Harbinson-Boulez Third Sonata

8/16/2019 Harbinson-Boulez Third Sonata

1/6

Performer Indeterminacy and Boulez's Third SonataAuthor(s): William G. HarbinsonSource: Tempo, New Series, No. 169, 50th Anniversary 1939-1989 (Jun., 1989), pp. 16-20Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/945318Accessed: 17/03/2009 15:26

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Tempo.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/945318?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/945318?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/6

William

G.

Harbinson

Performer

Indeterminacy

nd

Boulez's Third

Sonata

Why

compose

works

destined o be renewedat

each

performance?

ecause

development

hat s fixed

n

a

final

way

hasstruck

me

asno

longer

oinciding xactly

with the current tate of musical hought,with the

very

evolutionof musical

echnique,

which t mustbe

recognized

s

turning

more

and more toward the

search

for a

relative

universe,

toward

a

permanent

discovery comparable

o a

'permanent

evolution'1

With these

words,

Pierre

Boulez

opened

the

article entitled

'Sonate,

que

me

veux-tu?'

in

1963.

Referring

to his

Third Piano

Sonata

-

portions

of

which first

appeared

in

I955

-

Boulez

presented

his

arguments supporting

composi-

tions that contain

'open'

or

'mobile' forms.

'Fluidity

of form must

integrate

fluidity

of

vocabulary',2

Boulez stated.

The

fluidity

or

'freedom' of

the

musical

vocabulary

that was

available

to a

mid-2oth

century

composer

is

undeniable. Refined

systems

of

pitch

organization

(from

Schoenberg

to Webern to Stockhausen and

beyond)

freed

the

individual tone

from

binding,

conventional

relationships.

With

the

advent

of

integral

serialism

in

the

early

I950s,

register, dynamics,

articulation,

and

eventually

form fell under the

control of the

series;

yet

the

aural result

of

integral

serialism was a fluid and

kaleidoscopic

effect that

as

easily

might

have

been

derived

by

chance. In search

of

large-scale

musical forms

that

were

structurally

(and

philosophically)

accordant to

the smaller

components

of their

Boulez's Third Sonata

is

equally

worthy

of

study,

and the

present essay

focusses

on

its

'Formant

2',

the movement entitled

Trope.

Although

the aesthetic,

philosophical,

and

theoretical

arguments

for or

against

the

very

existence

of

mobile

form are

significant

and

at

times

enlightening,

those concerns are not

primary

here. The musical

relationships

(i.e.

thematic,

intervallic,

rhythmic,

and

formal

relationships)

that

support

the section entitled

'Parenthese'

from

Boulez's

Trope

are

of

particular

nterest.

So is the manner in which

these structural

relationships might

be effected

by performer

indeterminacy.

In relation to the restrictions of

integral

serialism,

composers incorporated

various

degrees

of

unpredictability

within their

works.

This

generally

was

accomplished

in one of

two

ways:

composing

(or

deriving)

the

composition

through

indeterminate

means

(e.g.

the

throwing

of

dice),

or

allowing

the

performer

certain

choices

within

defined

limits which

allowed

him

to alter

and

ultimately shape

the form

of

the

composition.

The former is known as

composer

indeterminacy';

the latter as

'performer

ndeterminacy'. Having

written

one

of

the most automated

compositions

in

the

history

of music

(Structures

a,

1952),

Boulez

altered

his

course,

employing

a freer serial

technique

as well as

performer

ndeterminacy

n

the

Third Piano

Sonata.

Ex.1 Formants

Antiphonie

Trope

_

Constellation

(Constellation-Miroir)

Strophe

Sequence

I

compositions,

composers experimented

with a

variety

of

procedures

that

led

to less

predictable

forms. Stockhausen's

KlavierstuckXI

(I956),

in

which the

performer

chooses

the order of

19

composed

sections,

is

probably

one

of

the more

famous

experiments

in

mobile

form.

However,

Pierre

Boulez,

'Sonate,

que

me

veux-tu?'

Perspectives

of

New

Music,

I

(Spring,

I963),

p.32-344.

2

Ibid.,

P.33.

The sonata

is a

five-movement

'work-in-

progress'.

To

date,

only

the

Trope

and

Constellation

ovements

(or

formants,

as Boulez

prefers)

have

been

released.

The

mobility

of

form

that

permeates

every

structural

evel of the

sonata

is

apparent

nitially

in

the

organization

of

the

formants. The

five formants must be

performed

in one of

eight

available

arrange-

ments

(Example

I).

