Turkish March in 4th Mvmt of 9th Symphony - What was Beethoven Thinking?

[Peter]

A little more on the key structures in the 9th....in looking at the 3rd movement we see in the major sections: B-flatMajor, D Major (mediant), B-flat Major, G Major (sub mediant), E-flat Major (sub dominant, but mediant to G Major), and then back to B-flat Major. I think that this sort of tonality is one of the arguments for romanticism in Beethoven's music (I am not agreeing, necessarily) and is certainly a trend away from the norm. However, I find it interesting.

Rosen concludes the opposite - "It is tempting to think of Beethoven's substitute dominants as having something in common with the harmonic structures of the Romantic period, but his harmonic freedom is of a different order and nature."

He contrast this with Schumann and Chopin - specifically not the works that use sonata form but the true Romantic forms of Fantasy and Ballade where the tension is weakened by the secondary subdominant tonality. "No comparable subdominant relationship can be found in any work of Beethoven (except those based on ternary ABA or minuet and trio form). His expansion of the large scale harmonic range took plave within the limits of the classical language, and never infringed on the tonic-dominant polarity or the classical movement towards a greater tension away from the tonic. These secondary tonalities to his work, mediants and submediants, function within the large structure as true dominants. In addition, Beethoven always prepares their appearance so that they seem almost as closely related to the tonic as the dominant is, so that the modulation creates a dissonance of greater power and excitement than the more usual dominant."

[Sorrano]

Charles Rosen deals with this excellently and explains that they act as 'substitute dominants' in Beethoven - i.e they serve the same purpose of increasing the harmonic tension as opposed to weakening it as the subdominant does.

A little more on the key structures in the 9th....in looking at the 3rd movement we see in the major sections: B-flatMajor, D Major (mediant), B-flat Major, G Major (sub mediant), E-flat Major (sub dominant, but mediant to G Major), and then back to B-flat Major. I think that this sort of tonality is one of the arguments for romanticism in Beethoven's music (I am not agreeing, necessarily) and is certainly a trend away from the norm. However, I find it interesting.

Also, in terms of weighting, it is interesting, too, that Beethoven reversed the normal order of the inner movements. I wonder why?

[Peter]

In speaking of modality/tonality with Beethoven's 9th, I find interesting the key structures of the movements (d minor, F Major, B-flat Major, and D Major). Having rambled through the slow movement of the 3rd a few times (piano) I see a continuation of the 3rd in modulations. Had I more time I would delve into each of the later symphonies to explore the chordal relationships; I think Beethoven became fascinated by the tonic - mediant, tonic - submediant progressions as he developed his musical language. So, what was he thinking?

Charles Rosen deals with this excellently and explains that they act as 'substitute dominants' in Beethoven - i.e they serve the same purpose of increasing the harmonic tension as opposed to weakening it as the subdominant does.

[Sorrano]

Thanks for the clarification, Sorrano. I know we're supposed to be discussing B's Ninth, but Bruckner's opening bars in his 4th and 9th are also wonderfully 'vague' as you mentioned : the magic of the open (perfect) 5ths (the interval of the 5th). I wonder sometimes if such 'gestures' represent some sort of shared 'metaphor' for listeners here in the west, especially when played on the horns. What could such 'imagery' be : hunting, wide open spaces, sunlight reflecting off snow-capped mountains ...?
Pure speculation, I know, but ...

Rarely do I get such imagery in the music. Mostly mood and colors and often vague impressions that I simply cannot put in writing. What I can say about the 1st movement of the 9th (Beethoven's) is that it grabs me in the gut and gives me a good wrenching! Oddly, I get a similar reaction from the 1st of Bruckner's 9th.

In speaking of modality/tonality with Beethoven's 9th, I find interesting the key structures of the movements (d minor, F Major, B-flat Major, and D Major). Having rambled through the slow movement of the 3rd a few times (piano) I see a continuation of the 3rd in modulations. Had I more time I would delve into each of the later symphonies to explore the chordal relationships; I think Beethoven became fascinated by the tonic - mediant, tonic - submediant progressions as he developed his musical language. So, what was he thinking?

[Quijote]

Dear Al, thank you for your very stimulating posting. This is the perennial problem, is it not : how to ‘talk’ about music? As Elvis Costello once said, ‘writing about music is like dancing about architecture’. However silly this comment strikes us, there is a nugget of truth in it, and you have very courageously taken up the relay in your posting. My first reaction to Costello’s point would be : why not, as it all passes through the ‘filter’ we call the brain, though this is a diversion.

