Professional Documents
Culture Documents
simple and repetitive motif. The musical material is most often in pairs of quavers, however the
grouping of the solo line differs from its implications, being first grouped in twos and threes,
before the groups of three notes become more prevalent, from f.8; bb. 4-7. Continuity is created
in a metric-modulation type effect, since it is true that three quavers in crotchet = 108 is
identical to two quavers in crotchet = 72. Therefore the grouping, commonly in threes, creates a
sense of common value between the musical material at f.8 and f.9. A further link here between
the two passages is effectively fashioned through the syncopated nature of the chords in the
flutes, interspersed with breath markings, which echo the off-beat stabs of the next section,
negating the stasis of a 2/4 time signature. In these ways, Stravinsky disguises the link between
the section at f.6 and the return of the opening material at f.9, heightening the sense of unity, yet
maintaining what is essentially a block like structure of forms. As Walsh recognises, the
techniques of Stravinskys block form composition create a work not dissimilar to
contemporary constructivist painting, of Stravinskys Russia.1 The Stravinsky maintains
distinct and separate sections, yet manufactures an overall architectural unity is similar to
approaches to perspective, and this relates to the sense in which sections are interpreted in
retrospect. Stravinsky himself noted that the work consists of litanies in close tempo relations
succeeding one another, yet we may argue that the piece achieves coherence not just through
purely architectural and mathematical means, but also other methods.
Retrospect and hindsight is a useful tool in the final realisation of the chorale. In many
ways the teleological destination is the final chords, although said chord appears earlier in the
piece. Pieter van den Toorn notes the possibility, or rather implication, or a V-I cadence to close
the chorale which ends the work.2 Stravinsky cloaks the implication of a perfect cadence firstly
through the addition of multiple dissonant notes which remain unresolved traditionally, while
he also usurps our expectations by introducing a breath marking after f.75 before the final held
chord, placing more emphasis on this subsequent moment, and interrupting any possible
continuity between chords. Furthermore, the spacing and figuration of the chords is
unconventional to say the least, with a ii-I movement in the tuba not being realised in a
conventional manner, and subverting the final cadence. Additionally, the step-wards rise in the
flute, from C to a dissonant D at the top of the texture contributing to this notion of ambiguity.
Nonetheless, the final chords function in terms of voice-leading in a manner not unfamiliar to
conventional harmony, with the fagotti line-leading being emblematic of this, while the flute
line is paradoxically traditional in its line-leading when approaching the cadence, however
resultant is a dischord. Conversely, the pervasion of parallel movement, such as in the
trombones and horns cannot be disguised by the breath marking, and evokes a more ancient, if
less traditional cadential treatment. In this way, Stravinsky allows a certain ambiguity to be
achieved, and as van den Toorn suggests, the recollection of a V-I cadence at the end is just that:
retrospective in its possibility.
However, what the final passage is characteristic of is Stravinskys fascinating voicing
and instrumentation which gives the piece both contrast and continuity. One could argue that
Stravinskys treatment of the crucial chord, first heard at f.1 of the piece, devalues it
1
2
Walsh,S.
TheMusicofStravinsky
,(Oxford,1998).p.104
vandenToorn,P.C.
TheMusicofIgorStravinsky,
(NewHaven,1998).p.3423
harmonically and strips it of any functional purpose, thereby removing any possible harmonic
continuity which may be achievable. Certainly, the first appearance of the chord at f.1 is
problematic. Technically, the chord heard here, and subsequently repeated in a dogmatic
manner, is a dominant minor ninth in second inversion. However, at f.1 the chord appears to
lose all functionality because of Stravinskys figuration of it with the heavy dissonance near the
bottom of the texture, while the incessant repetition of it, out of harmonic context, serves to
render it nonsense in the overall musical language, as it no longer serves a conventional
purpose. The repetition of the chord in this way works in a similar fashion to the repetition of
pitch in music so as to render it a centre. Through destabilising and uprooting this chord
therefore, Stravinsky gives the music a sense of harmonic weightlessness, whereby there is no
feeling of motion as such. This is a very intricate technique which can be seen to link the music
here at f.1 with that of the chorale, heard in its full form from f.65. The floating effect of the
spacing and sense of redundant harmony appears through both passages, and we may recall
moments such as f.1 in retrospect, functioning much like the final cadence. On a micro-scale
then, the passage from f.0-11 displays multiple musical threads which pass through similar
passages and remain throughout the alternating contrasting sections, while on a macro-scale,
recollections of harmonic weightlessness and stasis can be seen to continue through the
intersecting music between f.1 and the final chorale.