Bibliography

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/goethe.htm

http://www.ipl.org/div/mushist/clas/index.htm

http://www.andreas-praefcke.de/wunderlich/

Newbould, Brian (1999). Schubert: The Music and the Man. University of California Press.  

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/44183/Austria/33361/The-Age-of-Metternich-1815-48

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Wars#Start_date_and_nomenclature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_vienna

Following, is my eclectic analysis (in backwards order)...

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Meta-Critique

The eclectic analysis of "Heidenröslein" generated a lot of valuable data about the poem, the song, and their relationship as a lied.  The most success was found in Steps 3 though 6 (syntax, phenomenology, musical and textual representation, virtual feeling).  The movement between each step truly built upon itself each time and led to a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the piece upon completing Step 6.

The flaw of this eclectic analysis is perhaps its eclectic-ness.  In analyzing "Heidenröslein," one must consider the poet, the composer, and the vocalist.  None of these three artists can be left out since each plays such a crucial role in this analysis: phenomenology could not be completed without thoughts on the vocalist, musical and textual representation relied on the poet, and syntax was based in the composer.  The true issues surfaced in the relms of onto-historical world and historical background, during which the analyst attempted to include information stemming from all of the artists.  However, as one knows, the more information one tries to squeeze in then the less specific one can be.  Additionally, it might have been beneficial to do a brief analysis of "Heidenröslein" set to different music by different composers (at least one or two) in order to set up another step of the eclectic: comparative analysis.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Performance Guide

When performing Schubert's lied "Heidenröslein" the most important thing is to completely understand the poem.  One cannot simply sing the text as if it is just a group of meaningless syllables.  On the other hand, one cannot simply give the song any direction he or she wants.  Rather, the poem must be interpreted in a way that is cohesive with the poem, so that if one were to take away the text, then one's tone of voice could still tell the same story.

Other important techniques in performing "Heidenröslein" are rubato and volume.  Rubato should be used liberally with taste.  Do not make the listener feel sick by the instability of your tempo.  However, it is the nature of this simple song to be dramatized in this way.  The same goes for volume - the volume should change with the tone of voice and the mood of the specific part of the poem.  

Overall, treat each stanza like a different scene in a play.  Even though the notes are exactly the same, the character must be completely different depending on if one is singing the opening, the middle, or the ending.  Each portion of Goethe's has its own flavor and it should be treated as such.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Second Open Listening

Even without acknowledging the text, the song feels like a story with Schubert and Fritz Wunderlich as the narrators.  As story teller, Wunderlich emphasizes the emotions of each character in his voice.  He is a sympathetic commentator - the dramatic changes in the countour of his voice both within and between phrases reflect both the attitudes of each character and of his own opinions/observations (which is really Goethe's third person commentary, but it functions as the vocalist's commentary in this setting.) Additionally, each time the song repeats, it is in a different context as the lyrics are at a different point in the poem.  Wunderlich reflects this in changing the character of his voice completely with each repeat.  And finally, there is Schubert; the puppet master behind Wunderlich's narration, he composed the piece to reflect the tone of the characters and the conflict that make up the poem.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Onto-Historical World

CULTURAL WORLD OF COMPOSITION:

Schubert composed the lied to Heidenröslein in 1815 in Vienna.  This was an extremely turbulent time in all of Europe.  After the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars were sparked in 1803.  These wars involved Russian and most major European countries.  Aside from the United Kingdom, Austria became the most resolute enemy of France and had over a million men fighting in the wars.  The wars ended at the Congress of Vienna, when European ambassadors met to discuss the issues that arose from the wars and to redraw the political map of Europe.  These discussions lasted from September of 1814 until June of 1815, and bear particular historical significance in that they mark the first time that people came together from all over the continent to meet in one place to make peace over a treaty.  The settlements they reached at these meetings were held up until 1914.  A major result for Austria was changes in territorial claims.

CULTURAL WORLD OF POEM:

Heidenröslein was one of Goethe's early poems. Many people took to the poem's unconventional simplicity.   It was written in 1771 and published in 1789, which was a pivotal time in Goethe's life, as he took off in the whirlwind of his self-made (with a partner) period of literature.  [Since I have already spoken about the time period in regards to Schubert's composition, I will now expand upon this major period that followed Goethe's composition of the poem.]

Weimar Classicism was a period from (1788-1832) during which two thinkers/writers, Goethe and Schiller, searched for "aesthetic standards in contemporary literature". They did not wish to copy Classic Greek literature, but hoped to infuse those aesthetic qualities found in Classic Greek literature (such as genre or structure) into their contemporary German literature, as a way of creating new forms for their own culture.  Examples of subject focuses in their literature were the development of individuality and finding direction through experience.  Both men were extremely multi-talented, and each put out a vast array of literature during this time period, from the solely literary to the scientific to the philosophical.

After Schiller died in 1805, it is believed that Goethe began to move toward Romantic styles of writing in his poetry.  His poetry of this time is characterized by exoticism, or the borrowing of style from a distant culture, which also characterized Romantic poetry of the time.  However, it is believed that Goethe was able to distinguish himself from Romantic poets by using his own distinct expressive mode.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Virtual Feeling

After analyzing the text of Goethe's poem, many of the phenomenological and syntactical observations can now be put into the context of the story.  I will provide an outline of the text and use referential meanings to describe how the subject of each line is reflected in both the composition and the voice of the tenor.

Crude boy saw a tiny new

Rosebud in the heather,

During the first two lines, when the boy is noticing the rosebud in the heather, the music is bouncing around, pleasant and innocent, as if the boy has no ulterior intentions.

Young as dawn and fresh as dew;

The naïveté of the music continues until the word "fresh", which is the first mention of the rose's chasteness.  It is at this point when the music dabbles in the minor mode and the voice becomes a bit uneasy.

Ran straight up and stooped to view,

There is a deliberateness in the voice, and strong major chords on the upbeats imply that the character is eager and after something.

Filled his eyes with pleasure,

The voice seems overcome with passion and desire.  As the stepwise passage of sixteenth note is sung it feels like the character is floating down from a cloud of elation.  Overall this phrase feels like love song being sung from afar, and the rose cannot hear it being sung.  This longing still carries an air of innocence with it.

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

An ascending scale and a glorious affirmation that it is this rose that he desires.

Rosebud in the heather.

As the music falls down from the high G to the low G, the character also seems to be falling down from his cloud of passions.  The voice is calm and assuring as the character falls back into reality, in which he will pursue the rose.

Said the boy, "I will pick you,

Rosebud in the heather".

The increased volume, vigor and enunciation in the voice exemplify the character's shameless and confident declaration that he will have the rose.

Rose replied, "Then I'll stick you,

The voice almost responds to itself in a different tone that is much more anxious, as it begins to characterize the rose speaking.  The voice seems to grace each note without letting it ring out, as if trying to run away while singing.

Let my sharp thorns run you through,

You will not forget me, ever!"

The tone of the voice changes almost to say "don't you have any pity on me?  I am merely a rose".  This seems to embody a deliberate contradiction between the text which is angry and the voice which is heartbreaking - this is also a characteristic that many women embody when they are being sly in argumentative situations.

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

Rosebud in the heather.

