当前位置: X-MOL 学术Music Theory Online › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Middleground Structure in the Cadenza to Boulez’s Éclat
Music Theory Online Pub Date : 2019-05-01 , DOI: 10.30535/mto.25.1.4
C. Catherine Losada 1
Affiliation  

Through a transformational analysis of Boulez’s Éclat, this article extends previous understanding of Boulez’s compositional techniques by addressing issues of middleground structure and perception. Presenting a new perspective on this pivotal work, it also sheds light on the development of Boulez’s compositional style. Volume 25, Number 1, May 2019 Copyright © 2019 Society for Music Theory [1] Incorporating both elements of performer’s choice (mainly for the conductor) and an approach to temporality that subverts traditional notions of continuity by invoking the importance of the “moment,”(1) Boulez’s Éclat (1965) is a landmark work from the mid-1960s. It stems from a pivotal period within Boulez’s compositional career, following a time of intense application of novel serial techniques in works that cemented his reputation as a major figure of European modernism (such as Pli selon pli (1957–1962) and the Troisième Sonate (1955–63),(2) but preceding the marked simplification of the musical language that followed Rituel (1974).(3) Piencikowski (1993) has discussed the reliance of much of the central section of Éclat on material from the first version of Don (1960) which in turn is derived from the flute piece Strophes (1957) and from Orestie (1955), and has also thoroughly explained the pitch content of that central section.(4) The material from the framing cadenzas of Éclat, however, has received li le scholarly a ention in published form, although Olivier Meston (2001) provides a description of abstract serial processes that could explain the pitch content.(5) One of Meston’s main claims is that the serial processes he presents are not perceptible (10, 16). [2] Much has been wri en on the relationship between compositional process and perceptual elements in Boulez’s music. Most authors (including Lerdahl 1988, Guldbrandsen 1997, 2016, and Salem 2014, 205, 236) invoke the distance between precompositional materials and final product to question the perceptual implications of many of the generative techniques Boulez implemented in the 1950s and early 1960s. In contrast, passages in some works from Boulez’s later period feature a clear relationship between compositional processes and perceptual elements of the music.(6) Some disagreement exists regarding the placement of the stylistic shift. Campbell (2010), Na iez (2004, 257, 262), Nicolas (2010, 22, 32), Tissier (2011) and Salem (2014, 249) invoke Boulez’s writings, and especially his essay Nécessité d’une orientation esthétique (1963) to claim that 1963 provided a juncture point in terms of Boulez’s increased preoccupation with perceptibility. However, this claim has not been supported analytically.(7) The main works Na iez invokes in his argument (most significantly Rituel and, mainly, Répons) date from Boulez’s later period (243). Goldman (2011) likewise argues for 1975 as an important juncture point. [3] The compositional techniques applied throughout Éclat retain the intricacy resulting from the practice, characteristic of many of his works from the mid-1950s, of producing materials through multiple (often simultaneous) layers of derivation. Indeed, the undeniable complexity of the musical surface problematizes the perceptual and structural connotations of the generative processes. In this essay, I will argue that the one of the fundamental concerns of Boulez during this time period was to apply compositional techniques that resulted in a perceptible middleground organization. [4] The argument will proceed in two stages. In the initial stage, I will present an analysis, based on sketch studies, that elucidates both the compositional techniques used in this work and important elements of harmonic and formal structure.(8) Although related to compositional techniques used in his earlier works (particularly pitch-class multiplication),(9) the compositional techniques in Éclat are somewhat distinct in their emphasis on totally ordered pitch-space intervallic series,(10) rather than the partially-ordered pc interval intervallic configurations of the works that preceded it. Furthermore, they do not occur in a twelve-tone context.(11) In the second stage, I will critically examine how an application of transformational theory to this work results in insights that go beyond those brought out by a serial approach.(12) The existence of a serial analysis of Éclat makes this piece an ideal test case to discuss the benefits of an analytical approach that combines both sketch studies and the application of transformational theory to Boulez’s music. Sketches, derivation, and their implications for the harmonic and formal structure [5] The musical sketches for Pierre Boulez’s Éclat (1965) present a wealth of information for the music scholar.(13) Minute annotations scribbled between the staves and in the margins of a score for the first version of Don (piano, voice, 1960, Example 1), when properly deciphered, clarify every stage of the compositional process that led to Éclat. This essay will demonstrate how these annotations outline the skeleton (background scheme)(14) for the entire opening piano cadenza of Éclat.(15) By delving beyond the question of how the foreground material was generated to why these processes were used, the analysis demonstrates that the cadenza is structured in a manner highly analogous to a traditional concerto cadenza, consisting of an expansion of germinal chords. This is a surprising finding, given Boulez’s avoidance of references to traditional formal and harmonic models at this stage of his career. Furthermore, it shows that the isomorphic relationships underlying the generative techniques have structural and musical repercussions that guide the transfer from sketch to final musical product. Ultimately, the analysis produces graphs that compile the various stages of process shown in the sketches and illustrate how they elucidate a perceptible middleground organization. [6] Example 2 presents a summary of the formal structure of the cadenza. After the introductory opening flourish in the piano, which is punctuated by a chord sustained by the instruments, the cadenza consists of an alternation of two distinct kinds of sections, which contrast primarily through strong changes in tempo and articulation and are labeled respectively with uppercase and lowercase le ers in the sketches.(16) The juxtapositions create an increase in tension that culminates with the opening of the lowercase c section. As Goldman (2011) has noted in relation to Boulez’s later works, this alternation between contrasting materials is characteristic of Boulez’s approach to form.(17) Studies of Éclat that address issues of perception (Schoeller 1986, Deliège 1989) have focused on the perceptibility of these large-scale formal junctures. My analysis will show how these sections contrast at a fundamental level through their harmonic content. I will furthermore argue that the cadenza as a whole describes a perceptible harmonic trajectory, related to the way the material is derived. [7] Boulez’s generative processes in this cadenza involve the replication of precise pitch interval schemes at various different levels of structure. This is a pitch-space version of pitch-class multiplication, which generally does not keep precise pitch interval dispositions and tends to eliminate repeated tones. This pitch-space multiplication takes three forms: direct, reverse and inverse.(18) Direct pitch-space multiplication (shown in Example 3) consists of a process where a given pitch interval pa ern (figured from an anchor note) is replicated keeping the same order and direction on two different levels.(19) Reverse pitch-space multiplication (shown in Example 4) keeps the same order but reverses the direction (again, when figured from a given anchor note). It differs from direct pitch space multiplication primarily through the choice of anchor note, which is an important part of the analytical process. In Example 4, B 4 is the chosen anchor note. Had B3 been chosen as an anchor note instead, the example would represent direct pitch-space multiplication. Both of these types of pitch-space multiplication result in notes that recur at two different structural levels and are emphasized in the musical se ing through their position at the beginning and end as well as at the registral extremes of important units. Finally, inverse pitch space multiplication (shown in Example 5), reverses both order and direction. It results in a crucial structural common-tone relationship.(20) The anchor note (the note from which the middleground intervals are calculated) is common to each chord thus derived and, in a straightforward presentation of such a scheme, would occur repeatedly on the musical surface. As the examples illustrate, in all cases, the disposition of the structural chord in temporal space stretches out something that is conceived as a simultaneity. This is what Boulez would refer to as the diagonal dimension, which eliminates the traditional distinction between the vertical and horizontal dimensions of music.(21) [8] In this analysis, I will use two different ways to describe the pitch interval disposition of chords; both of these ways of conceptualizing the chordal structure have important structural implications in this work. Although these tools have precedents in the literature (particularly in the work of Chapman 1981 and Morris 1995), they differ from previous formulations in important ways and especially through their emphasis on the concept of an interval series (IS). The first, and most common (shown in Example 6), is the Registral Adjacency Interval Series (RAIS), which consists of the series of unordered pitch intervals defined by adjacent notes within the chord.(22) The second one (shown in Example 7) is the Interval Series from the Anchor Note (ISfAN) which, in a manner analogous to a figured bass, always lists the intervals from the anchor note to each note of the chord.(23) In his

