[Smt-talk] Addendum on Bach
Richard Hermann
harhar at unm.edu
Fri Jan 22 12:09:22 PST 2010
Dear SMT-Listers,
Around 30 years ago Robert Cogan made an interesting comment on
"Common-Practice" music in that by that yardstick, common-practice
would be better applied to modal music as it has been around a lot
longer. Why should "norms" of one period trump those of other periods/
practices? On what specific grounds should one specific period/
practice be made paramount? As the king of siam said in a musical
along time ago: "etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...."
Best,
Richard Hermann, Prof. of Music
University of New Mexico
On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:58 PM, Dmitri Tymoczko wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2010, at 11:46 AM, Steven Rosenhaus wrote:
>
>> I have found that while following rules can make for some
>> exquisite music, it can also result in G*d-awfully boring stuff.
>> When I teach the craft of composition I make sure the students
>> understand that what they are learning are not hard and fast
>> "rules" but practices, and that learning them is like knowing
>> where the walls are in an unlit room; much easier to push/break
>> down those walls (or just find the light switch and/or door, to
>> further the metaphor) if you know where those walls are.
>
> While Stephen Jablonsky wrote:
>
>> Using the words "normal" or "usual" when referring to the output
>> of great composers is quite amusing. It is only the second rate
>> composers who stick to the predictable or the probable.
>
> Two points:
>
> 1) It is important to distinguish the project of defining a
> harmonic grammar from that of doing analysis. The activities are
> as different as linguistics and literary criticism. Great authors
> play with grammatical rules, but this doesn't show that grammatical
> rules don't exist, or aren't important.
> The problem here is that music theory comprises many different
> activities -- analogues to linguistics, psychology, literary
> criticism, etc. What defines our field is the subject matter, not
> the style of thinking. So when someone like me starts talking
> about grammar, others are always going to talk about how irrelevant
> that is to what they do. This is a reminder that we all do very
> different things.
>
> 2) Interestingly (or perhaps predictably) enough, I've always been
> surprised by how *infrequently* great composers violate some of the
> musical conventions that defined their style. In this respect, I
> think, they were very different from contemporary artists, weaned
> on modernism and the violation of norms.
>
> For instance, there are very, very few clear root position V-IV
> progressions in the music -- despite the fact that this progression
> sounds good. Likewise, there are hardly any sonata-form movements
> in major with the second theme in the relative minor, or in the
> supertonic. (Yes, I know a few.) Or pieces in Lydian. Or
> parallel fifths. Or pieces in 5/4. Really, the list could go on
> and on.
>
> In large part, I think this is because these composers did not
> think of the principles of their musical style as being arbitrary
> and conventional, but rather as being rooted in something much
> deeper. In this respect I would think that theory played a huge
> role in defining for them the limits of the acceptable.
>
> When I imagine myself projected back in time, and composing in the
> 18th- or 19th-century style, I always imagine exploring all these
> relatively obvious alternatives. And I always tell my students:
> "these composers were very different from us. The things we think
> of as natural, like mixolydian mode or VI-VII-i or V-IV-I
> progressions, were not at all natural to them." I think it is very
> hard to understand how they distinguished between norms that were
> not to be trifled with, and norms that could be violated.
>
> The great classical composers were, of course, very inventive.
> They broke rules. But it's equally important that they preserved
> rules and didn't even think about breaking with them. This is how
> some of the conventions survived for so long.
>
> DT
>
> Dmitri Tymoczko
> Associate Professor of Music
> 310 Woolworth Center
> Princeton, NJ 08544-1007
> (609) 258-4255 (ph), (609) 258-6793 (fax)
> http://music.princeton.edu/~dmitri
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Smt-talk mailing list
> Smt-talk at societymusictheory.org
> http://lists.societymusictheory.org/listinfo.cgi/smt-talk-
> societymusictheory.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.societymusictheory.org/pipermail/smt-talk-societymusictheory.org/attachments/20100122/7256c074/attachment-0004.htm>
More information about the Smt-talk
mailing list