey, Kathryn. “Symmetry as Nemesis: Webern and the First Movement of the Concerto, opus 24.” Journal of Music Theory 40.2 (1996): 245–310. ———. The Twelve-Note Music of Anton Webern: Old Forms in a New Language. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Basart, Ann. The Twelve-Tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola. PhD diss., University of California, 1960. Berger, Arthur. “Problems of Pitch Organization in Stravinsky.” Perspectives of New Music 2.1 (1963): 11–42. Berry, Wallace. Musical Structural and Performance. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Biondi, Michael. Compositional Process in Dallapiccola’s Ulisse: A Survey and Analysis of New Findings in the Dallapiccola Archive, Florence, Italy. PhD diss., City University of New York, 1994.

Alegant.indd Sec2:311

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

312

selected bibliography

Boland, Marguerite Maree. The All-trichord Hexachord: Compositional Strategies in Elliot Carter’s Con leggerezza pensos and Gra and a folio of original compositions. MA thesis, La Trobe University, 1999. Brown, Rosemary. Continuity and Recurrence in the Creative Development of Luigi Dallapiccola. PhD diss., University of Wales, 1977. ———. “Dallapiccola’s Use of Symbolic Self-Quotation.” Studi Musicali IV (1975): 277–309. Caplin, William. Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Cohn, Richard. “Bartok’s Octatonic Strategies: A Motivic Approach.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 44.2 (1991): 262–300. Covach, John. “Schoenberg’s ‘Poetics of Music.’ ” In Schoenberg and Words: The Modernist Years. Edited by Charlotte M. Cross and Russell A. Berman, 309–46. New York: Garland Publishing, 2000. Craft, Robert. Stravinsky: Chronicle of a Friendship. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1972. Dallapiccola, Luigi. Dallapiccola on Opera: Selected Writings of Luigi Dallapiccola, Vol. 1. Translated and edited by Rudy Shackelford. Exeter: Toccata Press, 1987. ———. “My Choral Music.” In The Composer’s Point of View: Essays on Twentieth-Century Choral Music. Edited by R. S. Hines, 151–57. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1963. ———. Parole e musica. Edited by Fiamma Nicolodi. Milan: Il Saggiatore, 1980. ———. Review of Rene Leibowitz, Schoenberg et son école. Le Tre Venezie: rivista d’umanità lettere ed arti 21.7–9 (1947): 287–90. ———. “Sulla strada della dodecafonia.” 1950. Translated by Deryck Cooke as “On the Twelve-Note Road.” Music Survey 4 (1951): 318–32. DeLio, Thomas. “A Proliferation of Canons: Luigi Dallapiccola’s ‘Goethe-Lieder No. 2.’ ” Perspectives of New Music 23.2 (1985): 186–95. Earle, Ben. “Dallapiccola’s Early Synthesis: No. 1, ‘Vespro, tutto riporti,’ from Cinque Frammenti di Saffo.” Music Analysis 25.1–2 (2006): 3–38. Eckert, Michael. “Octatonic Elements in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola.” Music Review 46 (1985): 35–48. ———. Review of Dietrich Kämper: Gefangenschaft und Freiheit. Leben und Werk des Komponisten Luigi Dallapiccola. Journal of Musicology 5.4 (1987): 562–71. ———. Review of Luigi Dallapiccola: Parole e musica. Edited by Fiamma Nicolodi. Journal of Musicology 1.2 (1982): 243–49. ———. “Text and Form in Dallapiccola’s Goethe-Lieder.” Perspectives of New Music 17 (1979): 98–111. Fearn, Raymond. The Music of Luigi Dallapiccola. Rochester: The University of Rochester Press, 2003. Forte, Allen. “Debussy and the Octatonic.” Music Analysis 10.1–2 (1991): 125–69. ———. The Structure of Atonal Music. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973. Fragapane, Paolo. “Le scale alternate di Vito Frazzi.” Rassegna Dorica 4 (1933): 65– 71. Frazzi, Vito. Scale alternate per pianoforte. Florence: A. Forlivesi & Co, 1930. ———. I vari sistemi del “linguaggio musicale.” Siena: Quaderni dell’Accademia Chigiana, 1960.

Alegant.indd Sec2:312

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

selected bibliography 313 Frisch, Walter. Brahms and the Principle of Developing Variation. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Gauldin, Robert. “Pitch Structure in the Second Movement of Webern’s Concerto, Op. 24.” In Theory Only 2.10 (1977): 8–22. Graebner, Eric. “An Analysis of Schoenberg’s Klavierstück, op. 33a,” Perspectives of New Music 12.1/2 (1974): 128–40. Haimo, Ethan. Schoenberg’s Serial Odyssey: The Evolution of his Twelve-Tone Method, 1914– 1928. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990. Hatten, Robert S. Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994. Hyde, Martha. “Dodecaphony: Schoenberg.” In Models of Musical Analysis: Early Twentieth-Century Music. Edited by Jonathan Dunsby, 56–80. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993. ———. “Musical Form and the Development of Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Method.” Journal of Music Theory 29 (1985): 85–143. Jonas, Oswald. Introduction to the Theory of Heinrich Schenker: the Nature of the Musical Work of Art. Translated and edited by John Rothgeb. New York: Longman, 1982. Kämper, Dietrich. “Commiato: Bemerkungen zu Dallapiccolas letztem Werk.” Schweizerische Musikzeitung–Revue Musicale Suisse 4 (1975): 194–200. ———. “Dallapiccola und der Schönberg-Kreis.” In Bericht über den 2. Kongreß der Internationalen Schönberg-Gesellschaft. Edited by R. Stephan and S. Wiesmann, 83–92. Wien: E. Lafite, 1986. ———. Gefangenschaft und Freiheit: Leben und Werk des Komponisten Luigi Dallapiccola. Cologne: Gitarre und Laute Verlagsgesellschaft, 1984. ———. “Ricerca, ritmica e metrica: Beobachtungen am Spätwerk Dallapiccolas.” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik LXXXV (1974): 94–99. Kiesewetter, Peter. “Luigi Dallapiccola: An Mathilde.” Melos 50 (1988): 2–30. Klumpenhouwer, Henry. “The Inner and Outer Automorphisms of Pitch-Class Inversion and Transposition: Some Implications for Analysis with Klumpenhouwer Networks.” Intégral 12 (1998): 81–93. Kramer, Jonathan. “The Row as Structural Background and Audible Foreground: The First Movement of Webern’s First Cantata.” Journal of Music Theory 15 (1971): 155–81. Krieger, Georg. Schönberg Werke für Klavier. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968. Kurth, Richard. “Mosaic Polyphony: Formal Balance, Imbalance, and Phrase Formation in the Prelude of Schoenberg’s Suite, Op. 25.” Music Theory Spectrum 14.2 (1992): 188–208. Leibowitz, René. Schoenberg and his School; The Contemporary Stage of the Language of Music. New York: Philosophical Library, 1949. Lewin, David. Generalized Musical Intervals and Transformations. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. ———. Musical Form and Transformation: 4 Analytic Essays. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. ———. “Some Ideas About Voice-leading Between Pcsets.” Journal of Music Theory 42 (1998): 15–72.