Almost in direct response, the voice of the boy comes back in to reassure.  This time, the text seems directed at the rose not as a love song but in a way that says: "Rosebud, rosebud, little rose, don't you see? You are naïve and I am going to have you no matter what".  It is almost as if he is speaking this portion in his head, as if to say "you don't know this now, but you will later...".

So the rough boy ripped the little rose, 

Rosebud in the heather,

The voice is loud and tension is building as the voice links and draws out each syllable and seems to sway back and forth between each note, growing and growing, without taking a single breathe!  This commotion personifies the boy beginning to rape the rose.

Though she pricked, he held her close,

The voice remains loud and powerful, as if the vocalist, as a third person narrator, cannot believe what is happening.

Though she cried, the poor little rose,

Made no difference for her,

The voice, still strong and powerful, takes on an apologetic tone.  The vocalist seems to be crying out for this injustice that he is witnessing.

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

In what still seems like the voice of the narrator, the vocalist reflects on the events that have just happened in a sad, faint, and quiet tone.  The ascending scale, previously sung gloriously, is now sung with despair and forlorn.

Rosebud in the heather.

Finally, the voice jumps back into the character of the boy for one final phrase.  Content with himself for what he has just accomplished (rape), the music becomes happy and bouncy in a major mode once more. The boy walks away, whistling to himself, as he goes off to resume his day.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Musical and Textual Representation

Heidenröslein by Johann Wolfgang van Goethe

Sah ein Knab ein Röslein stehn,

Röslein auf der Heiden,

War so jung und morgenschön,

Lief er schnell, es nah zu sehn,

Sah's mit vielen Freuden.

Röslein, Röslein, Röslein rot,

Röslein auf der Heiden.

Knabe sprache: Ich breche dich,

Röslein auf der Heiden!

Röslein sprach: Ich steche dich, 

Daß du ewig denkst an mich,

Und ich will's nicht leiden.

Röslein, Röslein, Röslein rot,

Röslein auf der Heiden.

Und der wild Knabe brach

's Röslein auf der Heiden;

Röslein wehrte sich und stach,

Half ihr doch kein Weh und Ach,

Mußt es eben leiden.

Röslein, Röslein, Röslein rot,

Röslein auf der Heiden.

TRANSLATION BY LESLIE NORRIS AND ALAN F. KEELE:

Crude boy saw a tiny new

Rosebud in the heather,

Young as dawn and fresh as dew;

Ran straight up and stooped to view,

Filled his eyes with pleasure,

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

Rosebud in the heather.

Said the boy, "I will pick you,

Rosebud in the heather".

Rose replied, "Then I'll stick you,

Let my sharp thorns run you through,

You will not forget me, ever!"

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

Rosebud in the heather.

So the rough boy ripped the little rose, 

Rosebud in the heather,

Though she pricked, he held her close,

Though she cried, the poor little rose,

Made no difference for her,

Rosebud, rosebud, little red rose

Rosebud in the heather.

This poem by Goethe contains many common symbols.  The rose is a common metaphor for virginity and femininity.  The rose therefore resembles a young and delicate virgin woman.  Sex is also a common subject of poetry, but it is covered up with metaphors such as the rose because of its taboo nature.  (Sex is so taboo because it comes with many dangers and fears, such as sexually transmitted diseases and rape).

The story, therefore, might be interpreted as such: A boy comes upon a girl ("rose") he has never seen before.  This girl stands out from the rest of the flowers (" the heather").  Young, gorgeous, and most likely a virgin ("fresh"), he is overcome by sexual desires ("filled his eyes with pleasure") and decides he must have her.  He tells her right out that he desires to have sex with her and it is not up to her to decide if she wants to or not ("I will pick you").  The girl ("rose") responds in a fury and tells the boy that if he tries to have sex with her, she will use violence and fight back against him ("Let my sharp thorns run you through").  However, the boy does not care about what the young girl ("rose") has to say.  Through the use of force, he begins to have sex with her ("ripped the little rose").  She tries to fight him off ("though she pricked") but the boy, being much stronger than this young and fragile girl, holds her in place and forces her submit to his desires ("he held her close").  The girl, now aware that she is unable to escape, begins to cry and hopes that the boy might have pity on her sadness ("though she cried").  But the boy is relentless.  He has forgotten about how special that one "rose in the heather" was, and does not care about the girl's ("rose"'s) feelings, only about his own wishes ("made no difference for her").

*It should also be noted that the poem consists of 3 stanzas each having 7 lines.  This odd number of 7 throws off the traditional balance of symmetrical musical structure, but Schubert obviously works around this in his construction of the lied.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - The Sound-in-Time

0:00 - 0:07

The music begins with a playful pulse.  The voice is soft and pastel.  The bass line bounces up and down and then recoils all the way down.  The high soprano note is left alone suspended in air.

o:07-0:10

The voice rises while the melody falls.

0:10-0:14

The voice becomes slightly more forceful.  The end of this phrase feels open yet on edge.  The forward-moving-ness of the music is felt here.

0:14-0:20

The notes flow into each other delicately.

0:20-0:25

Abruptly the delicate fluidity is lost. The voice now sounds a bit shaky as it jumps on to each note.  However, after 2 seconds it returns to the delicate fluidity from before which now seems somehow even more fluid.

0:26-0:33

The voice becomes extremely light.  Enunciated with an air of pompousness.  The piano mimics the voice.

0:33-0:39

The voice becomes stronger and robust.  The syllables are enunciated with more vigor.  The voice feels like it starts off at a distance and comes closer until it reaches that same high note from the beginning, except this time the high note is sung out with power and assertion.

0:39-0:42

The voice grows louder and louder, the tension is building, the piano speeds up.  The melody ascends.

0:43-0:46

A stark contrast.  The voice has lost its vigor.  The tone of the voice is more gentle.  The melody descends.

0:47-0:53

A continuous downfall in loudness and melody.  The gentleness in his voice grows until the melody ends and he shies away.

0:53-0:58

The voice begins to regain its strength, building up to the end of this phrase.  It takes him longer to get to the highest note this time, the voice struggles to reach this point.

0:58-1:05

The piano is soft and so is his voice, which here resumes the same quality it possessed in the beginning.  The piece tenderly comes to an end...

1:06-1:12

... only to resume once more in the most dramatic way.  The piano is more enunciated.  The voice is rich and full of flavor.  The syllables are more drawn out, and there is barely an audible gap between each note.  This time, the high note rings out with glorious resonance.

1:12-1:15

The voice remains full-throated.  The syllables are still drawn out until the end when he starts to cut short his sounds and almost yell the words.

1:16-1:19

In a more delicate way, the rich and flowy nature of his voice returns abruptly.

1:20-1:26

The syllables flow into each other more than ever here, as the voice floats around serenely, and is gently put down.

1:26-1:32

The voice, having lost its fullness, remains soft and does not regain strength in this part, as it had before.  The high note at this point is the faintest note heard in the entire song.

1:32-1:40

The vocalist breathes out the final notes - they fall hushedly from his mouth and the piano catches them.  

1:41-1:46

Silence, white noise fades out.

----Phenomenological Conclusion:

Throughout the piece, certain syllables are always emphasized.  This, plus the extreme rising and falling of each phrase, the overall continuity (no rests), and the deliberate rubato make the piece actively move in all sorts of directions at once.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Syntax

The specific recording being analyzed is from an album entitled "Schubert: Die schöne Müllerin & Three Lieder".  It was recorded in stereo.