As a trained musician I am quite used to ‘explaining’ musical processes (note the use of this term!) in analytical-harmonic-structural terms, though this formalist approach does rather fatigue me these days. Musical “meaning” is not the ultimate preserve of trained (and somewhat ‘dry’) specialists – music is a human endeavour, thank God (or thank the deity of your choice), and is as open as a poem. In other words, musicians need an audience and an audience needs musicians. To put it differently : music is a two-way street. How we ‘negotiate’ this street is the key to our argument.

My objection (this is too strong a term really, perhaps I mean ‘reluctance’ ) to describing B’s Ninth as evoking ‘despair’, ‘struggle’ and so on is that it strikes me as so much ‘received opinion’. I am not particularly an advocate of NLP (neuro-linguistic programming), but I concede that in carelessly accepting and using terminology that one has not thought through oneself does lead one into repeating apparent axioms. So many people talk about the ‘despair’ they hear in this symphony; so many people talk about the ‘spiritual element’ in this or that work. I often find myself asking : where is this despair? How is it manifested in concrete terms? Who says so? Why? How? When? And so on ... That music, as you say, invokes feelings is a given, but as you have quite aptly pointed out, one person’s feelings (or spirituality) is not the same as another person’s.

Can we ever talk about music without being descriptive, without using adjectives (and their comparatives / superlatives)? I am not yet able to answer the point that Al raises, but feel that part of the problem lies in the fact that ‘types of music’ come with their own ways of thinking about music; this is surely the case with classical music where ways of thinking about it (and propagated by schools and universities) reflect the way music was perceived in 19th century Europe.

We must talk again about this, Al1432. You have raised some fascinating issues that need to be addressed more coherently than I have done tonight.

[al1432]

Further, that we tend to accept the adjectives and descriptions so often used by 19th and early 20th century commentators (spiritual, pain, suffering, transcendent ...) and I sometimes just wish we could stop and re-evaluate them.

This raises some very interesting ideas, Philip. We can redefine the adjectives we use, yes, but can we do away with them? The latter may not have been your point, but it does bring it to my mind. This would bring the wiring of the brain, and language, and music, all together for a really thorough examination of how we define music's effect upon us. Music does invoke feeling, thought, imagery in the mind of the listener. Can we be truly adjective-less with our mental processes regarding music? Sounds to me like that might be moving towards a sort of Buddha-like renunciation of the passions, which might leave us devoid of any need for music in the emotional sphere (since there would effectively be no more emotional sphere). I do understand your point about the specific adjectives and descriptions you mention: one person's pain may not be another's (or not quite exactly), and one person's spirituality may be quite something different to the next person, and all of these terms have a bit of a sentimental quality about them, in a way, yet I don't know what we'd replace them with, without going into that Buddha-space I mentioned before, or transliterating "music" simply to its mathematical correlates. Can the human mind appreciate music with all its intensity, emotion, etc., without being descriptive about it, or can music exist on a "purer" plane? (Ironically, doesn't this itself invite discourse about "absolute" versus "programme" music?). I'm glad you brought this up, it's a very interesting point, and one I really need to give some thought to. Just how are we "wired" when it comes to music, and what happens if we stop the "chatter" in our minds as we listen to it, and as we attempt to communicate its effect on us to other human beings? I know there are several books out there currently on music and the brain, none of which I've read as yet, but I may find myself more inclined to read one now.
Al

[Quijote]

And so to answer part of the question posed at the beginning of this thread, namely 'What was Beethoven thinking?" : I would give PDG's right arm to know. Wouldn't we all?

I would even renounce TC's winery to know, really I would. But I would not renounce TC herself. Oh no, not that, I have some honour left in my jaded soul ...

[Quijote]

I would suggest that the expression of "male rage verging on rape" is more in the mind of Ms. McClary than it was in LvB's.

Quite so Al1432. No more or less than 'despair' or 'struggle' in the mind of others (mine included, by the way). We hear 'struggle', McClary hears 'male rage'. Who is to say who is right? What did Lvb envisage? We cannot say. The point I'm trying to make is that we should be cautious in assuming all hear in a similar fashion (see my comments and yours above). Further, that we tend to accept the adjectives and descriptions so often used by 19th and early 20th century commentators (spiritual, pain, suffering, transcendent ...) and I sometimes just wish we could stop and re-evaluate them.

