[Smt-talk] Subdominant versus Predominant
Daniel Wolf
djwolf at snafu.de
Mon May 7 11:25:33 PDT 2012
On Mon, 07 May 2012 16:37:01 +0200, Stephen Jablonsky
<jablonsky at optimum.net> wrote:
> There is no place for style on a Schenker chart and that's what really
> interests me.
While I am far from expert in matters Schenkerian, I believe that this is
a fundamental mischaracterization of what Schenker's work was about.
Schenker, if nothing else, was after an accounting of all the details and
elements of a particular tradition and its styles and how they emerge from
a deeper structures and connections, both unique to a single work and
common to styles. He was not producing "charts" as an end product — and
certainly not the generic "Schenkergrams" routinely produced in some
modern classrooms — but rather using a collection of notational devises to
record moments in a dynamic process of composition and audition.
There is an anecdote which Babbitt told (and identified as apocryphal; I
belive it's in the Madison lectures) about Schoenberg looking at the
Eroica analysis by Schenker and exclaiming critically "But where are my
favorite places?" Babbitt then made the case that Schenker's analysis did,
in fact, deal with those "favorite places" by describing how they fit,
both stylistically and uniquely, into the continuity of a particular
work. We can argue about the success of this project and about the
problems of its focus upon a particular repertoire, but I don't think we
can argue that it was unconcerned with style.
Daniel Wolf
Dr. Daniel Wolf
composer
Frankfurt am Main
More information about the Smt-talk
mailing list