Tenor: Fritz Wunderlich; Piano: Hubert Giesen

Recording Supervision: Hans Ritter.

Recording Engineer: Heinz Wildhagen.

Recorded at Akademie der Wissenschaften, Munich from July 2, 1966 through July 5, 1966.

Label: Deutsche Grammophon

Released: September 17, 1996

Heidenröslein is in G Major, and in 2/4 time.  The instrumentation is for piano and one voice (The voice may be in any range. In this case it is a tenor voice.).  The vocal range marked in the score is from G4 to G5.  However, in adapting the song to the tenor vocal range, in this recording it is sung from G3 to G4.  The song is 16 bars in length and is repeated three times for a total of 48 bars of music.  The style marking is Lieblich, which translates from German to mean lovely, gentle, sweet, and charming.  The tempo marking in the score is quarter note = 69.  This recording starts off at tempo 69, however the tempo is not steady throughout.  The length of the recording is 1:46.  

The piano part is chordal. The majority of the piece is structured as such:  the downbeat is in the bass clef and the subsequent chord follows on the upbeat.  This is consistent until the final 3 measures of the 16 bar song, when the piano takes up the melody in a simple restatement.

The chord structure is as follows:

Phrase 1 With Tonic as I:   ||: I  I  ii4/2  ii4/2  V6/5  V4/2  I6  I

Prase 2 With Dominant as I:   IV IV V#4/2 V #4/2 I6 ii6 V7[#3] VI

Extention of Phrase 2 with Dominant as I: I6 ii6 V7[#3]  I

Phrase 3/ Coda with Tonic as I: V V4/2 I6 I, IV IV6 I

Afterthought: IV ii I6/4 V7 I  :|| x3

The first phrase ends somewhat openly on a sort of dragged out Imperfect Authentic Cadence.  The second phrase introduces C# accidentals and modulates to the dominant key of D Major, ending on a deceptive cadence.  The D major segment is then brought to a close with a short 2 bar extention that ends with a Perfect Authentic Cadence in the key of D.  There is a fermata hold on this final chord in the key of D.  The third phrase, which feels more like a coda, revists G Major.  There is a breathe halfway through what I have marked as Phrase 3, on a fermata on the I chord - this can be called a short Imperfect Authentic Cadence.  Then the vocal melody finishes its song with with a plagal cadence in the next 2 bars.  The piano ends the piece with a 2 and a half bar afterthought that solidifies the home key of G major with a Cadential 6/4 chord and a Perfect Authentic Cadence.

There are various stylistic and dynamic markings.  The music is marked pp at measures one and eleven, which is at the beginning of Phrase 3/Coda.  At this second pp, the music is also marked "nachgebend", which translates to mean getting slower, yielding.  However, two measures later in measure thirteen, the music is marked "wie oben" which translates literally as "in the style of above", so it is implied that Schubert wanted to performer to slow down leading up to the end of measure twelve, and then to resume his original tempo upon reaching measure thirteen.  In the piece, there is also one crescendo marking in measure 9, as the music reaches its PAC in D Major, and two decrescendo markings in measure 15, as the song winds down.

Link to score

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Open Listening

The song begins without any introduction, or even a breathe by the vocalist. The melody simply starts and then moves forward.  When the first phrase begins it feels like the singer is skipping along while remaining in a legato style, as the piano bounces back and forth between the bass note and the chord (This piano part is consistent until the last few measure of the song, and it is the driving force of the piece.  The part bounces while remaining a distinct legato quality, which is probably due to a deliberate use of the sustain pedal). As the music moves toward the end of the first phrase, the dynamic grows from a gentle mp to a solid mf - this is especially emphasized in the piano part.  And as the tenor reaches the high note at the end of the phrase, he suddenly softens his voice and almost whispers the syllable.  Additionally, when the singer reaches the end of the phrase he employs rubato.   In fact, there is a rubato feel throughout the phrase from the beginning to the end, and moreover, the tempo fluctuates throughout the whole piece.    

The second phrase begins in the same resilient manner as the first.  However, an accidental is quickly introduced and suddenly the song is filled with an apologetic instability; yet in the next 4 bars this same accidental transforms the melody into a glorious statement that still bears a touch of remorse.  This middle portion of the song ends powerfully in the dominant key, and after a short held out note, the melody swiftly moves back to the original key without any hesitation whatsoever.

We hear an ascending scale that brings us up to the tonic.  It is held out for a moment, and then, as if letting out a deep sigh, the melody arpeggiates downward and lands on the tonic one octave below.  The piece comes to a close with a short restatement of the melodic theme in the piano.  This short composition is repeated three times through, which is the length needed to go to span the entirety of Goethe's poem.  The second time the song begins with more fury, at a slightly faster tempo, in a louder dynamic, with the ends of phrases being sung out rather than whispered.  The notes are almost sung staccato and the syllables seem to be pronounced more clearly, almost as if the singer is speaking or yelling rather than singing and is trying to emphasize the words to a non-German speaker.  Halfway through the second time, the vocals reach a calm legato again, and the rubato is more dragged out, and more dramatic.  During this portion, the piano is also much lighter than before.  Overall, the second time through we see much more stylistic and dynamic contrast.  And the third time through sees even MORE dynamic contrast than the first and second - the first half is ff and full of vigor and the second half is supple and forgiving.  Finally the piece ends, with the restatement of the melody that occurred each time in the piano voice - there is no large cadence, just a gentle affirmation of the tonic that is quickly left alone.

This piece is brief yet it packs a big punch.  It is full of dynamic contrast and deliberate details that bring a bit of magic to the song.  Also, Goethe's poem fits perfectly in the context of this lieb.  The syllables of the poem bounce and roll from note to note and the unbroken sound that springs from this relationship between music and text makes it hard to believe that the poem ever existed separate from the song.

Schubert "Heidenröslein, D. 257 (Op.3/3)" - Historical Background

Schubert was born and died in Vienna, Austria (1/31/1797-11/19/1828).  As a composer, he may be considered a bridge between the "classical" and "romantic" musical periods. Schubert is known for his ingenius melodic writing and his original sense of modulation in harmonic writing.  His music is often described as passionate, dramatic, and above all, extremely inventive.  He composed operas, symphonies, chamber music and more, yet throughout his short life of 31 years the majority of Schubert's output were lieder.  Heidenröalein, one of the 600 or more lieder that Schubert composed, was written in 1815 which may have been his most prolific year (in 1815, Schubert composed around 140 lieder, in addition to other works).   (Newbould)

Franz Schubert is very closely tied with the form of the lied.  A lied is an "art song," usually written for piano and one voice, that is set to the lyrics of a highly literary poem.  Lieder are associated with 19th century European romantic music and the simultaneous flowering of German poetry.  Though seen elsewhere, lieder developed in Germany and specifically, in the hands of Franz Schubert and Robert Schumann.

The poem "Heidenröslein" was an early work composed by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832), one of the most influential thinkers and writers in Western culture.  He has an immense history of literary output, his most famous work being the two-part poetic drama "Faust".   Though Schubert was one of the pioneers of setting such well-known poetry to song, he was not the only one to write music to Heidenröslein. (Others such as Brahms and Schumann composed for the poem). 

