DQ for Watkins 383-401 (grad students: please also read 401-410)

DQ for Watkins 383-401 (grad students: please also read 401-410)

Please be prepared to respond in either seminar meeting or in "Comments" on the course blog. In all venues, you must be prepared to cite specific passages (by page, paragraph, line, and quotation) in support of your responses—and specific works.

Summary: These pages actually combine material from two different chapters: that on Webern’s “mature” (that is, post-Schoenberg) music, and that introducing Bartok’s music. If we view Webern as a kind of “parallel” to Schoenberg, and Bartok as a kind of “parallel” to Stravinsky, we will see that understanding Schoenberg’s and Stravinsky’s music of this period will help us develop a perspective on that of Webern and Bartok. One caveat: in my opinion, Watkins’s discussion of Webern’s late works neglects certain aspects of his compositional technique, particularly in the area of systematization of parameters besides pitch. Expect that my classroom presentation will address this latter factor in some detail, and be prepared to take notes accordingly.

General question for consideration: what responses, goals, and compositional traits does Webern share with Schoenberg? Bartok with Stravinsky? What responses, goals, traits and (in particular) compositional resources do Webern and Bartok develop independently or in contrast to Schoenberg and Stravinsky?

(1) p383, be prepared to unpack the very first sentence. For what “stylistic options” did Webern “show[] less concern” than his contemporaries? Why might he have avoided less concerns?

(2) Watkins refers, also on p383, to an “unspoken subscription [to] neoclassic textures and formalities” which Webern shared with Schoenberg. What are the details of this “subscription”? Which of these details or concerns did Webern share with Schoenberg? What is the source of these concerns? Why did both of these German composers leave their “subscription” “unspoken”? More general philosophical question: in order to refer to the presence of an “Ism” in a composer’s work, is it necessary that the composer him/herself must either identify or agree with that Ism? If not, why not? Another way to think about the same question: are Isms categories or trends?

(3) The discussion of the Webern Op. 14 identifies certain affinities which Watkins claims the composer shared with Expressionism, despite the degree to which Webern’s music does not “sound like” “typical” Expressionist music. What are the “typical sounds” of Expressionist works? Why do composers employ those sounds? To problematize the conventional label of Expressionism: ought we to presume that Expressionist music has a certain “sound”, any more than Neoclassical music? If Expressionism is not a product of sound, of what is it a product? Also, as part of this, be prepared to relate the biography and aesthetic of Trakl to Weimar Berlin.

(4) On p384, first full para, Watkins provides a very subtle observation about how Expressionist composers tended to treat words in texted pieces. In the sentence fragment that begins “structurally it derives from the Expressionist predilection…” what is the relationship between individual words, full texts, “involved syntactical construction”, and “silence and the pause”? How are these tendencies relevant to other works by Webern, and to his sonic aesthetic as a whole?

(5) p385 has a good summary of Webern style traits that are common across his whole catalog. Be prepared to recall these style characteristics (of which there are at least four) to all works cited in this chapter, and to contribute these observations to our classroom discussion. In addition to the influences of Expressionist texts, folk-song, and his teacher Schoenberg, what other influences upon Webern’s music does Watkins identify here?

(6) The top of p386 has a discussion on issues of restriction, and especially of symmetry, which is both very important to understanding Webern’s music, and also links his music (especially his formal/structural conception) to that of Bartok. Read “forward” into the Bartok chapter, and be prepared to relate Bartok’s treatment of structural symmetries with that of Webern—and to cite examples. On the bottom of p386, be prepared to summarize Webern’s own comments on the op. 21, and to contribute this summary to our in-class discussion of the Symphony.

(7) Nice quote about “delicate aeration” on p389; what does it mean? Give examples.

[NOTE: During our class discussion, I will add substantially to Watkins’s discussion of Webern—particularly in the area of Webern’s systematization of other musical parameters beyond pitch.

(8) On p394, Watkins cites a set of goals which drove Bartok’s folklore experiments. What were those goals, and how did they relate both to goals of other composers, and to Bartok’s own musical resources? Also on this page and the next, Watkins compares Bartok’s relationship to folk musics with that of Stravinsky. How does he differentiate the two? What is the impact on Bartok’s music?

(9) Please note, on pp395 & ff, that Bartok’s compositional influences were quite broad and diverse; though folklore/folk-music was very important, it was not the only influence. What were Bartok’s other influences, and what works does Watkins cite as evidence of these? (I will have comments to supplement Watkins’s discussion of this topic)

(10) On pp397-99, Watkins provides a brief but detailed discussion of the scalar and intervallic sources of Bartok’s harmonic language. What is the origin of these particular scalar and intervallic constructions? How does it impact Bartok’s harmonic language? His phrase structures? His cadential and modulation schema?

(11) Be prepared to demonstrate Bartok’s varied approaches to rhythm. How would you demonstrate “parlando-rubato”? “Giusto”? “Additive rhythms”? You will need to be able to play, sing, and describe each of these.