|
COPYRIGHT 2001 University of Nebraska Press
Recent discussions of the technique called developing variation and its exemplification in Brahms's music often emphasize the role of metric irregularities in the composer's thematic processes. Both Walter Frisch and David Epstein have extended Schoenberg's insights by moving beyond metric issues on the phrase level to consider the impact of Brahms's rhythmic invention on the overall shape of a piece. The present study explores motivic-metric process via passages from two Brahms works: the first movements of the Horn Trio, op. 40 (1865), and of the Clarinet Trio, op. 114 (1891). These pieces provide an ideal context in which to build on Frisch's and Epstein's work on rhythmic aspects of developing variation. The trios are profitably approached through a synthesis of their ideas with David Lewin's insights into the relationship of harmony and meter in Brahms as well as with Harald Krebs's and Richard Cohn's recent explorations of the topic of metric dissonance.(1)
The rhythmic technique that will be my chief concern is metric displacement or what Krebs calls type B dissonance.(2) The opening phrase of the Horn Trio, shown in ex. 5.1, provides a paradigmatic example. The passage typifies the complexity of Brahms's rhythmic invention: the material is marked both by signs of metric displacement and by cues that do indeed signal the notated meter. Though choosing a primary metric pattern may lead to interpretive insights, it is nevertheless important to recognize the bivalence of metric cues. With respect to displacement, the appoggiatura character of the first eighth note in the phrase's basic idea makes the beginning of each motivic repetition sound metrically strong; the placement of the piano chords enforces the metric shift, as does the swell that leads to the melodic arrival on F in m. 7. Yet, if the accompaniment is heard as an echo of or a response to the violin's notated downbeats, then the written meter suddenly becomes more convincing. In this hearing, the eighth-note pairs lead ahead to the quarter notes, which receive stress through agogic accent. Nor do later statements of the material solve the quandary. Rather, as we might expect in Brahms, ambivalence becomes a source of development. Score annotations in ex. 5.2 highlight additions to two restatements that contribute to a heightened perception either of the metric shift, on the one hand, or of the notated meter, on the other.(3)
[ILLUSTRATIONS OMITTED]
These excerpts illustrate several concepts of general applicability to the topic of metric displacement. First, though it is often possible to argue for a predominant accent pattern, we should be ready to acknowledge the coexistence of multiple rhythmic impulses. Second, the reciprocal relationship between performance and metric interpretation should not be underestimated. Nuances of tone, dynamics, and phrasing can have a decisive impact on the projected accent pattern of a metrically ambiguous passage. At the same time, a performer's reading of metric cues in the score has a seminal influence on the entire complex of physical activity that creates an expressive performance. The question of whether a performer should articulate the notated meter in the face of conflicting signals, or should allow the signs of displacement to dominate, remains open. The answer will depend on the particular musical context as well as on the performer's own taste, style, and interpretation. What is clear is that a discussion of metric displacement implicitly engages performance issues in addition to matters of structure and aural experience.
Another point that will emerge is that the impact of a metric displacement depends on its position in the larger form and, indeed, on the formal type itself. Reciprocally, a shifting barline will influence both local and large-scale formal relationships. Frisch notes a tendency in Brahms for metric shifts to occur both toward the end of sonata-form exposition and at the overlap that he often fashions between the development and the recapitulation.(4) I hope to contribute to an appreciation of Brahms's rhythmic genius by shifting attention away from metric displacement as an attribute of formal culmination and exploring instead characteristics and consequences of the technique as a premise for formal departure. I will also highlight the reciprocal relationship between a movement's overall form and the character of its metric processes. These motivations provide a rationale for a pairing of the two trios. The Clarinet Trio, like the Horn Trio, raises a metric issue at the outset; the two movements, however, adapt the technique of metric displacement to different formal types: rondo in the case of op. 40, sonata form in the case of op. 114. Because we have already begun to look at the Horn Trio, it will be convenient to continue with it before moving on to the clarinet work. In addition to relationships between form and meter, the analyses will address the following topics: the intimate bond that Brahms often forges between metric displacement and harmonic function; the interaction of metric shifts with Knupftechnik; and the role that rhythmic dissonance plays in creating extensive tonal delay. The trios also provide an opportunity to extend the concept of prolongation into the metric dimension and to explore the idea of motivic dissonance and resolution in Brahms's thematic processes. Let us begin with the role of metric displacement as a constituent of formal articulation in the Horn Trio.
I
Example 5.3 presents a global view of the form. Score excerpts illustrate thematic relationships and the pattern of metric shifts; roman numerals indicate the main prolonged harmonies for each section. Before moving into analytical details, it is necessary to make two preliminary observations. First, the formal analysis is based on an interpretation of the opening theme as metrically shifted; the material is labeled [x] or [x'] throughout ex. 5.3. Emphasis on metric displacement is not intended to deny the internal ambivalence of the material, which is certainly important to its expressive character. Rather, I simplify, in favor of what I regard as the predominant accent pattern, in order to facilitate access to larger issues. Over the course of the analysis, information will accumulate to support the idea of a metric shift, though there will also be a place in my interpretation for cues that signal the notated barlines. The second preliminary point relates to issues of formal organization. The movement is a special type of five-part rondo in which the two episodes consist of the same thematic material. (This is why ex. 5.3 presents an excerpt only from the first episode.) Brahms uses a similar form on several other occasions; examples include the second movements of the F-Major Viola Quintet, op. 88, and the A-Major Violin Sonata, op. 100, and the third movement of the Second Symphony, op. 73. The Horn Trio, however, is the only instrumental cycle that begins with this type of rondo; indeed, Brahms's first movements are otherwise all in sonata form. In the second movements from the quintet and the violin sonata, it is not absolutely clear until the final cadence whether the tonic of the refrain or of the episodes is primary.(5) In the Horn Trio, the primacy of E[flat] is never in doubt. Instead, a conflict between displaced and notated meters creates the high-level dissonance that remains unresolved until the final refrain. It is this metric dissonance--along with what we will soon see is an associated harmonic instability--that perhaps allows the rondo to substitute for a sonata form as first movement.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
I will return shortly to the issue of rhythmic dissonance and resolution. First, it is necessary to explore the relationship of meter and form throughout the body of the rondo; we will then be in a position to appreciate the climactic impact of the metric reconciliation toward the end of the movement. Of special interest is the correspondence between metric change and patterns of primary and secondary thematic material on multiple formal levels. The most obvious example of metric-formal correspondence is the change from ?? in the refrain to ?? in the episodes. Along the lines of the analogy that Lewin makes between tonal and rhythmic structure, we can speak of ?? as a tonic meter, ?? as a nontonic meter, and the change as a modulation.(6) Within the refrain itself, meter plays a similar role in formal articulation. In terms of harmonic-metric relations, however, it is important to observe that the motion out of the tonic key for the episodes corresponds to the more extreme form of metric modulation. Within the tonic area, a simple displacement of the two-beat module coordinates with shifts in harmonic function. The pattern of shifted ??-aligned ??-shifted ?? complements Brahms's reversal of the standard I-V-I layout for the small ternary form of the refrain. The shifted ?? of the A section is dissonant against the notated barlines and requires resolution through alignment, just as the material's dominant prolongation needs to resolve to an opening structural tonic. Both aspects of resolution converge at the structural downbeat that initiates the B section at...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