Since the phenomenology of this analysis will be greatly affected by the vocalist in the recording, it is important to acknowledge the historical background of said vocalist. Fritz Wunderlich like Schubert lived a short life, dying at just 35 years old.  The German tenor was born into a family of music and upon receiving a scholarship to Frieburg School of Music, he began to study both french horn and voice. During his career, he performed many operas in his local language of German, including Mozarts' "Magic Flute".  He also especially noted for his interpretations of Schubert and Schumann's lieder cycles.

Meta-Critique of a Published Critique

Link to the original analysis of the 1889 cylinder recording of Johannes Brahms' piano performance of a segment of his First Hungarian Dance.

Though it is not structured in the same way, this analysis follows the most important rule of the eclectic analysis which is to form the analysis around the work.  The goal is to explore this short, noise-filled recording for the nature of Brahms' performance and a window into the past.  The analysis starts off with a bit of historical background about Brahms, and a more lengthy historical background simply about the recording itself. Here, the analysis provides enough data to teach the reader about the difficulties surrounding this out of use recording style (by cylinders).  The amount of information given about HOW to denoise, however, slightly distracts the reader from the text.  Perhaps this portion might be limited if it is to be presented to a reader who is mostly interested in the particularities of the music itself. 

The author takes a section for general observation or as we might call it, an open viewing of the recording.  Then, the reader is provided with at-length syntactical analysis in which every piece of data is scrutinized.  Once again, the diagrams provide good insight as he compares a transcription of the recording with a transcription of the score. This comparison moves the author smoothly into a discussion of improvisation in brahms' performance, which was what the analyst hoped to uncover in the recording.  This leads him into a nice conclusion, which includes his own kind of meta-critique, instructing the reader about just how difficult it was to decipher the recording and how his attempts are merely a first step in the right direction. 

 Overall, this analysis is a huge success.  It provides a multitude of syntactical data from a recording that is barely audible.  It is true that much of the anaylsis was devoted to describing how things were done, which may or may not benefit the reader.  However, this analysis was limited in nature; due to the terrible quality of the recording, it would have been impossible construct any sort of sound-in-time analysis.

The recording in question can be heard here in its original form, throughout the denoising process and reconstructed as a midi file:  (© 1999 Jonathan Berger, CCRMA, Stanford University. All Rights Reserved.)

The original wax cylinder recording 1889

First step in denoising

Second step in denoising

Third step in denoising

Fourth step in denoising

The same phrase with a synthetic sound overlaid upon the voice that was 'excavated' by the denoising process

Midi reconstruction that takes all the data from the analysis of the recording and maps it onto the entire piece

Ferrara, "Phenomenology as a Tool for Musical Analysis"

Historically, the western mind has yearned to possess objective knowledge.   Current scientific philosophers and phenomenolgists alike, however, have begun to explore the idea of personal knowledge: "the personal (experiential) involvement of a 'knower' in all acts of understanding"(356).   In his article "Phenomenology as a Tool for Musical Analysis," Ferrara examines phenomenology as the means of incorporating experiential knowledge into music analysis.   The phenomenological method does not dominate or manipulate the work as it does in standard analysis, but rather it allows the work to question the analyst and the analyst to respond.  According to Ferrara, a work "functions not only as a series of solved problems to technical questions" but as a "polyphonic texture of syntactical, semantic, and ontological meanings" and therefore it must be attended to in a more human and complex way (357).

Ferrara chooses to analyze Edgard Varèse's Poème électronique, an atonal electronic piece of music, phenomenologically because he believes that most other theoretical approaches cannot function in analyzing this type of music.  In performing this analysis, he is attempting to prove "that applied music theory can be broadened to include the implementation of philosophical interpretation" (358). 

He begins with 3 open listenings.  He maintains that you can and should do as many open listenings as the work lends itself too.  After each listening, he records what he hears, building upon his observations each time, and by the third listening he even begins to try and categorize the sounds into some sort of basic sections.  This leads him into the first listening for syntactical form.  First he describes how he will approach the syntactical analysis - since it will not be as straightforward as a standard syntactical analysis that only works with tonal or structured music, he will have to structure the syntactical analysis around the piece - and then proceeds to analyze each section of the piece (he has broken it up into 10 sections).  Ferrara writes that it is difficult to bracket out "semantic" meanings in a piece like this and focus solely on syntax, since the syntax is made up of sounds like birds in a jungle and crashes which obviously have built-in references.  (This proves, once again, how the analyst must be open to the work and not stuck behind rules).  Syntax is approached on 2 levels in Ferrara's analysis.  Firstly, the analyst brackets out formal training to focus on sounds and textures, and secondly, the analyst may use traditional methods to uncover "higher levels of syntax" and to build upon the first more phenomenological analysis of the music (360).

Ferrara moves on to analyze semantic content and meaning in the work.  Again, there are 2 levels - the obvious, for example a bell tolling, and the second, which deals with a specific and deeper meaning for every sound, such as the bell tolling symbolizing time. Semantic meaning is symbolic and has to do with making references.

The third part of the analysis is onto-historical, which not only grows out of but clarifies the previous syntactical and semantic analysis'.    From listening to the work, Ferrara establishes that "Poème électronique crystallizes what it means to be in the modern era.  In our actual lives, technology (computers, automobiles, or electric can openers) surrounds our existence" (369).   This opens up the work to even more symbolic reference, such as: "The concept of "time ticking away or a heartbeat stopping underscores the importance of temporality in human being (370)".    Additionally, the free and sporadic nature of the music coming in and out of the listener's conciousness parallels the way that realities of our existence come in and out of our conciousness awareness without order.   The onto-logical analysis, therefore, elaborates upon and gives depth to the prior two steps.

The three levels of analysis described in the text are all inter-connected, constantly building upon each other.     In the final open listening, these levels come together to create "an intuitive sense of the whole" (371).  Certain passages, directions, etc. now stand out to Ferrara as he weaves his analysis together, and he is finally able to draw some solid conclusions based in experiential knowledge.

He concludes by stressing that there is no correct way to analyze a work.   He contends that the analysis and the work must be essentially bonded together, grounding the former in the latter.  "If the work functions at levels of meaning other than syntax, then so must the analysis.  Musical analysis must not be limited to a discussion of formal elements"(373).  Ferrara insists that music exists on a multiplicity of levels, and therefore must be approached from many different dimensions, as is explained in the phenomenological analysis.

Reaction

I was unsure why this was titled a "phenomenological analysis" - was the whole analysis supposed to be described in a phenomenological sense, or was the phenomenological element supposed to be the most important, with syntax, semantics, and onto-historical worlds to supplement it?  I was also confused by the syntax.  To me, the syntax seemed like a phenomenological analysis - it consisted of phrases like "juxtaposition of hard percussive sounds" and "round, deep tones" (364-5).  The first step of syntactical analysis especially, when the analyst brackets out formal training just to listen to sound is purely phenomenological in the sense that we have spoken of.  Overall, this entire analysis seems to take on a slightly different structure than the eclectic method, but I can see how the eclectic method grew from this.