The

Constellation

ormant

I


3/6

Performerndeterminacy

nd

Boulez's Third

Sonata

17

(or

its

retrograde,

Constellation-Miroir)

must

remain at the

centre

of the

sonata. The

first and

second formants

(Antiphonie/Trope)

may

be the

initial or terminal pairof the sonata;the same is

true of

the

Strophe/Sequencepair.

However,

Trope

and

Strophe

must

remain

equidistant

from

the

central formant.

(For

example,

if

Trope

is

performed

as

the initial

formant,

i.e.

prior

to

Antiphonie,

then

Strophe

must be the

concluding

movement.)

Thus,

there are

eight

possible

orderings

of

the five

movements. Because of

the

length

of

each

formant,

one

might

consider

the Third Piano Sonata to be a

cycle

of related

works. Within each

formant,

there are

structural

divisions that areequivalent to movements.

Trope,

or 'Formant

2',

is

circular

in

form

(Example

2).

One

may

begin

with

any

of its

Ex.2

Trope

Structure

Texte

Commentaire Parenthese

Glose

Comm/entaire

five

movements,

but 'Commentaire' is to be

played

once

only.

Thus,

there are

eight

possible

arrangements

of

the four

distinct movements.

The

practical

aspect

of

ordering

the

movements

for

performance

is

aided

by

the

spiral-bound

score. The movements are similar in musical

content

(as

suggested

by

the

similar

titles:

Parenthese,

Commentaire, Glose,

and

Texte).

The movements contain

graduated

degrees

of

register,

density,

and

predominant dynamic

level; thus, a 'gentle curve'3 of variedarcresults

from

any

of the

eight possible orderings.

The

'Parenthese'

movement

receives

particular

attention

in this

study

(Example

3,

on

p.

8).

'Parenthese' contains

optional

passages

that

arepartitionedfrom the mandatory passagesby

parentheses.

The

parenthetical

material

may

be

performed

or

omitted,

much

as a medieval

'trope'

may

or

may

not have been

performed

during

a

particular

performance. Beyond

the

use

of

parentheses,

the

mandatory

and

optional

passages

are

separated

by

tempo

(Lent,

=40

versus

Libre),

density,

fermati,

and

typography

(i.e.

the

parenthetical

passages

are

reduced).

A

brief

examination of the row from which

the Third

Piano Sonata is constructed assists

in

the comprehension of the style and structure of

the

composition.

The

series

(Example

4)

is

divided

into

four

segments

(labelledA,B,C,D).

The intervallic content of

A is

similar to that

of

BD;

i.e. BD is a

reordered

transposition

(minor

third

below)

of

A.

Yet,

the

segment

BD

is

interrupted

-

or shall we

say 'troped'?

-

by

the

segment

C,

which is

symmetrical

within itself

(a

minor third

with its

inversion).

Boulez calls

the more

apparent symmetry

with C 'manifest

symmetry'

and the

less obvious

relationship

of

A=BD 'concealedsymmetry'. (Thosewho wish

to examine

further these

concepts

may

refer

to

Boulez's

text

Boulez

on Music

Today).

As

the

formants

of

the sonata

may

be reorderedaround

Constellation,

and

as

the movements

of

Trope

may

be reordered

circularly,

the row

may

be

presented

in

four

orderings:

ABCD, BCDA,

CDAB,

DABC. Boulez

exploits

this

segment-

ation and

reordering

as well as

the invariance

(i.e.,

equality

in

structure)

that

exists

between

different

forms of

the

row.

Disregarding

the

parenthetical sections, the row presentations

within the movement are

fairly

simplistic.

Ex.4 Pitch

Series

A

B

C

D

?..

0

0

0

IIr

The choice of the title

Trope

s not

capricious;

the

expansion

of a

'text'

by

the addition of

musically

related

developments

forms

the

foundation

of the

formant. Boulez stated:

The

tropes

have three

possibilities:

hey

are

rhyth-

mically

ntegrated

with thetext itself

['Texte']; hey

fit into

general given

durations

upon

which

they

comment

['Glose']

in

these wo

cases,

hey

are o be

played);

hey

alternate

with

these

general

durations

and are inscribed

in

parentheses

with different

typography

'Commentaire',Parenthese']they

may

be

played

or

omitted).4

3

Ibid.,

p.39.

4

Ibid.,

p.38.

'Parenthese' akes

the

BCDA

arrangement

of

the row as its

original

form.

The

row

segments

are

assigned

motivic identities

(Example

3):

a

single

note

(B),

two

pairs

of

minor

thirds

(C),

a

three-note

segment

(D),

and

the final four-note

segment (A; beginning the second mandatory

passage).