Alegant.indd Sec2:313

4/5/2010 10:23:40 PM

314

selected bibliography

———. “A Theory of Segmental Association in Twelve-Tone Music.” Perspectives of New Music 1.1 (1962): 89–116. ———. “A Tutorial On Klumpenhouwer Networks, Using the Chorale in Schoenberg’s Opus 11, No. 2.” Journal of Music Theory 38 (1994): 79–102. Mancini, David. “Twelve-Tone Polarity in Late Works of Luigi Dallapiccola.” Journal of Music Theory 30.2 (1986): 203–24. Marvin, Elizabeth West. “A Generalization of Contour Theory to Diverse Musical Spaces: Analytical Applications to the Music of Dallapiccola and Stockhausen.” In Concert Music, Rock, and Jazz Since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies. Edited by Elizabeth West Marvin and Richard Hermann. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1995. Mead, Andrew. An Introduction to the Music of Milton Babbitt. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. ———. “Large-Scale Strategy in Arnold Schoenberg’s Twelve-Tone Music.” Perspectives of New Music 24.1 (1985): 120–57. ———. “Some Implications of the Pitch-Class/Order Number Isomorphism Inherent in the Twelve-Tone System: Part One.” Perspectives of New Music 26 (1988): 96–163. ———. “Twelve-Tone Organizational Strategies: An Analytical Sampler.” Intégral 3 (1989): 93–169. ———. “Webern, Tradition, and ‘Composing with Twelve Tones.’ ” Music Theory Spectrum 15.2 (1993): 173–204. Merrill, Thomas. Luigi Dallapiccola’s use of Serial Technique in Four Choral Works: Canti di Prigionia, Canti di Liberazione, Requiescant, and Tempus Destruendi/Tempus Aedificandi. DMA thesis, Cincinnati College Conservatory of Music, 1995. Messiaen, Olivier. La Technique de mon langage musical. Paris: A. Leduc, 1944. Mila, Massimo. “L’incontro Heine-Dallapiccola.” La Rassegna musicale 27.4 (1977): 301–8. Montecchi, Giordano. “Attualità di Dallapiccola.” In Letture e prospettive. Edited by Milo De Santis, 389–416. Lucca: LIM, 1997. Morris, Robert. Composition with Pitch-Classes: A Theory of Compositional Design. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. ———. “New Directions in the Theory and Analysis of Musical Contour.” Music Theory Spectrum 15.2 (1993): 205–28. ———. “Recommendations for Atonal Music Pedagogy in General; Recognizing and Hearing Set-Classes in Particular.” Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy 8 (1994): 75–134. ———. “Voice-leading Spaces.” Music Theory Spectrum 20.2 (1998): 175–208. Morris, Robert and Brian Alegant. “The Even Partitions in Twelve-Tone Music.” Music Theory Spectrum 10 (1988): 74–101. Mosch, Ulrich. “Luigi Dallapiccola e la Scuola di Vienna.” In Dallapiccola: Letture e prospettive. Edited by Milo De Santis, 117–29. Lucca: LIM, 1997. Nathan, Hans. “Luigi Dallapiccola: Fragments from Conversations.” Music Review 27 (1966): 294–312. ———. “On Dallapiccola’s Working Methods.” Perspectives of New Music 15.2 (1977): 34–57.

Alegant.indd Sec2:314

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

selected bibliography 315 ———. “The Twelve-Tone Compositions of Luigi Dallapiccola.” Musical Quarterly 44.3 (1958): 289–310. Neidhöfer, Christoph. “Bruno Maderna’s Serial Arrays.” Music Theory Online 13.1 (2007). Neumann, Peter-Horst and Jürg Stenzl. “Luigi Dallapiccola’s ‘Goethe-Lieder.’ ” In Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft IV, 1980. 171–91. Nicolodi, Fiamma. “Luigi Dallapiccola e la scuola di Vienna: Considerazioni e note in margine a una scelta.” Nuova Rivista Musicale Italiana 17.3/4 (1983): 493–528. Noller, Joachim. “Dodekaphonie via Proust und Joyce: Zur musikalischen Poetik Luigi Dallapiccolas.” Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 51.2 (1994): 131–44. Peles, Stephen. “Interpretation of Sets in Multiple Dimensions: Notes on the Second Movement of Arnold Schoenberg’s String Quartet #3.” Perspectives of New Music 22 (1983–84): 303–52. ———. “‘Ist Alles Eins’: Schoenberg and Symmetry.” Music Theory Spectrum 26.1 (2004): 57–85. Perkins, John. “Dallapiccola’s Art of Canon.” Perspectives of New Music 1.2 (1963): 95–106. Perle, George. Serial Composition and Atonality: An Introduction to the Music of Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern. 3rd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972. Phipps, Graham. “The Classical Italian Vocal Tradition Meets the New Vienna School: Dallapiccola’s Liriche greche.” In Italian Music During the Fascist Period. Edited by Roberto Illiano, 633–55. Cremona: Fondazione Locatelli, 2004. ———. “Webern studiato da Dallapiccola: Fonti per procedimenti tonali nel Quaderno musicale di Annalibera.” In Dallapiccola: Letture e prospettive. Edited by Milo De Santis, 183–202. Lucca: LIM, 1997. Prawer, S. S. Heine: The Tragic Satirist. A Study of the Later Poetry, 1827–1856. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961. Rahn, John. Basic Atonal Theory. New York: Longman, 1980. Richardson, Dana. Dallapiccola’s Formal Architecture. PhD diss., New York University, 2001. Rochberg, George. “Webern’s Search for Harmonic Identity.” Journal of Music Theory 6 (1962): 109–22. Roeder, John. “Voice Leading as Transformation.” In Musical Transformation and Musical Intuitions: Essays in Honor of David Lewin. Edited by Raphael Atlas and Michael Cherlin, 41–58. Roxbury: Ovenbird Press, 1994. Rothgeb, John. “Thematic Content: A Schenkerian View.” In Aspects of Schenkerian Theory. Edited by David Beach, 39–60. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. Rouse, Steven. “Hexachords and Their Trichordal Generators: An Introduction.” In Theory Only 8 (1985): 19–43. Ruffini, Mario. L’Opera di Luigi Dallapiccola: Catalogo Ragionato. Milano: Suvini Zerboni, 2002. Sablich, Sergio. “Commiato: opera ultima, ultima opera.” In Dallapiccola: letture e prospettive. Edited by Mila de Santis, 233–40. Lucca, 1977. ———. Luigi Dallapiccola. Palermo: Edizioni Epos, 2004. Sallmen, Mark. “Listening to the Music Itself: Breaking Through the Shell of Elliott Carter’s ‘In Genesis.’ ” Music Theory Online 13.3 (2007).