Dickie, "Art and the Aesthetic" Chapter 5

In Chapter 5 of his text, "Aesthetic Attention: Disinterested Awareness," Dickie considers two common theories of aesthetic attention - those of Jerome Stolnitz and Eliseo Vivas.  Stolnitz's definition of the aesthetic attitude is characterized by "disinterested and sympathetic attention to and contemplation of any object of awareness whatever, for its own sake alone"(114).    Stolnitz's aesthetic attention has no concern for any hidden purpose in an object, but looks thoughtfully upon the object in question just to experience it's aesthetic.  Similarly, Vivas defines the aesthetic attitude as a fascinated attention on an object, accompanied by "the intransitive apprehension of an object's immanent meaning and values in their full presentational immediacy"(114).   Vivas believes that with by apprehending the inherent meanings, one can experience an object in real-time for what it is, aesthetically.  In this way, Stolnitz and Vivas both suggest that man possesses the power to access the aesthetic object and suspend all outside things through his own power and attitude.   Dickie points out however that it seems more appropriate to employ "distinterested awareness"  when one has some type of ulterior motive, such as to write a review of a sports game, yet it seems more useful to employ "intransitive attention" when one has a predetermined desire, such as for a team to win a game.  Therefore, he contends, it important to understand both theories in order to cover all cases in which they may be utilized.

Dickie questions the idea of interested attention.  He presents an example of a boy who looks at a painting of his father and instead of noting its color or expressive nature is reminded of his father.   By the theorists, this may be described as "attending transitively to the painting by using the work of art as a vehicle for associations, that is, as a case of attending with external factors in mind"(117).  Yet Dickie claims that this boy is simply inattentive to the painting, rather that interestedly aware of it, because as soon as the painting sparks his memory he becomes distracted from the work and begins attending to his own memories.  Dickie also considers a boy who knows of the man in the painting, although it is not his own father.  Here, Dickie makes an interesting claim: "The fact that a certain bit of knowledge about a painting may distract attention from it, does not prove that that certain bit of knowledge must distract attention"(119).  Just because this new boy knows who the subject of the painting is, does not mean that he does not possess the ability to fully appreciate and concentrate on the painting itself while he is concious of this relation.  Next, Dickie builds upon his ideas and contemplates an example of two boys listening to music, one of which is listening to analyze the piece while the other is simply listening with no ulterior purpose.   The theorists, Dickie asserts, understand the first boy to be interestedly aware, and the second one to be disinterestedly aware.  Yet Dickie contends the only claim that can be drawn from this example is: "people attend with different motives"(118).  The music is appreciated in different ways because the boys possess different motives, but there is really only one way of listening, or attending.

Dickie goes on to present examples of false disinterested awareness in other various art forms, like acting and literature: in each he builds up the same conclusion that there are no different types of attention.  When he explores literature, in specific, he notes Vivas' assertion that if a poem is approached non-aesthetically then it can only function in practical ways such as for social criticism or for history.  This appalls Dickie because, like Aldrich, Vivas is beginning to make claims without backing them up.  Dickie uses more character examples to disprove Vivas and spitefully concludes that theorists like Vivas "want us to ignore the historical content and social criticism in literature, as if they were somehow not proper aspects of literature" (124).   How one might employ this forced ignorance (or disinterested awareness) is unclear to Dickie.  This leads him to explore where the concept of disinterested awareness began.

It was originally thought that in order to experience beauty one must be disinterested, that is, "not influenced by regard for personal advantage" (124).   The idea literally became "disinterested contemplation" (contemplation without regard for personal advantage).   Then, however, it evolved into "contemplating something without regard to anything in which it stands in relation"(125).  He traces this back to a man named Hutcheson and his idea that the "sense of beauty is triggered by a certain sort of object independently of any relation in which such an object stands to any other thing"(125).  Dickie explains how Hutcheson's theory of disinterested senses does in fact make some sense, yet the new theories on disinterested consciousness are utterly confused.

Finally, Dickie attempts to show how the new theory on disinterested awareness has been used falsely to back up misguided conclusions on criticism and art appreciation.  He considers Stolnitz's assertion that criticizing artwork is distinctly different from appreciating it.  Stolnitz claims that critics of art seek reasons to back up evaluations of the work in question, while to appreciate the art requires a whole different kind of perception.  He also notes that criticism is good in preparation, but one should never be thinking in this analytical way during the free aesthetic experience.  Stolnitz is basically claiming that a critic is interestedly aware, however Dickie accuses Stolnitz in having no basis for his conclusions as Dickie himself precedes to conclude, once again, that the only thing that separates a critic and a non-critic is his motives, not his way of attending to the work (in which there can be no difference since there is only one way).  Dickie claims that a critic's search for reasons in an artwork are not "incompatible with the appreciation of art", but rather that in noting reasons (either subconsciously or consciously) one's appreciation is often amplified (129). Dickie expands by claiming that seeking out reasons is only being ready to notice things and this action does not have compete with appreciation; in many cases it would even be impossible to analyze, and then appreciate, such as during a live performance.  Dickie considers another common claim by aesthetic attitude theorists, that the moral values in an art work can often disrupt or distract our aesthetic attention.  He argues that not only do most art works have a moral point of view, but these views are often the most important aspects of the work.  There is, as Dickie states, no reason to treat this aspect of the work any differently, and even if there was reason, there is no way to do this.

REACTION

I was struck by Stolntiz's idea that one should not criticize a work during the actual aesthetic experience, because it reminded me of the eclectic method.  Whenever we have an open listening or viewing, we are freely and unquestioningly surrendering ourselves to the work.  Yet, in all other steps of the analysis, we are critically questioning the work at hand and its various aspects.  In this, we seem to be following Stolnitz and the aesthetic-attitude theorists, rather than Dickie.  However, the eclectic method also relates to Dickie in that it is never done with any step - it continues to build upon itself and "the finding of reasons goes on constantly"(130).  Articles such as this reveal how the formation of the eclectic method must have drawn upon many different theories on aesthetic.

Dickie, "Art and the Aesthetic" Chapter 6

In Chapter 6 of Dickie's Art and the Aesthetic entitled "Aesthetic Perception: Seeing As," he presents Virgil Aldrich's theory on aesthetic perception, and precedes to discount it.  Aldrich questions what the "'proper parts' of an aesthetic object" are in an artwork (135).   In answering this question, he maintains that through the use of "aesthetic perception," these 'proper parts' can be revealed to the viewer (136).  Aldrich strives to develop this idea of aesthetic perception as an objective way of experiencing the art object; meaning, the aesthetic in a work can be understood objectively rather than subjectively but only when the work is looked at in a certain way.

Aldrich considers ambiguous figures (figures that can be seen as representations of multiple things, such as a picture that can look like either a rabbit or a duck).   "What is seen (the representation) is conditioned by what one has in mind, but that what is seen 'is not just a thought or even just a subjective image; it is an object of perception of some sort'"(137).  He claims that each representation within the image is an object of perception, and uses this argument to prepare his main point that there exists 2 types of perception: ordinary (used in daily life and science), and aesthetic.    Dickie notes here that Aldrich relies too much on this example of ambiguous figures as the main model for his perception theory, and this becomes evident as Aldrich's theory does not move much from this example.  Regardless, after presenting these two types of perception, Aldrich presents the idea of a 'material thing'.  Basically, he argues that it can either be perceived as a "physical object" or an "aesthetic object," depending on which mode of perception is employed (138).