Boulez

exploits

the invariance

that

exists between the final

segment

of

O

(A)

and

the initialfour

pitches

of

the

retrograde

nversion

beginning

on E

(RI6):

O(9-I2)=RI6

(i-4).

RI6

contains the

segment

order

ADCB;

the motivic

presentation

reveals this

order

in

the

second and

third

mandatory

passages.

The final

pitch

ofRI6

serves also as the first

pitch

of the

original

form

beginning

on

D

(06).

The

grouping

BCDA


4/6

18

Performer

ndeterminacy

nd

Boulez's

Third

Sonata

LI~~~~~~~

up^C

J

A

r

~I-jY

I

I)

'

03

1n1

7^

t:

r-4

~,-

. .

-"

?

'^ >'

"~'=-"

-~L

t i

h1 ,̂

41I-V

-Ik

'

A

tit


5/6

Performerndeterminacy

nd

Boulez's Third

Sonata

19

occurs

during

the

06

form

of

the

row. The

final

four

pitches

of

06

are

equivalent

to

the initial

four

pitches

of the

retrograde

inversion

(RI;

second system, end). The movement is brought

to a

close

with the ADCB statement

of RI.

Example

5

contains

an illustration of the row

structure

and motivic

structure of'Parenthese'

(disregarding

the

optional passages).

The

illustration

reveals a

simple

but

significant

organizational

feature

of

'Parenthese':

palin-

dromic structure.

The second half

of

this

movement

is a

retrograde

inversion

of the first

half;

further,

each

half

is

palindromic

(by

retrograde

inversion)

within itself.

In

relation

to pitch structure, this discovery has minimal

audible

significance.

However,

in relation

to

motivic

structure

(which

is based on

aurally

perceptible

relationships

of

rhythm,

contour,

dynamic,

etc.),

the

recognition

and

interpre-

tation

of the

palindromic

structure

s

imperative

for

the successful

performance

of this

movement.

Ex.5 Row

Structure/Motivic

Structure

AO,

.

a

RI6

contains a concealed

symmetry.

The

performer

has

no

choice but to

play

the

mandatorypassages

in their

palindromically

structured

order;

thus,

the foundation of the movement is 'fixed' from

performance

to

performance.

However,

this

symmetry

is

interrupted

(or 'concealed')

by

the

parentheticaldevelopments.

The

performer

must choose to include or

omit the various

optional

passages.

This decision

should

be made from one of two

interpretations

of

the

relationship

that exists between the

mandatory

and

optional

materials: one either

regards

the

optional passages

as

isolated

developments

that

interrupt,

yet

comment

on,

the sequential discourse of the mandatory

passages

(as

in the

process of'troping'),

or one

regards

the

optional

passages

as

forming

a

complete

and continuous

entity

that exists

parallel

to

the fixed

progression

of the

movement.

If

the

performer

chooses the

former,

the

elimination

or

inclusion of isolated dev-

06

6

RI

"IJI

It I

I

I

_

I

I

IL

I

I I

I

I

I

B C D A D C B C

D

A D C B

I

I

11 d

I

I

The

optional passages

of

'Parenthese' are

structured more

freely.

In

general,

the

paren-

thetical

passages

contain

developments

of the

motives

exposed

in

the

mandatory passages

that

immediately precede

or

follow

them.

For

example,

the first

optional

passage

contains

developments

of

the C

segment

(at accelerando)

and

the

D

segment

(at

subitement ssez

large).

Appropriately, the sonority of the first

parenthetical passage

lacks

pitches

G

,C

,

D

t

,

and D:

pitches equivalent

to

those

of

the

A

motive that

yet

is

to be

presented. Examining

the

optional

passages

as

a continuous

entity,

one can

identify

a

second

palindromic

structure

within 'Parenthese'. The

brackets and numbers

above the

parenthetical passages

(Example

3)

locate motivic

groups

from

the

first

half of the

movement

(before

the

double

line,

second

staff)

that are

equivalent

(by

retrograde

inversion)

to

the identically numbered motivic groups from

the second

half of

the work. No

continuous

12-tone

presentations

of

the row or its

various

transpositions

and

inversions

occur within the

parenthetical passages,

supporting

the

develop-

mental

nature

of this

material.

Armed

with

the

above

observations,

the

performer

will be

prepared

to

make those

decisions

that will

decide

the

form of the

movement.