Alegant.indd Sec2:315

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

316

selected bibliography

Samet, Bruce. “Hearing Aggregates.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 1985. Sammons, Jeffrey. Heinrich Heine: The Elusive Poet. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1969. Samuel, Jamuna S. Music, Text, and Drama in Dallapiccola’s Il Prigioniero. PhD diss., City University of New York, 2005. Schiff, David. The Music of Elliott Carter. London: Eulenburg Books, 1983. Starr, Mark. “Webern’s Palindrome.” Perspectives of New Music 8.2 (1970): 127–42. Straus, Joseph. “Stravinsky’s ‘Construction of Twelve Verticals’: An Aspect of Harmony in the Serial Music.” Music Theory Spectrum 21.1 (1999): 43–73. ———. Stravinsky’s Late Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. ———. “Uniformity, Balance, and Smoothness in Atonal Voice Leading.” Music Theory Spectrum 25.2 (2003): 305–52. Taruskin, Richard. “Chernomor to Kashchei: Harmonic Sorcery; or Stravinsky’s ‘Angle.’ ” Journal of the American Musicological Society 38 (1985): 72–142. ———. Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions: A Biography of the Works through Mavra. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. Tymoczko, Dmitri. “Stravinsky and the Octatonic: A Reconsideration.” Music Theory Spectrum 24.2 (2002): 68–102. van den Toorn, Pieter. The Music of Igor Stravinsky. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. van Hees, Julia. Luigi Dallapiccolas Bühnenwerk Ulisse: Untersuchungen zu Werk und Werkgenese. Kassel: Gustav Bosse Verlag, 1994. Vlad, Roman. Luigi Dallapiccola. Translated by Cynthia Jolly. Milan: Suvini Zerboni, 1957. Wason, Robert. “Webern’s Variations for Piano, Op. 27: Musical Structure and the Performance Score.” Intégral 1 (1987): 57–103. Waterhouse, John. “Incontro con Anton Webern (Pagine di diario 1935–1945).” Tempo 99 (1972): 2–7. Webern, Horst. “Dallapiccola—Maderna—Nono: Tradition in der italienischen Moderne.” In Bericht über den 2. Kongreß der Internationalen Schönberg-Gesellschaft (Vienna, 1986): 93–98. Wildberger, Jacques. “Dallapiccolas Cinque Canti.” Melos 26 (1959): 7–10. Wilkinson, Edward. Theory and Practice: An Interpretation of Serialism in the Music of Luigi Dallapiccola. PhD diss., Royal Holloway College, University of London, 1982. Wintle, Christopher. “Analysis and Performance: Webern’s Concerto op. 24, Second Movement.” Music Analysis 1.1 (1982): 73–99.

Alegant.indd Sec2:316

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

Index Note: Page numbers in italics indicate musical examples; page numbers followed by fig indicate a figure. accidentals, marking of, 14 aggregate composition: in An Mathilde, 147, 159, 160, 161–62, 162, 168, 183, 199, 201, 202, 204, 218; in Commiato, 96–97, 103; cross partitions and, 20, 23; defined, 14; octatonic collections and, 117–18, 126; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 232, 241; in phase 2 works, 38, 105; in Preghiere, 84, 91, 93, 96; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 31, 38, 292n16; in Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, 126, 129; in Requiescant, 66, 71; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10, 10fig, 38, 45; in Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, 142; weighted vs. unweighted, 291n7. See also derived aggregates or rows An Mathilde (Dallapiccola), 29, 83, 155–225; An die Engel movement, 5, 168, 200–223, 224, 224–25, 305n21, 306n27; axial symmetry, 147, 155, 193, 213; “chorale” realizations, 165–66fig, 167, 168; compositional techniques, 12, 13, 103, 290n1, 302– 3n34; cross partitions, 5, 157–59, 158, 161–62, 172, 223, 225, 282, 305n14; cyclical thinking, 225; Den Strauß, den mir Mathilde band movement, 168–82, 193, 198–200, 214, 219, 290n29, 309n31; derived aggregates, 87, 155, 159, 160, 161–62, 201, 202fig, 204, 208, 224–25, 302–3n34, 304n4; floating rhythm, 147, 164, 201; fourvoice arrays, 5, 159, 162, 163, 164fig, 164–66, 165–66fig, 168, 169, 173, 175, 183, 193, 199, 214, 219, 225, 309n31;

Alegant.indd Sec2:317

Gedächtnisfeier movement, 168, 183– 200, 224, 225, 306n24; Goethe-Lieder compared with, 155; instrumentation, 155; Kiesewetter’s analysis, 155– 56, 223, 304n3, 305n13; “Mathilde” leitmotive, 161, 225; neglect, 155; octatonic elements, 4–5, 147–48, 149, 154, 204, 213, 218, 225; Parole di San Paolo compared with, 226; phrase structure, 305–6n23; poetry for, 155; polarity, 159, 208; recording, 303n2; row composition, 148fig, 156–59, 157, 161–62, 164–66, 168, 190, 227, 229, 304n6; sketches for, 304n8; soundscape, 164; tetrachordal structuring, 162, 164–66, 168, 189–90, 193, 225; text, 155, 161, 168; Ulisse’s quotes, 87, 223 aphoristic forms, 28, 31, 36, 39, 83, 155, 297n4, 301n19 arch forms, large-scale, 12, 74, 96, 149, 151, 193 axial symmetry, 4; in An Mathilde, 147, 155, 193, 213; in Cinque canti, 141; Dallapiccola’s penchant for, 285; in Dialoghi, 74; in Goethe-Lieder, 39; in Il prigioniero, 132; in Parole di San Paolo, 5, 226, 257, 273, 280; in phase 1 works, 103; in phase 2 works, 31, 45, 46, 83; in phase 3 works, 47, 304n10; in Preghiere, 93, 96; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 31; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10, 10fig; in Tartiniana, 12; as Webernian characteristic, 9, 31, 33, 287–88n4; Webern’s use of, 30

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

318



index

Babbitt, Milton, 31, 89, 296n36, 299n2, 307n4 Bach, Johann Sebastian: An Mathilde references to, 5, 223, 224, 225; “Es ist genug” chorale, 301n26; Partita in E Major, 64, 64 BACH derivations, 4, 292n10; composers’ use of, 89; in phase 2 works, 45; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 33–34, 35, 36–38, 66, 105, 292n12; in Schoenberg’s Variations, 36–37, 36–38, 66; Webern’s use of, 30 Beethoven, Ludwig van, 288n9, 299n5 bel canto, 14 Berg, Alban, 29, 285; Altenberg Lieder, Op. 4, 301n19; early works, 46; Lulu, 89; self-quotations, 89; Violin Concerto, 301n26; Wozzeck, 89, 301n25 Berlioz, Hector, 298n1 Boulez, Pierre, 14, 79, 296n36 Brown, Rosemary, 1, 4, 74, 76, 79, 87, 155, 213, 223, 249, 296n35, 297n12 Brunetto Latini, 151 Busoni, Ferruccio, 9, 13 canonic devices: in An Mathilde, 147, 155–56, 183, 188–89, 193, 195, 196–97, 198–200, 199, 201, 213, 223, 224–25; in Cinque canti, 52, 54, 54, 55, 141; in Cinque frammenti di Saffo, 87; Dallapiccola’s penchant for, 285; in Due liriche di Anacreonte, 87; in Goethe-Lieder, 39, 41, 83, 105; in Parole di San Paolo, 248, 273; in phase 1 works, 13, 15–16, 17–18, 24, 28, 86, 103, 288n8, 289n19; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 31, 83; Schoenberg’s use of, 30; in Sex carmina alcaei, 87, 289n18, 292n16; Webern’s use of, 30, 31 Canti di liberazione (Dallapiccola), 13, 29, 292n12, 300n11 Canti di prigionia (Dallapiccola), 10, 12, 300n11 Carter, Elliott, 307n4 Cassado, Gaspar, 120