A diagram is now presented representing the way that an ambiguous figure is perceived.  On the left, there is the perceiving subject, from which three separate lines extend, and at the ends of which are three separate representations of the ambiguous figure.  Dickie comments on how this diagram describing the phenomenon of ambiguous figures "provides no basis for the two kinds of perception" (139).  Rather, it suggests that there is merely one form of perception that yields three separate aesthetic object.  Dickie then accuses Aldrich of using "impressive technical terminology" to state his theory without actually supporting it with evidence!

Dickie precedes to consider two of Aldrich's attempts at illustrating aesthetic perception in use.  Aldrich presents two examples in which ordinary things, a skyline at dusk  and a snowflake, are seen impressionistically.   Dickie however is not convinced by these examples, for "although it would seem to be all right to say that the protruding sky area [and snowflake] [have] a kind of impressionistic character, the fact does not justify saying that a special mode of perception has been isolated," which is what Aldrich had been attempting to prove (141-2).   For Dickie, the uncommon or pleasing nature of these examples provides Aldrich with no solid reason to claim that one must have used a special aesthetic mode of perception in order to perceive the objects in this way.  

Aldrich returns to his ideas on representations in ambiguous figures.  He claims these figures and their representations are seen impressionistically, as something that they are not in reality thought to be, and therefore aesthetically.  Dickie argues, however, that an aesthetic experience can not be found in every single seen representation.  Since Aldrich he asserts this claim and then stops without building up his argument, he leaves unclear what exactly he means by impressionistic viewing, and leaves his argument open for Dickie to tear apart.  Dickie asserts once again that "the usual way of looking at paintings is not like these ways of looking" that Aldrich has described and ultimately succeeds in making Aldrich look like a fool.  

Dickie finishes off his argument by stating that there is no justification in saying that there is a certain kind of aesthetic perception which an aesthetic object to reveal itself.  He does commend Aldrich for recognizing that the aesthetic objects are the 'proper objects' within a work that should be appreciating and critiqued, something that previous theorists had ignored.  However, Dickie makes his final claim against Aldrich, and against many previous theorists in this field, there exists no individual power in man "to change non-aesthetic characteristics into aesthetic ones or to make aesthetic features accessible"(145).  Aldrich attempted to make the aesthetic features of a work accessible by a special mode of perception, but the inevitable falsity in this theory became the perfect proof for Dickie's final conclusion.

REACTION

I agree with Dickie.   Let's say I am looking at an apple on my desk - am I to simply switch on my "aesthetic perception" and all of the sudden notice some striking aesthetic objects in the apple and in the way it is positioned and lighted on the desk?  It seems ridiculous that I could switch on and off different modes of perception in order to try and perceive different aspects of the same object.  Perhaps if Aldrich had backed up his claim better, I could understand his ideas on perception better, but Dickie disproved him so well that his claims look foolish to me now.  Additionally, Dickie's final conclusion about the inability of someone to make non-aesthetic objects into aesthetic ones or for someone to expose the aesthetic object himself seems justifiable.  I feel as though the exposure of the aesthetic object is something that the work does in itself as an entity after viewing it for a long time.  I also feel that the aesthetic object is to an extent individualized and subjective, as each person does not perceive the aesthetic nature of an artwork to be the same thing.  Perhaps this is reliant on a person's training, but I feel that the aesthetic object that I find in a work versus that which an art critic finds is can be just as pleasing or "correct."

Ferrara, Chapter VII: An Eclectic Method for Sound, Form, and Reference

Chapter VII of 'Philosophy and the Analysis of Music' gives an overview of the eclectic method and demonstrates how it is truly "circular" upon itself (185).    Though each step in the method has questions and a direction, each step must also have the capacity to be infiltrated by any unexpected levels of musical significance.  As an analyst, the key is to be responsive to what the artwork questions of you, and to "maintain a stance marked by openness" while working within the guiding principles of the methods (179).

The first step is to study the (mostly) musical history of both the time period that the composer wrote in and of the composer himself.  One asks both general and specific questions of this nature in order to gain historical data.  The second step is an open listening of the work, during which "the listener becomes oriented to the overall sound, structure, and message of the work" (181).  There is no specific way to engage in an open listening; one simply listens without prejudgement, and keeps their ears open to notions that will be later explored.  Step three is a "literal and direct" account of the syntax in a piece of music, and step four is a description of the sound-in-time which, unlike step three, employs a "poetic style" of descriptive language (182).   The fifth step, "the first level of referential meanings," analyzes musical representation; that is, the "meanings" of a piece of music that can be found in "a program or a text" (183).  The sixth step, and second level of referential meanings, is a report of how a piece of music is "expressive of human feelings"(183).  This step involves a hermeneutic or interpretive analysis which allows for the listener to discover virtual feelings in a work.  However, Ferrara warns that "during this step, the listener/analyst must exercise control over any proclivity to dominate the music by utilizing it for ordinary emotional release"(183).  It is important to stay detached, especially in step six, so that one's personal sentiments do not interfere with the message of the piece.    Step seven also uses hermeneutic analysis to uncover the cultural world of the composer within the piece of music.  It is important to note that both steps six and seven "must be grounded in the levels of the sound-in-time and syntax," instead of analyzed with suspended judgement.  In step seven, for example, one looks at how the cultural world relates with and emerges out of the syntax and sound, rather than giving a full and isolated cultural recount.

Although each step of the eclectic method functions independently, they are all brought together in Step Eight, the second open listening.  Ferrara maintains: "Each stratum remains perceptibly discreet yet there is an inner connective organicity that weaves them together in a dynamic state" (185).  In order to understand fully the complexity of a musical work, it is important to experience both the parts and the whole (multiple times), which is exactly what the eclectic method allows the analyst to do. 

The last two steps are a performance guide and a meta-critique.  The purpose of the former is to guide a potential performer in their comprehension of the work, whereas the latter is meant to provide the analyst with a chance to self-evaluate, and hopefully reveal to oneself ways in which the eclectic method and/or one's approach to it could be improved in the future.

Ferrara finishes off the chapter, and his discourse, by bridging the eclectic method together with Heidegger's philosophy of art.  Just as Heidegger believes "truth" happens in an artwork, Ferrara asserts that "music" happens "when [an] analyst responds to the multiplicity of levels of musical significance in [a] work"(185-6).   He maintains that the eclectic method, a method meant to respond and reconsider, is based upon this happening conception of music.  

REACTION

I enjoyed this short review of the eclectic method.  It rounded off the text nicely and demonstrated how each step moves smoothly into the next.  Additionally, the comparison Ferrara made to a pianist practicing a 4-part fugue was a nice parallel to the eclectic method.  It got the point across that if you take apart and closely examine each piece of something, and then put all the pieces back together, they will blend yet each part will inevitably retain something individual.  I also enjoyed the parallel between Heidegger's art philosophy and the eclectic method.  It elucidated why we studied Heidegger so in depth, and by reading text from two different authors (Ferrara and Heidegger) on the idea of a noun "happening" helped to both clarify and justify the concept.