Like

the row

itself,

'Parenthese'

elopments

has little effect on the

substance

of

the work. In this

case,

one

may

choose to

emphasize through performance

the

similarities

of

the

optional

and

mandatory passages (e.g.,

motivic

structure that illustrates the

segment-

ation

of

the

row

-

including

contour,

rhythmic

shape,

and

articulation).

On the other

hand,

if

the

performer

decides that the 'Libre'

passages

comprise a continuous entity, the elimination

of

optional passages

must be considered

more

carefully.

An

arbitrary

elimination

may

result

in

the destruction

of

the

palindromic symmetry

of the

developmentalpassages

and,

thus,

weaken

their formal

identity

and

cohesiveness. This

would

contradict

the

interpretation

of

these

passages

as

comprising

a continuous

whole.

Decisions

concerning

elimination

or inclusion

of

the

parentheticalpassages

should result in

the

retention of

the

palindromic

structure. In

addition, one may choose to convey this

interpretation by

emphasizing

the

contrast

between the

optional

and

mandatory

passages

(e.g.,

tempo regularity

versus fluctuation

and

changes

in

density).

In

a recent article entitled

'Boulez's Third Piano

Sonata:

Surface and

Sensibility',

Robert

Black wrote:

The task

here

[for

the

performer]

s to

subvert

he

natural

perception

of

a

temporally

equential

pro-

I

I ?

I

?

4 I

?


6/6

20

Performer

ndeterminacy

ndBoulez's

Third

Sonata

gression

of

discourse

it is not cohesion

of this sort

which is invited

by

the work's

eruptivepolysemy.5

Yet, the underlying symmetry and motivic

unity

inherent

in 'Parenthese' belies

such an

interpretation

of this

movement.

With

the

principal

decision made

as to the

relationship

of the

optional

and

mandatory

materials,

the

performer

may

construct

an

interpretation

that

conveys

his choice. Con-

sidering

the

post-Webern

characteristics

of

'Parenthese',

the

performer

may anticipate

the

use of

basic,

simple

intervallic structures

in lieu

of

thematic

or

melodic structures.

The

pianist

is

challenged to convey through performance the

unmistakable

motivic

indentity assigned

to the

four row

segments.

There

is

less

emphasis

on

serial

pitch

ordering

and more

emphasis

on the

aurally

demonstrable

elements

of

texture,

5

Robert

Black,

'Boulez's Third Piano Sonata:

Surface

and

Sensibility',

Perspectives

f

New

Music,

XX

(Fall-Winter,

98

I;

Spring-Summer,

1982),

p.

86.

tempo,

dynamics,

and

register.

These essential

elements,

which enable

the audience to

follow

the

progression

of the

complex

work

through

any of its mobile shapes, form the foundation of

an

intelligent

and

meaningful

interpretation

of

the

movement.

The

performer

who

accepts

the freedom

to

'shape'

Boulez's

Third Piano

Sonata

(or

a

similarly

'mobile'

work)

must be

able to

justify

his

choices.

Boulez

emphatically

dismissed

'chance'

as a viable

compositional technique

in

the article

'Alea'

in

I964.6

What

a

performer

meets

in

the Third Piano

Sonata

is

'choice',

not

'chance':

the

former demands

informed

and

carefullyconsidered decisions (within controlled

boundaries)

and

allows the

performer

o become

more

involved

in

the creative

musical

process.

6

Pierre

Boulez,

'Alea',

Perspectives

f

New

Music,

III

(Fall-

Winter,

1964),

p.42-53.

Boosey

&

Hawkes

Music

Publishers

Limited

oviet

Music

As

representative

f the

USSR's

copyright gency

VAAP,

Boosey

&

Hawkes

s the sole

agent

in

the

United

Kingdom

or

he

music

of

contemporary

oviet

composers.

Ali-Zade

*

Artyomov

*

Capyrin

*

Denisov

*

Ekimovsky

*

Firsova

*

Gubaidulina

?

Gugel

*

Hrabovsky

Kabalevsky

?

Kancheli

*

Karayev

Khachaturian

*

Knaifel

?

Korndorf

*

Lobanov

?

Lyubimov

Mansuryan

*

Martynov ?

Mossolov

?

Peletsis

Popov

Prokofieff

*

Raskatov Rostomian

*

Schnittke

?

Shchedrin

*

Shoot

Shostakovich *Shchetinsky Silvestrov *Smirnov *Sokolov Sumera ?Sviridov

Tarnopolsky

*

Terteryan

*

Tishchenko

*

Ustvolskaya

*

Vasks

*

Zagrobyan

?

For

further

information

about

Soviet

composers

contact the Promotion

Department

baO Lx

Documents

Harbinson-Boulez Third Sonata