Alegant.indd Sec2:318

Ciaccona, Intermezzo e Adagio (Dallapiccola), 4, 115fig, 116, 120–24, 154, 300–301n18 Cinque canti (Dallapiccola), 4, 52–57, 83, 103, 223, 303n1; atmospheric sonorities, 52; axial symmetry, 141; compositional techniques, 12, 13, 82, 84, 294n4, 294n12, 309n31; cross partitions, 141; floating rhythm, 54; four-voice arrays, 54, 55, 55, 309n31; ideograms, 56, 57, 83, 105, 141, 143, 302n29; instrumentation, 306n1; octatonic elements, 110, 112, 113, 115fig, 116, 140–41, 154; opening, 53, 74, 93, 105, 141, 142; pitchclass representation, 56fig; rhythm, 52, 54, 83; RI-invariant row, 47–48, 48, 52, 83, 140–41; vocal rows, 54, 54–55 Cinque frammenti di Saffo (Dallapiccola), 12, 14, 87, 289n18, 289n20 Commiato (Dallapiccola), 4, 86, 96–105, 285; analyses, 298n18; Dallapiccola’s illness during composition, 303n39; derived aggregates, 151; floating rhythm, 97, 100; form, 96, 149, 151; hexachord sonorities, 287n2(1), 309n26; instrumentation, 96; octatonic elements, 4, 109, 112, 113, 115fig, 116, 149, 151, 154; opening, 98–99; pitch-class associations, 101–2, 102fig; retrograde frame, 309n36; row characteristics, 96–97, 97fig, 105, 298n20; sketches for, 102–3; third movement opening, 151, 152–53; third movement text, 151, 151fig; vocal lines and incipit trichords, 100–102, 101 “complement union property” (CUP), 113, 115fig, 116, 117 composite sonorities, 242–43, 253, 270, 280, 282, 282–83, 308n21, 309n27 Concerto per la notte di Natale dell’anno 1956 (Dallapiccola), 50, 51, 83, 285, 293n2, 294n4, 294n15, 300n13, 309n36 contour studies, 305n12

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

index 6

cross partitions: 2 type, 159, 172, 179, 4 209n22, 304n9; 3 , 5, 21, 21fig, 63, 158– 59, 172, 230, 233–37, 241, 249–50, 275, 3 277, 277, 278, 280, 282, 289n20; 4 type, 23, 24, 63fig, 63–64, 93, 132, 159, 2 161–62, 172, 179, 224, 290n28; 6 type, 21, 30, 68, 74, 82, 105, 141–42, 159; in An Mathilde, 5, 157–59, 158, 161–62, 172, 223, 225, 282, 305n14; in Cinque canti, 141; Dallapiccola’s explanation, 3–4; Dallapiccola’s penchant for, 24, 285, 304n8; Dallapiccola’s writings on, 103; defined, 20–21, 304n9; even, 21, 21fig; implications, 289n20; in Parole di San Paolo, 5, 226, 230, 233–37, 245, 248, 274–75, 278, 280, 282, 307n11, 309n35; in phase 1 works, 103, 105; in phase 2 works, 30, 83, 86, 105; in phase 3 works, 47, 49, 50; in phase 4 works, 86, 89; in Preghiere, 96, 282; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 33–34; in Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, 24, 27, 105, 290n27, 308n14; in Requiescant, 50, 63, 68, 282; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10fig, 49; Schoenberg’s use of, 22, 23, 105, 289n20; in Sex carmina alcaei, 23, 24; slot-machine permutations, 21, 21fig, 235–36; Webern’s use of, 289n20 Dallapiccola, Laura, 168 Dallapiccola, Luigi: attendance at Das Augenlicht premiere, 49, 285–86, 288n10; “Fragments from Conversation,” 38, 49–50, 66; Italian lyrical influences, 14; literary influences, 9, 23, 105, 239; “On the Twelve-Note Road,” 3–4, 13, 23, 123–24; Pages from a Diary, 293n21; pre-1942 exposure to Webern’s music, 288n10; preserial period, 10; review of Leibowitz’s book, 291n5; Schoenberg’s stylistic influences, 3, 4, 9–10, 10fig, 29, 47–105, 104fig, 122, 189–90, 233, 287n2(1); serial phase 1, 3–4, 9–10, 12, 13–28, 103, 104fig, 105, 120, 122, 154, 223, 226; serial phase 2, 12, 29–46, 82–83, 103, 104fig, 105, 154, 156, 223, 226,

Alegant.indd Sec2:319



319

304n10; serial phase 3, 12, 47–83, 82–83, 84, 103, 104fig, 105, 154, 226, 304n10; serial phase 4, 12, 84–105, 104fig, 154, 226; signature harmonies, 154, 309n26; style periods, 2–3, 9–10, 11fig, 12–13, 82–83, 103, 104fig, 105, 288n6; twelve-tone technique acquisition, 9, 29–30; Webern’s stylistic influences, 3, 4, 9–10, 10fig, 29–46, 47–83, 103, 104fig, 286, 289n14, 291n4. See also specific compositions Darmstadt School, 79, 291n4 Debussy, Claude, 299n5, 300n10 DeLio, Thomas, 39 derived aggregates or rows: in An Mathilde, 87, 155, 159, 160, 161–62, 201, 202fig, 204, 208, 224–25, 302–3n34, 304n4; in Commiato, 151; Dallapiccola’s formal placement of, 308n17; in early works, 302n34; in Goethe-Lieder, 44, 45, 87, 88, 293n22, 298n16, 302n34; group theory in, 293n22; mosaic, 96, 252, 306n28, 308n19; in Parole di San Paolo, 230, 241, 243fig, 248, 252, 253; in phase 2 works, 45, 86, 103; in phase 3 works, 50; set class 6–27 and, 147–49, 151; in Tartiniana seconda, 12; in Tempus destruendi— Tempus aedificandi, 141–42; in Ulisse, 87, 88, 297n8; in Webern Cantata, Op. 29, 58; in Webern Concerto, Op. 24, 44, 45, 87, 103, 305n11; as Webernian characteristic, 10fig, 31, 44, 305n11 Dialoghi (Dallapiccola), 4, 74–83, 103, 285; atmospheric sonorities, 50, 52, 105; axial symmetry, 74; compositional techniques, 12, 82, 84; four-voice arrays, 74, 79; instrumental durations, 76, 78, 79fig, 81, 82, 296n35; as last work of phase 3, 84; multidimensional set presentations, 74, 76; opening, 74, 75–76, 76, 105; pedal point, 87; rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie, 76, 77–78, 78–79, 80–81, 82, 84, 105, 155, 241, 298n21; RI-invariant row, 47–48, 48, 74, 83, 84 Due liriche di Anacreonte (Dallapiccola), 14, 87, 290n30

