On May 28, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On May 28, 2007, at 7:28 AM, Ken Moore wrote:
"Dean M. Estabrook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you have a perfect fifth, or perfect fourth in a vertical
aggregate, you have, according to Schenker, a tonal center present.
That's one authority who carries little weight with me. Schenker
was not a total fool, but he was invincibly ignorant of the
acoustics on which he purported to base his theories, unscholarly
in some of his arguments, and a chauvinist in his musical tastes.
More important than any of this, his theories are ahistorical--that
is, they do not correspond to anything the actual composers of this
music had in mind.
This is a problem I have with much of what passes for music theory
today, not just Schenker.
Well, I would agree with your first sentence. and furthermore I would
say that possibly the greatest value Schenker has is that he
approaches the music from the point of view of the LISTENER, rather
than of the composer. Paradoxically, some of the works that would
come together more easily under his general approach are the
harmonically complex ones by early 20th century composers, and a lot
of jazz. I say paradoxically because he didn't like Debussy or Ravel,
and probably wouldn't have liked jazz much either.
When you need access to a composer's journals, notes, and apprentices
in order to even BEGIN to analyse one of his works, wouldn't you say
that perhaps the process of composition in that case is less
important to the listening experience than it is in earlier, simpler
works? It is possible from a Schoenbergian perspective to analyse
just about everything you need to know about Beethoven by ear; try
that with Stravinsky! And in more modern works, is it really
important to know that the composer used decay patterns of cesium
isotopes, or moon phases, or his toenail clippings, in order to
compose? I would take Jung's view here; that the art is in the
beholding, and if one beholds something in a work that was not in the
composer's conscious thought, that does not make it less valid. What
the composer was thinking has become much less important in the last
century or so.
Hmm, Jung and Schenker; I wonder if a comparison has been done? Might
be an article in there somewhere...
Christopher
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