Ferrara, Chapter V: Heidegger's Philosophy Of Art

Martin Heidegger believed that the Western philosophical culture created an abstract vision of what being is.  He attempted to deconstruct the standing philosophical tradition and reconnect with pre-Socratic roots, yet in his earliest work Being and Time he ended up writing into the same tradition that he so wanted to analyze and expose, to subvert its apparent significance.   At this point it became apparent to him that he would need to make an extreme move if he wished to escape philosophical tradition and metaphysics - this is when Heidegger "moved toward a meditative and poetic stance"(124).

In his later works, Heidegger starts to find that "resoluteness" connotes a role that is more passive than active. In Being and Time, Heidegger describes how to live authentically: "being authentic is being-toward-death.  This is not a negativism but a resolute facing up to one's temporality.  Only through such 'resoluteness' can one become authentic" (123).   The "resoluteness" is defined by Dasein, by being casted into the world towards death.  However, once Heidegger turns, he claims that rather than being thrown into the world, one should wait patiently and openly for Being to freely bring itself upon oneself, such as it does when one experiences an artwork.  It is noted that this form of waiting is non-subjective - rather than waiting for something and wanting it to come, one waits upon it selflessly and with no sense of desire.  It is also not passive waiting - it is simply "releasement" and allowing something to expose itself (125).  He maintains that instead of willing something this exposure to happen, "one must learn to think in a way that is responsive" - Western thinking men, he wrote, have forgotten to do just this(124).

In his essay, "The Origin of the Work of Art," Heidegger begins by defining the artist as the origin of the art work, and the art work as the origin of the artist.  He adds, however, that there is a 3rd element on which both are also dependent and that is the art itself.  Heidegger describes art as the "higher reality" and claims that therefore "the question of the origin of the work of art is really a question concerning the nature of art"(126).

He then questions the thinglyness of art, and inquires if it's thingyless is like the thinglyness of all other things.  He explores 3 common "thing-theories" but ultimately rejects each one based upon its ambiguity, distance, and inability to allow the things to show themselves.   When exploring the third theory, "the thing as formed matter," Heidegger states that "the thingly element is the matter or work material upon which the artist works.  He works upon the matter by giving it a form"(126,127).  In this way, the thinglyness of art is different from that of other things, which can be results of accidents or nature.  At this point, Heidegger begins to explore the nature of equipment, whos "matter and form are based on their use"(127).  The way to understand equipment therefore is when it is in its truest form, being fully utilized.  Through the example of Van Gogh's "Les Souliers," Heidegger describes how a piece of equipment such as shoes can solidify the outside world in them.  He sees the existence of the women who wears them through the art work; we see that the shoes are reliable and a part of their owner's cultural world - in this, the art work reveals "the Being of equipment"(129).  What are the shoes in truth?  For Heidegger, the art work establishes this through revelation of being.  The truth is not how close the shoes resemble a real pair of shoes, but it is something (previously hidden) that emerges from the work of art.  Human feelings and existence that the real life owner of the shoes would not notice then come to life in virtual forms in the painting.

A work of art, whether it is representative of something real or not, is built out of two elements.  The first, the earth, is made up of the primary or fundamental work materials and thingly characteristics that one finds when he steps back to view the work - these are ever-emerging and exploding with possibilities.  The second, the world of the artist, "transforms the composer's world into symbolic form" in dynamic and emerging ways (since the world itself is constantly changing as ones views and values change) that essentially make the work of art, work(132).  For Heidegger, nothing about art is static - it "emerges and unfolds in our experience of it"(132).

The relationship between the earth and the world is henceforth compared to the relationship between existing reality and Being.  The earth, like existing reality, is concealing and ordinary until it is exemplified by and viewed in the context of a broader ontological world which "thrusts the earth out into the open"; only then do the earth and existing reality become more than what they physically are and only then can the artist/man transcend mentally and have the potential be open to the world/Being (134).

In the case of a painting of a Greek temple, the art work gives the cultural world of ancient Greece durability and liveliness.  Heidegger claims that the ancient Greek world "remains open in the open expanse or world that has been set into the temple"(135).  Yet what does it mean to be "open"?  Heidegger maintains that the ideational world is open, and that in order for a work to be a work it must be open; "the open character of the work allows for the 'portico' through which we are transported" back into the life world of the artist(135).  The art work inherently presents the space for the cultural world to dwell.

An example concerning the same Greek temple is given to help one understand the earth more comprehensively.  Ferrara puts you in the position of a person walking to the Greek temple.  He suggests that you kick a stone while walking toward the temple, and then take a rest on a stone bench, before arriving and marveling at the beauty of the stone temple.   He claims these three stone objects to be made of the same material, though the first is only a mere thing, an accidental piece of earth, that you discarded, and the second is something that "used up" the stone material to be useful and to service man - the stone had become imperceptible in its functionality.  The third stone however, possessed an extra quality, the "ontological world of the historical people that surrounded and lived through that work" was set into the earth (137).    Heidegger concludes that only through this relationship is the earth able to show itself and move into the open world as it simultaneously grounds the world in its own eternal nature.  Here, a continuous strife is manifested, an "opening-concealing dynamic within the work of art" (137).  This is how truth emerges and can be defined as the nature of the work of art.    To Heidegger, however, the art's truth is all reliant not only upon its creator and these elements, but upon the appreciator and how he/she preserves the work of art by understanding the work. As Ferrara states, "Only if the appreciator allows the work to show itself as the struggle of earth and world can truth happen in the work"(139).  In this sense, truth is as dynamic as the art itself. 

The text is concluded with Heideggers beliefs on art and history.  He believes that "art is a place in which momentous historical activities and occurrences take place"(140).  Heidegger concludes by commenting on the historical nature of both being and art, and human understanding in relation to one's onto-historical world.

REACTION

Wow.  Once again, an extremely dense read but this chapter really clarified a lot for me.  (Please correct me if I misinterpreted parts of the text).  Ferrara's explanation of Heidegger's essay took me on a journey with Heidegger and showed me the ways in which he explored and often dismissed standing concepts such as the 3 thing-theories.  Overall, though still slightly unclear about the concept of "Dasein," I now feel much more satisfied with my knowledge of Heidegger's philosophical concepts after reading through Chapter V.  Ferrara had a lot of interesting insight that complemented Heidegger's concepts, as well, and it was great to read this chapter after hearing his lectures in class this week.  One part of the text that I especially enjoyed was the example with the stone, the bench, and the temple.  It was such a vivid and common image that it helped to clarify these complex philosophical concepts.  I wish these types of analogies occurred in all of the texts!  Additionally, towards the end I began to feel that Heidegger's essay on art was truly pointing towards some larger concepts having to do with history, being, and time.  I can't say what those are for sure, but I felt the implicit move away from art in the final sentences.

Formal Analysis of J.S. Bach's Two-Part Invention No.8

 J.S. Bach's Two-Part Invention No.8 is in F major, and in 3/4 time.  The piece contains 34 measures.  The range is from C2 to C6.  There are only 3 dynamic markings in the entire piece: forte in measure 1, piano in measure 12, and crescendo in measure 19.  The structure is strictly two-voice counterpoint - the only chord, F Major, appears in the final bar of the piece.  