4/5/2010 10:23:41 PM

320



index

Due pezzi (Dallapiccola), 285 Due studi (Dallapiccola), 13, 28, 110, 115fig, 285 dyadic complexes, 183, 189fig, 189–90, 224, 225, 274, 306n24 dynamics: in An Mathilde, 159, 161; Dallapiccola’s views on, 49–50, 103; in Parole di San Paolo, 226; in phase 1 works, 14, 24, 129, 140; in phase 2 works, 41, 164, 294n9; in phase 3 works, 49–50, 71, 74, 76, 105; in phase 4 works, 93–95; Schoenberg’s use of, 23 Eckert, Michael, 4, 9, 110, 112, 291n3, 299n5 Eimert, Herbert: Lehrbuch der Zwölftontechnik, 30–31 elision, 33, 295n18 false relations, 30–31, 93, 291n3 Fearn, Raymond, 1, 4, 74, 87, 223, 288n6, 297n12, 301n20, 301n21, 302n30, 303n39 Finney, Ross Lee, 303n41 “fixed-do” pitch-class integer notation, 110 floating rhythm, 3, 31; in An Mathilde, 147, 164, 201; in Cinque canti, 54; in Commiato, 97, 100; Dallapiccola’s writings on, 103; in Goethe-Lieder, 38–39, 41, 43–46, 87, 88, 105; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 232, 237, 241, 274; in phase 2 works, 38–39, 41, 43–46, 105; in phase 3 works, 47, 49; in phase 4 works, 86; in Preghiere, 91, 93, 96; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 105; in Tartiniana, 12; in Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, 141; Webern’s use of, 286 flutter tonguing, 86 Fortspinnung, 100 four-voice arrays: in An Mathilde, 5, 159, 162, 163, 164fig, 164–66, 165–66fig, 168, 169, 173, 175, 183, 193, 199, 214, 219, 225, 309n31; in Cinque canti, 54, 55, 55, 309n31; in Dialoghi,

Alegant.indd Sec2:320

74, 79; in Parole di San Paolo, 5, 264, 265, 267fig, 267–68, 269–70, 270, 273–74, 309n31; in phase 2 works, 30; in phase 3 works, 4, 48–49, 83, 84, 103, 304n10, 305n17; in Requiescant, 60–61, 61, 63, 71, 82; in Tartiniana seconda, 12; as Webernian characteristic, 10fig, 48–49, 58 Goethe-Lieder (Dallapiccola), 4, 29, 38–46, 103; An Mathilde compared with, 155, 225; axial symmetry, 39; Cinque canti compared with, 52, 54; compositional techniques, 12, 31, 103; derived aggregates, 44, 45, 87, 88, 293n22, 298n16, 302n34; dynamics, 294n9; floating rhythm, 38–39, 41, 43–46, 87, 88, 105; Parole di San Paolo compared with, 226; rhythm, 83; row distribution, 41, 304n7; “Die Sonne kommt,” 39, 40, 41, 306n30; “Der Spiegel sagt mir,” 41, 42–43, 43–44; Webern’s influence on, 292n18, 293n20 Heine, Heinrich: An Mathilde settings, 155, 161, 168, 169fig, 183, 200–201, 223; literature on, 305n19 hexachordal structuring: all-combinatorial, 252; in An Mathilde, 204, 213; in Cinque canti, 52–54, 105; in Commiato, 97, 99–100; in Dialoghi, 74, 79, 105; mosaic, 96, 252, 306n28, 308n19; within octatonic collections, 112–20; in phase 2 works, 105; in phase 3 works, 49, 83; in phase 4 works, 84, 86, 89, 105; in Preghiere, 90fig, 90–91, 93, 96; in Requiescant, 64, 65, 68; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10, 10fig, 49, 52, 82, 90–91, 287n2(1), 287–88n4; set class 6–5[012367], 68, 82, 86, 97, 97fig, 101, 105, 303n40, 309n26; set class 6–27[013469], 113, 114, 115fig, 117fig, 117–18, 118fig, 120–40, 147–49, 151, 154, 213, 218, 225, 300n16, 301n24, 303nn40–41; set class 6–30[013679], 113, 114,

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

index



321

115fig, 117, 117fig, 118, 119fig, 140–54, 143, 146fig, 204, 225, 299n2, 303nn40–41; Z-related, 113–14, 115fig, 156, 190, 227, 242, 257, 300n10, 304n7, 307n4, 308n20 homophonic texture: in Cinque canti, 52; cross partitions and, 20–21; in phase 2 works, 13, 30, 38, 83, 164; in phase 3 works, 47, 83; in phase 4 works, 86; in Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado, 27; in Requiescant, 61, 74; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10; in Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, 141; Webern’s use of, 58, 60

musicale di Annalibera, 83, 105; in Tartiniana, 12 irregular partitioning, 4; in An Mathilde, 179, 195, 223; in Parole di San Paolo, 5; in phase 2 works, 45; in phase 4 works, 89; in Preghiere, 90, 93; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 33–34, 292n16; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 31 isomorphic partitioning, 68, 93, 122, 295n25, 298n15

ideograms: in Cinque canti, 56, 57, 83, 105, 141, 143, 302n29; in Concerto per la notte di Natale dell’anno 1956, 83, 294n15; Dallapiccola’s use of, 87, 103, 105, 294n15; defined, 294n15, 302n29; in phase 3 works, 4; row setting approach and, 83; in Sicut Umbra, 294n15, 302n29 index numbers, even: in An Mathilde, 164; defined, 31; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 257, 264; in phase 1 works, 103; in phase 2 works, 31, 43; in phase 3 works, 47; possibilities precluded by, 291n7; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 31, 33; setclass inventories, 292n9, 300n14; as Webernian characteristic, 10fig index numbers, odd: in An Mathilde, 164, 190; defined, 31; in Goethe-Lieder, 44; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 241; in phase 3 works, 47; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10fig, 31; set-class inventories, 292n9, 300n14, 306n24, 309n33 inversional combinatoriality, 4, 84; Dallapiccola’s use of, 96, 103; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 30, 31, 90, 287–88n4 irregular canons: in An Mathilde, 147, 188; in Cinque canti, 52, 54; Dallapiccola’s penchant for, 285; in GoetheLieder, 38, 41, 43, 83, 105; in Quaderno

Kämper, Dietrich, 76, 79, 84, 86 Kaufmann, Harald, 151 Kiesewetter, Peter, 155–56, 223, 304n3, 305n13 Klangfarbenmelodie: Dallapiccola’s use of, 49, 68, 86; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10, 10fig, 49 Klangfarbenmelodie, rhythmicized. See rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie

