Adam Lehman

Dr. John McGinn

Music 357

7 May 2018

Final Paper

The poem ‘Charlie Rutlage’ by D.J. O’Malley is a cowboy poem about the death of

Charlie Rutlage and the life he left behind. The texture that is used is a very classic rhyme

scheme (AABB, CCDD, etc..) which could certainly make for an easier text to set to music. The

meter itself is rough, and not exact. If I were to set this text, I would definitely use this rhyme

scheme to my advantage as a way to progress the music further, but the meter would pose

difficulties for making it smooth.

Upon first glance, it does seem that there is only one voice speaking in the text, although

there is the possibility that each stanza is another voice speaking. The poem repeats itself about

the death of Charlie Rutlage, which could be an indication that multiple cowboys are speaking

about his death, rather than one single voice.

The temporal music of the text yields itself to something that is moderately paced, it

seems. It does use a classic rhyme scheme, but each sentence is quite long. To make the rhyme

feel more complete, a more exact and intent pace would allow the listener to hear each rhyme

better.

Another aspect of the poem is that it is very descriptive of the land that Rutlage and the

other cowboys worked on. It illustrates their way of life, the jobs that they did, and even

Charlie’s affect, being “gay and full of glee”. This could describe the harmonics chosen for the

piece, as one could choose to bring out this happier aspect of Charlie’s life. One could also use
the rhythm of the piece to emulate the spurring on and running of a horse, or some of the sounds

of the hills they worked on.

There is a eulogy-like element to the end of the piece that signals a different emotional

content in the poem. It is one that is more somber, and one of mourning that is not apparent in

the previous stanzas. In the previous stanzas, I sense that the speaker is recounting the tale of

how Charlie died, but does not necessarily show his emotional state. It is in this last stanza that

the speaker wishes Charlie well in the afterlife, hoping that he will get to be reunited with his

family once more. Personally, I would slow the tempo and even make the music more strophic at

that point, remnant of a church hymn as a way to bring out that solemnness and the well-wishing

that the speaker has for him.

The emotional content of the piece seems to be fond of Charlie, sad for his passing, as

well as a somber recounting of how he came to die. The language is simple, which is how it feels

distinctly like “cowboy poetry”, compared to the other poetry I have encountered. It does not feel

polished or precise in the way other poems might, but that is part of what makes this poem so

appealing. It brings out the character of D.J. O’Malley as a man who was tough and still artful.

This poem captures some of that essence of O’Malley and the fondness he had for his friend.

Upon listening to the piece of music, it is very strikingly different than the previous

analysis of reading the poem. Charles Ives’ reading is much more intense, and he took the poem

in a very different direction. Ives’ interpretation is a powerful one, and he uses many different

and unexpected techniques to set the poem.

From the beginning of the piece, it is very reminiscent of the wild west, with the left hand

piano line with quarter notes on the down beat and the right hand has quarter notes on the and of

each beat. The vocal line is purposefully sung separated to help contrast between when Ives
specifically wants the line legato. From the beginning, the piece is already different than what I

had initially expected. It is faster than I expected it to be. Due to the nature of the piece being

about the death of someone, my reading saw this as a slower, yet deliberate piece.

One similarity between both of our interpretations was the roughness of the meter. In

Ives’ piece, it does not feel exactly metered and level, which is in keeping with my own personal

interpretation. Ives uses this to help create tension within the piece. This helps the language of

the piece move smoothly and is conveyed more easily to the listener.

On the second page at measure twenty-one, the music picks up in speed and intensity

with a recitative-like vocal line. The piano line becomes increasingly discordant, using many

different and complex rhythms in the right hand, while the left hand maintains a pattern of eighth

note octaves on the first and third beats, and chromatic descending eighth notes in between. All

of this chaos that is placed within the music was Ives’ interpretation, where he captured the fast-

paced life and danger that a cowboy might encounter, and specifically on the day that Charlie

Rutlage died.

Later on in the piece, Ives has the accompaniment play loud, discordant chord clusters,

culminating at the moment that Charlie actually died. From this point on, it moves out of the

recitative, and into a sung line again. This is very atonal, and it moves completely away from

normative progressions seen pre-20th century. The texture is incredibly dense in its homophony. I

would not have interpreted this in my analysis of the piece originally, as I had not even

considered to have any of the vocal line be spoken.

This last section of the piece is fairly similar to the beginning. It is sung again, and Ives

returns with a similar rhythm that he used at the start of the piece, as well. He places some small

variations in rhythm, adding triplets and eighth notes in the right hand. Lastly, when the voice
line sings, hoping that Charlie meets his family in the afterlife, and they will see him by the

“shining throne of grace”, Ives ends the piece with a plagal cadence, which is commonly used in

hymns and religious music. This is actually similar to my interpretation of the piece. I had

considered turning the last stanza into a strophic form, which is the common way that hymns are

written in, and they often use plagal cadences within them. While Ives did not do this, he did

implement the plagal cadence to achieve that effect.

Comparatively, both Ives and I had quite strikingly different interpretations of what we

saw from the poem of D.J. O’Malley. Where I had read the piece as slower and more eulogy-like,

Ives brought the poem into a completely different direction with intense, cacophonous chaos

with a cowboy spin to it. This is a testament to the capacity of poetic interpretation. Neither of

these ideas were wrong, and each highlighted different aspects of the text being used.

Ultimately, I think that Charles Ives’ setting was an excellent interpretation. Getting to

see just how extremely contrasting two views of a piece of poetry can be, as well as the aesthetic

tastes that can surround it was illuminating. While I do not think Ives’ interpretation would have

been the original idea that was within the poem itself, I think that it brought out a completely

new and engaging way of understanding the piece. Ives’ interpretation of the piece made me

appreciate the original poem more, now having seen a whole new range and emotional state that

could be found within it, even if it may not have been my own understanding of the piece.