[Quijote]

Gestures and 'metaphors'

Actually, I'm trying to develop an idea put forward by composer Trevor Wishart who thinks there may be 'universal sound symbols' that convey the same 'meaning' to listeners. For example, in one of his electroacoustic (acousmatic) compositions (Red Bird) he employs sounds of birds to represent concepts such as 'freedom' which he feels is a widely-shared metaphor. I would agree, but other commentators have pointed out that the 'symbol' is not universally perceived like that and that for some people birds are somewhat sinister (Cf Hitchcock).
What I do think holds true are the open fifths at the outset of B's Ninth and some of Bruckner's symphonies, but this is also down to the scoring and use of register (relatively high open 5ths in the horns/brass over tremolo lower strings); the feeling is of course one of 'spaciousness'. Is this a generally perceived view? And what does this tell us about 'musical space'? What do you think?

[Quijote]

Just to clarify, when I speak of tonality I speak of key centers, and when I speak of modality I speak of the arrangement of the scale within those centers. You might have a key center of C, for example, but then you would have options of various modes and I don't mean just major or minor. Dorian, locrian, aeolian, and etc. are foremost in my mind at the moment.

Thanks for the clarification, Sorrano. I know we're supposed to be discussing B's Ninth, but Bruckner's opening bars in his 4th and 9th are also wonderfully 'vague' as you mentioned : the magic of the open (perfect) 5ths (the interval of the 5th). I wonder sometimes if such 'gestures' represent some sort of shared 'metaphor' for listeners here in the west, especially when played on the horns. What could such 'imagery' be : hunting, wide open spaces, sunlight reflecting off snow-capped mountains ...?
Pure speculation, I know, but ...

[Sorrano]

I know what you mean Sorrano. But we must not confuse major/minor (tonality) with modality. Sorry to be pedantic, but you know me by now!

Just to clarify, when I speak of tonality I speak of key centers, and when I speak of modality I speak of the arrangement of the scale within those centers. You might have a key center of C, for example, but then you would have options of various modes and I don't mean just major or minor. Dorian, locrian, aeolian, and etc. are foremost in my mind at the moment.

[Peter]

Yes, the Eroica is not weighted towards the finale. My point : to point out that the Eroica was also 'unprecedented' in its time, in terms of length, structure, instrumentation, harmony and so on. Its impact was also far-reaching. The 9th is unique, clearly; we may argue the same for 3, 5, 6, 7.

Yes, but we're discussing the 9th! perhaps we should have a new topic on the symphonies? I'd be interested to hear your comments on the uniqueness of the 6th as well.

[Quijote]

Yes, but what's your point? I don't think the Eroica is weighted towards the finale. The points I am making are that 1) Generally speaking classical works are weighted towards the first movement (there are exceptions such as the 5th and I agree with your uncertainty over the 6th)
2) The 9th represents a marked departure from previous models in that the finale acts almost as the 2nd part of the work - it is almost a symphony in itself (and certainly lasts as long as many classical symphonies).
3) That the 9th was unique, unprecedented and of all the symphonies had the greatest influence on later composers.

Yes, the Eroica is not weighted towards the finale. My point : to point out that the Eroica was also 'unprecedented' in its time, in terms of length, structure, instrumentation, harmony and so on. Its impact was also far-reaching. The 9th is unique, clearly; we may argue the same for 3, 5, 6, 7.
I would like to come back to you about B's Ninth exercising the greatest influence on later composers.

[Peter]

Also noteworthy for its length and complexity (chronologically speaking) was (is?) the 'Eroica' symphony, do you not think? As to the 5th, it is certainly 'weighted towards' the finale in that it provides that perfect example of 'fulfilment' in cyclical terms. As to the Pastoral (6th), I'm still not sure about it's weighting; it continues to intrigue me from that point of view (amongst others!).

Yes, but what's your point? I don't think the Eroica is weighted towards the finale. The points I am making are that 1) Generally speaking classical works are weighted towards the first movement (there are exceptions such as the 5th and I agree with your uncertainty over the 6th)
2) The 9th represents a marked departure from previous models in that the finale acts almost as the 2nd part of the work - it is almost a symphony in itself (and certainly lasts as long as many classical symphonies).
3) That the 9th was unique, unprecedented and of all the symphonies had the greatest influence on later composers.

[al1432]

Other commentators - most infamously musicologist Susan McClary who hears the work as embodying 19th century male attitudes to women, with certain pasages expressing male rage verging on rape

I would suggest that the expression of "male rage verging on rape" is more in the mind of Ms. McClary than it was in LvB's. Freud would have had a field day with such a sexual interpretation. But yes, I am well aware that the music can be interpreted in many different ways. The communists used it, the nazis used it, etc etc, each for their own purpose.

Any musicological light you can throw on LvB's music would be most appreciated!
Al