Alegant.indd Sec2:321

Job (Dallapiccola), 114, 115fig Joyce, James, 9, 14, 23, 239

Leibowitz, René, 29–30, 48–49, 291n5 leitrhythms, 4, 71, 73, 74, 82, 87, 105 Ligeti, György, 294n10 linear row presentations, 9; in An Mathilde, 168, 179, 190, 202, 213, 224, 225; in Parole di San Paolo, 270, 273; in phase 1 works, 13, 24, 28; in Sex carmina alcaei, 14 linkage technique, 185, 188, 295n18, 308n22 Liriche greche (Dallapiccola), 14, 109, 259, 288n8, 289n14. See also Cinque frammenti di Saffo; Due liriche di Anacreonte; Sex carmina alcaei Liszt, Franz, 298n1 literature, modernist, 9, 23, 105, 239 looping, 307–8n13 Machado, Antonio, 14, 131 Maderna, Bruno, 296n36 Malipiero, Gian Francesco, 9, 10 Mann, Thomas, 9

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

322



index

Marsia (Dallapiccola), 12–13 Messiaen, Olivier, 109, 291n3, 299n4 metric modulations, 82 Michelangelo, 14 modes of limited transposition, 109, 301n20 Morris, Robert, 113, 299n2, 307n4 multidimensional set presentations: in Dialoghi, 74, 76; in phase 3 works, 4; in Requiescant, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 105; as Schoenbergian characteristic, 10fig, 82, 105; Schoenberg’s use of, 66, 67, 68; in Ulisse, 87 Mussorgsky, Modeste, 298n1, 299n5 octatonic collections: composers using, 109, 298n1; Dallapiccola’s approach to, 4, 109–54, 204, 299n8; Eckert’s study, 110, 111, 112; hexachordal filter, 4, 52, 96, 112–13, 301n20, 301n28; “Petrushka chord,” 52, 96, 113; table of, 114fig; twelve-tone, 109, 290n26, 299n2. See also specific compositions octave doublings: Dallapiccola’s avoidance of, 30–31, 46, 226; in phase 1 works, 13, 16, 28, 131; in Preghiere, 93 orchestration: of Dallapiccola’s Cinque canti, 52; in Parole di San Paolo, 226; in phase 1 works, 14, 27; Schoenberg’s style, 10, 10fig; Webern’s style, 9, 10fig, 52 palindromes: in An Mathilde, 168, 213; in Cinque canti, 52, 54, 54–55, 56, 294n4; in Commiato, 96, 99, 102; in Concerto per la notte, 294n4; in Dialoghi, 74; in Goethe-Lieder, 39, 293n20; in Parole di San Paolo, 258, 258–59, 268; in phase 2 works, 45, 86; in phase 3 works, 4, 47, 103; in Preghiere, 297n12; in Requiescant, 64, 65, 82; in Tartiniana seconda, 12; as Webernian characteristic, 31; Webern’s use of, 30, 293n20, 294n4 Parole di San Paolo (Dallapiccola), 5, 86, 226–83, 269fig; anachronistic

Alegant.indd Sec2:322

construction, 5, 84; axial symmetry, 5, 226, 257, 273, 280; composite sonorities, 242–43, 253, 270, 280, 282, 282–83, 308n21, 309n27; compositional strategies, 226–27, 280, 282; cross partitions, 5, 226, 230, 233–37, 245, 248, 274–75, 278, 280, 282, 307n11, 309n35; derived aggregates, 230, 241, 243fig, 248, 252, 253; floating rhythm, 226, 232, 237, 241, 274; four-voice arrays, 5, 264, 265, 267fig, 267–68, 269–70, 270, 273–74, 309n31; instrumentation, 226, 306n1; invariant relationships, 240, 275; large-scale form, 229–30, 231fig, 232, 237; “mountain” chord, 249, 250, 250, 257, 259, 280, 309n26; opening ritornello, 232–36, 233, 241, 275; orchestration, 52; palindromic relationships, 258, 258–59, 268; part 1, 237, 238–39, 239, 240fig, 241–43, 242, 245; part 2, 245, 246–48, 248–50, 252; part 3, 252–53, 254–56, 257–59; part 4, 259, 260–62, 262, 264, 265–66, 267fig, 267–68, 270; part 5, 270, 271–72, 273–75, 276, 277; pedal point, 87, 241, 242, 259, 282, 297n9; “prophecy,” 262, 263, 264; rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie, 241; row characteristics, 227, 228, 239, 240, 241, 252, 257, 304n6; sketches, 308n23; soundscapes, 226, 232, 245, 259; structural frame, 277, 279; tetrachordal structuring, 229fig, 232–37, 249–50, 251–52, 281, 282; text, 227– 29, 230fig, 270; voice-type for, 306n1; Webern’s influence on, 286 partitioning strategies: in An Mathilde, 5, 159–60, 168, 183, 185fig, 199, 201–2, 208, 224–25; in Ciaccona, 122; in Commiato, 100, 102–3; Dallapiccola’s development of, 3; isomorphic, 295n25, 298n15; nonadjacent, 285; in Parole di San Paolo, 5, 232, 241, 252; in phase 4 works, 86; in Preghiere, 91, 93; in Requiescant, 66, 68, 71; of Schoenberg, 30; in Tempus

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

index destruendi—Tempus aedificandi, 141, 142; twelve-tone partition, 296n29; in Variazioni, 292n13. See also cross partitions; irregular partitioning Paulinus of Aquileia, 142 pedal points: durational series applied to, 87; in phase 1 works, 13, 288n8; in phase 2 works, 30–31, 46; in phase 4 works, 95, 241, 242, 259, 282, 297n9 “Petrushka chord,” 52, 96, 113 Piccola musica notturna (Dallapiccola), 29, 110, 112, 114, 115fig, 285, 299n8, 307–8n13 pitch-class inversion properties, 31, 280 polarity, 103, 123, 123–24, 159, 208, 223, 297n14, 300–301n18, 308n15 polyphonic texture: in An Mathilde, 5, 164, 166; Dallapiccola’s writings on, 103; Leibowitz on, 30, 48–49; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 273; in phase 1 works, 13, 103; in phase 2 works, 13, 83, 164; in phase 3 works, 47, 83; in Requiescant, 63; in Sex carmina alcaei, 15–16; as Webernian characteristic, 9, 10fig, 30 Preghiere (Dallapiccola), 4, 89–96, 103; axial symmetry, 93, 96; cross partitions, 96, 282; as first work of phase 4, 84, 86; floating rhythm, 91, 93, 96; formal overview, 89, 89fig; hexachord sonorities, 309n26; octatonic elements, 115fig; opening, 90–91, 92, 93; palindrome, 297n12; Parole di San Paolo style contrasted with, 5; pedal point, 87; referential tetrachords, 90, 91; row complex, 105; third movement, 93–95, 94, 95, 95fig prigioniero, Il (Dallapiccola), 132–40, 285; axial symmetry, 132; form, 28; “Fratello” leitmotive, 132, 138, 140, 140; “Hope” row, 301n22; “Liberty” row, 301n22; octatonic elements, 4, 110, 115fig, 116, 119, 120, 132, 136, 137, 138, 140, 149, 154; opening, 132, 133, 162; “Prayer” row, 132, 133, 138, 140, 140, 301n22; Psalm 51 quoted in, 136, 137, 138; “radiant”

