<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Ildar,<br>
<br>
I am frightened to see how Schenker is reproached things that he
never wrote. I find it is extremely difficult to continue this
discussion if we do not refer to the same texts. In my editions of
Schenker at least, he so to say NEVER beams 1, 3, 5 in the bass (see
below).<br>
<br>
You may be aware that Schenker did not draw analytical beams before
his analysis of Beethoven's 3rd Symphony, in <i>Das Meisterwerk</i>
III, 1930. Neither there, nor in <i>Five Graphic Analyses</i>, do
the bass beams clearly represent the main progression in the bass.
It is therefore <i>Free Composition</i> only that concerns us –
which already raises the question whether this book can be
considered representing Schenker as a whole.<br>
<br>
Examples 14, 15, 16 and 18 of <i>FC</i> illustrate various forms of
the <i>Wege des basses zur Oberquint </i>at the firs level of the
middleground; they show first the bass alone (example 14), then
under lines from ^3 (15), from ^5 (16) and from ^8 (18). The bass
beams always denote what for Schenker is the main arpegiation,
I–V–I. He does consider that the other notes are hierarchically less
important, but I think that this hierarchy may be considered
possible – unless you believe that there exists only one truth. You
say that in real progressions (why "real"?) T, S and D have equal
status; but how can you be sure of that, equal status for whom?<br>
<br>
The notes other than the dominant in examples 14-18 are marked with
Roman numerals, I6, II, III or IV. Whenever the figure is I6 or III,
it is put between parentheses; whenever the figure is II or IV, it
is underlined by the double curve denoting the oscillation between <i>Unterquint</i>
and <i>Oberquint</i>. This all makes clear, I believe, that the
subdominant (II or IV) is considered the most important degree after
the dominant itself, and certainly more important than III.<br>
<br>
In the other examples in <i>FC</i>, the bass beam, if any, usually
joins I–V–I. There are very few exceptions:<br>
– example 40.2 includes I6 in the beam, but the numeral is written
between parentheses. Schenker most probably understands it as a
continuation of the initial I; and he underlines the following II–V<i>–</i>I
progression with the usual double curve.<br>
– examples 40.9 and 104 beam I–IV–V–I, and example 46 includes the
same degrees under a secundary beam.<br>
– example 89.2 beams I–III–V<i>–</i>I. This, unless I am mistaken,
is the SOLE case, in the whole of Schenker's writings, where III is
included in the bass beam. <br>
You are right that IV or II often are indicated as eighth notes; but
the flag is intended to stress the note (Schenker also uses half
notes with a flag).<br>
<br>
You seem to consider that <i>Bassbrechung</i> means I–III–V–I: this
certainly is not Schenker's idea. I am afraid that the person you
name "Schenker" is not the same as mine. Yours is the result of an
American normalization that followed the translation of <i>freie
Satz</i>, and of which the recent translations of <i>Der Tonwille
</i>and <i>Das Meisterwerk</i> should mark the end or at least a
correction.<br>
<br>
Nicolas Meeùs<br>
Université Paris-Sorbonne<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 7/05/2012 23:48, Ildar Khannanov a écrit :
<blockquote
cite="mid:1336427282.65993.YahooMailClassic@web45006.mail.sp1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">
<div>Dear Nicolas,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>[...] On every Schenkerian graph, on all three
levels, the notes in the bass which he randomly selects
always comprise the arpeggiation of the tonic triad. It
is always 1, 3, 5 that are beamed together. If there is
4, it is notated with the " single eighth note,' that
is, with the note with the stem and the flag. In all
graphs it means that the Subdominant it downgraded to
the "lower structural level' than Tonic and Dominant.</div>
[...]<br>
<div>So, there are problems with the idea of continuity in
Schenker. Everybody likes continuity, but the model of
Bassbrechung is simply wrong: it does not describe the
practice of harmonic progression. In real progressions
of music of Baroque and Classico-Romantic period T, S,
and D have equal status. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ildar Khannanov</div>
<div>Peabody Conservatory</div>
<div>Johns Hopkins University</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:solfeggio7@yahoo.com">solfeggio7@yahoo.com</a><br>
</div>
<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>