The structure of the first 11 bars is a classic example of Shoenberg's "musical sentence." It begins with the presentation.  The first 2 measures contain the basic idea as the F major chord is outlined.  This is followed by 2 measures of its varied repetition, which outlines a first inversion F major chord.  Throughout this presentation, the voices create an imitative canon as each measure-long phrase is repeated successively between the two clefs. (For example, in measure 1 the right hand has F-A-F-C-F, and in measure 2, the left hand has the same pattern of F-A-F-C-F, with identical rhythms, one octave lower.)   Then, in the 5th measure, the two voices meet up rhythmically, and remain a 14th apart for two bars.  This second phrase can be called the continuation.  It, however, lasts for 7 bars.  In 4 bars it drives the music to a temporary, and imperfect cadence; in beat 1 of measure 9, the piece reaches F major again, with A in the soprano.  The sentence is henceforth lengthened with 3 measures of harmonic acceleration that drives the piece to a G Major chord (the secondary dominant of C) and a modulation into the dominant key of C Major.  This is an elision cadence.  It simultaneously marks the end of the exposition and the beginning of the development.

The development begins in measure twelve.  It begins with the same imitative pattern as in measure one, except completely reversed - the key is C instead of F, the dynamic marking is piano instead of forte, and the leading voice begins in the left hand, rather than in the right. The basic canon is expanded upon in the development.   In the first 11 bars, each one bar phrase is repeated immediately and successively in the opposite hand.  However, in many cases (m14-15, 18-20, 21-23, 24-25) the phrases in each voice are expanded into 2 bar or 3 bar phrases, which are not always repeated exactly in the opposite hand.  In these situations, the melodic idea is furthered.  In measure 15 a "pedal A" motif is introduced, and repeated in other keys, in both hands, throughout the development.  This can be considered a variation on a previously introduced motif.  In measure 5, the right hand plays F-A-G-A-F-A-G-A-F-A-G-A; in measure 15, the right hand plays C-Bflat-C-A-C-A-Bflat-A-C-A-A-A.  The pattern has been altered but it retains the idea of returning to one note, on the up beat.  Another expansive idea is the descending arpeggio pattern, introduced in measure 21.   This can be considered a variation on the ascending arpeggio pattern that exists throughout the piece until this point.  The new pattern remains in the left hand for 3 bars, then the right for 2 bars, and finally the left for 1 more bar.  In the last bar of descending arpeggios, the motif from the continuation in measure 5 is reintroduced.  This can be called the recapitulation.  The remainder of the piece, m26-34 is identical to m4-12 in rhythm and pattern.  The only way in which it is varied is the tonality.  The first occurrence of this pattern drove the piece to the dominant, however, this instance functions to drive the piece to the tonic, and to the final perfect authentic cadence.

META-CRITIQUE

 My insecurity about the chord structures takes away from the critique, as I don't offer any information about exact progressions.  Additionally, at times when writing the critique, I found myself unsure of how to convey exactly what I wanted to say.  This can be attributed to my own personal level of knowledge, and how many musical terms I am acquainted with.  For example, I was not sure if I could use the sonata form terms (exposition, development, and recapitulation) to describe J.S. Bach's 34 bar invention.  Instances like this may have left my critique feeling a little messy and unclear.

The critique may not be completely objective.  This, again, can be accredited to my uncertainty in how to use terms and what terms to use.  I may have used terms that convey my feelings about the piece instead of 100% pure syntactical fact.  Also, I was unsure whether or not I was supposed to have access to the sheet music of the piece.  Perhaps then, my meta-critique is that I, the author, am a student who is still in the process of learning how to structure a formal analysis.

Gebauer/Wulf "Mimesis"

Summary

This article explores the evolution of the concept of "mimesis".  It begins with a disection of the word mimesis and attempts to trace its roots.  An expansive range of meanings are found; most basically: imitation, representation, and expression.  The article brings up the interpretations of Else, Koller, and many others in exploring the earliest mentionings of mimesis, and concludes that "it is not possible to identify any clear aesthetic usage" of words like mimesis before Plato's time (29).

The article goes on to investigate Plato's concepts of mimesis before the Republic, in which "writing is not yet understood as mimesis and mimesis has not yet been restricted to questions of art"(31). Perhaps this is because Plato had not yet felt effects of the changing world (from an oral culture to a literal one).  Plato's work on mimesis is henceforth differentiated into 3 sections: mimesis as the "imitation of a concrete action" in which "a motive can be identified,"  mimesis in which "the persons imitated exist as models" and have ethical values that should be emulated, and mimesis used metaphorically"(31-32).  What is important here is the way in which Plato enforces mimesis, as opposed to the way he approaches the concept later, in the Republic.

"At issue is the education of members of the guardian class, with the goal of making them capable of fulfilling the duties they will be assigned by the state.  Since young people learn essentially through imitation, one of the most important tasks of education is the selection of objects to which they will be exposed.  Plato does not share the assumption that young people can become stronger by confronting negative models; his conception of mimesis suggests more that the effect would be unfavorable, leaving them weaker than before.  For that reason young people should be shielded from everything that might interfere with their ability to fulfill tasks later entrusted to them by the state"(33).  This paragraph from the article sums up Plato's basic views on mimesis and education.  He recognizes that children will inevitably learn by imitation, so therefore everything from poetry to music must be controlled; the children must not be exposed to anything untruthful.    Mimesis, in this sense, is "defined as the imitation of role models, whereby the goal is to become like the models.   The article goes on to describe all of the ways in which Plato wished to purify art for his community; that is, to expel all untrue art that could possibly "infect" someone and induce them to mimic the falseness, even against their will.

Finally, the article considers Plato's understanding that "painting and poetry are [in]capable of imitating the Ideas" and that "they produce only the phenomenal form of things"(37).  Plato describes how an artist creates an appearance in order to make available a phenomenon to the people.   "...the artist imitates God in the production of the world of appearance"(38).  An artist creates images, therefore, of things that do not really exist; he creates impressions of phenomenon.

Additionally throughout the section that focuses on the Republic, many interjections reveal Plato's discomfort with a move toward literacy: "Philosophy then takes over the significance for education that poetry had long possessed"(37).  Another good example is when the author states that in Plato's view, "poetry has inadequately fulfilled its pedagogical task in relation to young people"(33).   These statements are important to consider when one takes a review of Plato's concepts in his own  historical context.

Personal Reaction

While reading through the article, at many times I became confused as to whether it was Plato or Gebauer/Wulf I was reading.  Many times the authors would make statements, and I wasn't sure if I should attribute them to Plato, because so much of the article is focused on him.

Additionally, I was a bit thrown off (and confused) by the end of the article, when the authors started to make arguments: "If one does not want to be taken in by an illusionary mimesis purporting to imitate what it cannot possibly imitate, it is necessary to recognize this gap (between model and image)"(44).  This was slightly uncomfortable, since the rest of the article seemed more like an opinion-less, historical account.

One thing that I noticed throughout the article was Plato's obsession with doing right by the state.  "From early childhood on they should imitate only what will help them fulfill their tasks; everything else they should leave aside"(34).  This statement is very extreme and idealistic; yet, perhaps he is aware of that, and perhaps as he constantly mentions the "ideal state" he is only referring to something that he wants but does not expect to fully attain.  Additionally, in Plato's Greece the city-state and one's duty to the polas were central to life.  This must have guided his way of thinking.  However, it seems implausible and wildly inappropriate to suggest that one might breed children to be loyal a government or country, especially to today's audience.