Alegant.indd Sec2:323



323

B-major triads in, 87; scene 2 end, 132, 134–36, 136; scene 3, 136, 137, 138, 301n23; scene 4 climax, 138, 139, 140 Prima serie dei cori di Michelangelo Buonarroti il giovane (Dallapiccola), 302n29 Proust, Marcel, 9, 23, 239 punctuation chords, 183, 199, 225, 282–83 Quaderno musicale di Annalibera (Dallapiccola), 4, 29, 31–38, 103; aphoristic form, 46; axial symmetry, 31; BACH derivations, 33–34, 35, 36–38, 66, 105, 292n12; compositional techniques, 12, 292n16, 302n34; “Contrapunctus primus,” 83, 291n3, 294n12; “Contrapunctus secundus,” 31, 33, 34, 46, 103; cross partitions, 33–34; dynamics, 294n9; floating rhythm, 105; orchestral arrangement, 29, 36; “Simbolo,” 33–34, 35, 36–38, 66; Webern’s Variations for Piano compared with, 31, 33 Quattro liriche di Antonio Machado (Dallapiccola), 3, 14, 24, 25–26, 27, 103; Cinque canti compared with, 54; cross partitions, 26, 27, 105, 290n27, 308n14; distribution of 6–27 hexachords, 126, 127fig; dynamics, 294n9; first song, 124–31, 301n20; octatonic elements, 4, 109–10, 110, 113, 115fig, 116, 124, 125fig, 126, 127fig, 128, 129, 130–31, 131, 154; Parole di San Paolo compared with, 226; second song opening, 162; similarities to prigioniero material, 132 Ravel, Maurice: Bolero, 64, 64 Rencesvals (Dallapiccola), 288–89n13, 300n11, 302n34 Requiescant (Dallapiccola), 4, 58–74, 103, 223; atmospheric sonorities, 50, 51, 71, 105; Bach’s E-major Partita and, 64, 64; compositional techniques, 82, 84, 295n16; cross partitions, 50, 63, 68, 282; elided tetrachords, 64,

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

324



index

Requiescant (Dallapiccola)—(cont’d) 66fig, 82; formal design, 63, 63; fourvoice arrays, 60–61, 61, 63, 71, 82; hexachord sonorities, 86, 287n2(1), 309n26; mood, 296n30; multidimensional set presentations, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 105; opening, 60–61, 62, 68, 70, 71; Ravel’s Bolero and, 64, 64; rhythm and timbre, 68, 71, 72–73, 74, 82, 105, 295n24, 298n21; RI-invariant row, 47–48, 48, 58, 60, 82, 83, 97, 103; row chart for, 64, 65, 295n21; sketches for, 60, 61, 63–64, 64, 295n19, 295n24; Ulisse’s quotes, 87 retrograde-symmetrical rows, 4, 12 rhythm, proportional, 79, 155, 295n24 rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie: Dallapiccola’s use of, 105, 155, 226; in Dialoghi, 76, 77–78, 78–79, 80–81, 82, 84, 105, 155, 241, 298n21; in Parole di San Paolo, 241; in phase 3 works, 4; in Ulisse, 155, 241, 298n21 Richardson, Dana, 4, 112, 249, 299n8, 300n11, 302n30, 308n24 RI-invariant rows, 47–48, 48, 52, 58, 60, 64, 74, 82–83, 84, 93, 97, 103, 140–41, 305n17 Rimsky-Korsakov, Nikolay, 298n1 ritornellos: in An Mathilde, 203; in Parole di San Paolo, 232–36, 233, 237, 241, 243, 249–50, 275, 277, 280; in Preghiere, 89, 91, 93, 96, 298n15; in Requiescant, 61 row composition, 9; in An Mathilde, 156– 68, 185, 193, 227, 229; in Cinque canti, 52–53, 140–41; in Commiato, 96–97, 97fig, 99–101, 298n20; in Dialoghi, 74, 84; multidimensional set presentations, 4, 66, 67, 68, 69, 74, 76, 105; octatonic elements in, 109–10; in Parole di San Paolo, 227, 228–29, 257, 270, 273; in phase 1 works, 14–16, 16, 19, 19–20, 20fig; in phase 2 works, 30, 33, 38, 39, 41, 44; in phase 3 works, 83, 103, 105; in phase 4 works, 84, 86; in Preghiere, 90, 90fig, 93; in Quaderno musicale di Annalibera, 38, 292n16; in

Alegant.indd Sec2:324

Requiescant, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71; of Schoenberg, 10, 10fig, 30; semitone permeation in late works, 84, 85, 86; in Sicut Umbra, 227, 229; of Webern, 10fig, 30, 38, 44, 58, 293n3. See also derived aggregates and row; hexachordal structuring; symmetrical rows Schoenberg, Arnold: American period, 9; analytical focuses, 307n12; avoidance of self-quotation, 89; Dallapiccola influenced by, 3, 4, 29, 47, 84–105, 122, 226, 233, 287n2(1); Drei Lieder, Op. 48, 86; dyadic complexes used by, 189–90; early atonal works, 46; Five Pieces for Orchestra, Op. 16, 290n28; Klavierstück, Op. 33a, 22, 23, 30, 105, 299n2, 308n14; Klavierstück, Op. 33b, 30, 48, 296n27; Phantasy for Violin and Piano, 48; Piano Concerto, Op. 42, 189, 189fig, 190, 289n20, 296n27, 306n24; Prelude, Op. 44, 48; String Quartet No. 4, Op. 37, 30; String Trio, Op. 45, 30; stylistic traits, 9–10, 10fig, 31, 287–88n4; Variations for Orchestra, Op. 31, 30, 36–37, 36–38, 66, 67, 68, 82, 86, 97, 105, 287n2(1), 292n14, 296n28, 309n26; Violin Concerto, Op. 36, 30, 189–90, 306nn24–25; Wind Quintet, Op. 26, 48 segmental and nonsegmental harmonies, associating, 226, 236fig, 236–37, 239, 240, 304n8, 307n12, 308n21 segmental invariance, 93, 239 self-quotation and borrowing, 4, 84, 87, 88, 89, 285, 297n8, 298n21 semicombinatorial rows, 10, 10fig, 48, 66, 86, 96, 227 serialism: Dallapiccola’s study of, 9–10; development of, 2–3, 29–30, 287– 88n4; octatonicism in, 109, 299n2; polyphony in, 30; total serialism, 79, 82, 296n36 set-class redundancy, 53, 96, 241, 294n5

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

index seventh chords, use of, 16, 19, 33, 46, 113, 288–89n13, 304n3 Sex carmina alcaei (Dallapiccola), 3, 14–20, 103; “Canon perpetuus,” 15–16, 17–18, 289n18; canonic passages, 87, 292n16; cross partitions, 23, 24; dedication to Webern, 289n14; “Expositio,” 14–15, 15–16, 289n18; octatonic elements, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115fig, 116, 117, 122 Sicut Umbra (Dallapiccola), 86, 285; hexachordal structuring avoided in, 84; ideogram, 294n15, 302n29; soundscape of, 226; source row, 227, 229, 304n6 Sonatina canonica (Dallapiccola), 3, 12, 288n8 sound masses, 49, 50 soundscapes: development of, 3; late Schoenbergian, 10, 103; late Webernian, 9, 49, 58, 103; in phase 1 works, 4, 14; in phase 2 works, 33, 46, 83; in phase 3 works, 47, 49, 74, 83; in phase 4 works, 4, 86 Sprechstimme, 9 Stockhausen, Karlheinz, 79, 296n36 Stravinsky, Igor, 299n2, 305n18; Requiem Canticles, 162 structural framing, 27, 277, 279, 290n25 symmetrical rows: in phase 3 works, 83, 294n5; in Requiescant, 60, 61, 82; in Sex carmina alcaei, 14–15, 16; as Webernian characteristic, 9, 10fig, 47–48, 294n5 Tartini, Giuseppe, 12 Tartiniana (Dallapiccola), 3, 12, 13, 29 Tartiniana seconda (Dallapiccola), 3, 12, 13, 29, 83, 303n1 Tempus destruendi—Tempus aedificandi (Dallapiccola), 86, 141–47, 298n21, 302n30, 302n32; octatonic elements, 4, 112, 113, 115fig, 116, 117, 141–42, 146–47, 154, 299n8 text setting: in An Mathilde, 5, 161, 168, 179, 188, 224–25; in Goethe-Lieder, 43, 87; in Parole di San Paolo, 226, 237,

Alegant.indd Sec2:325



325

262, 263, 264; in phase 1 works, 14, 27; in Preghiere, 93, 94–95; in Sex carmina alcaei, 14 Three Questions with Two Answers (Dallapiccola), 86, 285 timbre, emphasis on, 50, 68, 71, 82, 84, 86, 155, 294n12 tonal translations, 3, 11fig, 12–13, 29, 83, 84, 103 total serialism, 79, 82, 296n36 Tre laudi (Dallapiccola), 87 Tre poemi (Dallapiccola), 28, 109, 110, 113–14, 115fig, 285 triads, use of, 16, 19–20, 33, 46, 87, 113, 119, 138, 288–89n13, 304n3 trichordal derivation, 4; in An Mathilde, 148, 155, 156, 195, 199, 201, 202, 204, 208, 218, 223, 224–25, 227, 229, 304n4; in Commiato, 151; in GoetheLieder, 39; in Parole di San Paolo, 5, 226, 227, 229, 232, 234, 235, 241–43, 244–45, 245; in phase 2 works, 44; in Sicut Umbra, 227, 229; in Ulisse, 149; of Webern, 44 twelve-tone partition (defined), 296n29 Ulisse (Dallapiccola), 285; atmospheric sonorities, 50; cross partitions, 282; derived aggregates, 87, 88, 297n8; hexachord sonorities, 287n2(1), 309n26; multidimensional set presentations, 87; octatonic elements, 4, 148–49, 150, 154; Parole di San Paolo style contrasted with, 5; pedal point, 87; “radiant” B-major triads, 87; rhythmicized Klangfarbenmelodie, 155, 241, 298n21; row complex, 84, 85, 86, 97, 105; self-quotations, 87, 88, 223, 297n8, 298n21 unordered row presentations, 10, 10fig Variazioni (Dallapiccola), 29, 36, 292n13 Verdi, Giuseppe, 299n5, 303n37 Vlad, Roman, 4, 109–10, 112, 288–89n13 Vogel, Wladimir, 10, 285 Volo di notte (Dallapiccola), 10, 87

4/5/2010 10:23:42 PM

326



index

Wagner, Richard: An Mathilde references to, 5, 223, 224, 225 Webern, Anton: Das Augenlicht, 12, 30, 48–49, 103, 162, 193, 285–86, 288n10, 306n2; avoidance of selfquotation, 89; Cantata, Op. 29, 4, 12, 47–48, 48, 58, 59–60, 60, 63, 103, 162, 267fig, 268, 295n17; Cantata, Op. 31, 12, 48, 103, 162, 294n13; Concerto for Nine Instruments, Op. 24, 44, 45, 87, 103, 241–42, 288n10, 289n20, 293n21, 305n11; Dallapiccola influenced by, 3, 4, 29–46, 47–49, 58, 60, 226, 286, 289n14, 291n4; early atonal works of, 46; Five Canons on Latin Texts, Op. 16, 292n18; late

Alegant.indd Sec2:326

period, 9; Saxophone Quartet, Op. 22, 293n20, 306n30; String Quartet, Op. 28, 30, 162; stylistic traits, 9–10, 10fig, 30, 31, 44, 287–88n4, 293n3; Symphony, Op. 21, 30, 48, 52, 162, 193, 293n20, 294n5, 299n2, 306n26, 306n30, 307n7; use of elision, 33, 295n18; Variations for Piano, Op. 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 103, 293n20, 294n4 whole-tone collection, 48, 97, 132, 193, 257, 268, 294n6, 300n13, 301n26 Wildberger, Jacques, 52 Wilkinson, Christopher, 9 World War II, end of, 29–30 Z-related set classes (defined), 290n24

4/5/2010 10:23:43 PM

Brian Alegant is professor of music theory at the Oberlin College Conservatory.

Cover image: The crucifix ideogram in Cinque canti, iii, Sugarmusic s.p.a. – Edizioni Suvini Zerboni, Milano (Italy). Background photo by Filtran. Cover design by Frank Gutbrod

Alegant_cover.indd 1

Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola

“Alegant’s sophisticated, accessible analyses deeply enrich our understanding of one of the most fascinating sound worlds from the twentieth century. The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallpiccola is a major achievement.” —Christoph Neidhöfer, associate professor (music theory), Schulich School of Music, McGill University

Alegant The

L

uigi Dallapiccola was one of twentieth century’s most accomplished and admired composers. His music incorporated many of the twelve-tone techniques developed by Arnold Schoenberg, Alban Berg, and Anton von Webern, but blended their expressionistic impulses with an Italianate sense of lyricism. Brian Alegant’s The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola traces the evolution of Dallapiccola’s compositional technique over a thirtyyear period (1942–74). Using both historical and music-analytical lenses, this book documents the influences of Webern and Schoenberg (many of which have not been previously disclosed), and highlights Dallapiccola’s innovative handling of harmony, form, and text setting. The Twelve-Tone Music of Luigi Dallapiccola sheds light on several works that have been virtually ignored and provides a long-needed account of Dallapiccola’s idiosyncratic approach to twelve-tone composition. The first part of the book builds a conceptual and theoretical framework for the analysis of his twelve-tone music. The second part provides a fuller picture of his harmonic language and his penchant for text setting. Alegant’s Dallapiccola book will be a crucial source of insights for readers— theorists, musicologists, composers, conductors, performers, pedagogues—who are interested in twentieth-century music in general and postwar Italian music and the Second Viennese School in particular.

Twelve-Tone Music of L uigi D allapiccola

The

2/4/10 12:19:52 PM