中文翻译:

Cadenza 的中间结构到 Boulez's Éclat

通过对 Boulez 的 Éclat 的转换分析,本文通过解决中间结构和感知问题,扩展了先前对 Boulez 的作曲技巧的理解。对这部关键作品提出了一个新的视角,也揭示了布列兹作曲风格的发展。第 25 卷,第 1 期,2019 年 5 月 版权所有 © 2019 Society for Music Theory [1] 结合表演者选择(主要针对指挥)的元素和时间性方法,通过调用“时刻”的重要性来颠覆传统的连续性概念, ”(1) Boulez 的 Éclat (1965) 是 1960 年代中期的里程碑式作品。它源于 Boulez 作曲生涯的关键时期,(5) 梅斯顿的主要主张之一是他所呈现的连续过程是不可感知的 (10, 16)。[2] 关于布列兹音乐中作曲过程和感性元素之间的关系已经有很多论述。大多数作者(包括 Lerdahl 1988、Guldbrandsen 1997、2016 和 Salem 2014、205、236)援引预合成材料和最终产品之间的距离来质疑 Boulez 在 1950 年代和 1960 年代早期实施的许多生成技术的感知含义。相比之下,布列兹后期的一些作品中的段落则具有明显的作曲过程与音乐感性元素之间的关系。(6)在风格转变的位置上存在一些分歧。Campbell (2010)、Na iez (2004、257、262)、Nicolas (2010、22、32)、Tissier (2011) 和 Salem (2014,249) 引用了 Boulez 的著作,尤其是他的论文 Nécessité d'uneorientation esthétique (1963),声称 1963 年为 Boulez 日益关注可感知性提供了一个转折点。然而,这种说法没有得到分析支持。(7) Na iez 在他的论点中引用的主要作品(最重要的是 Rituel,主要是 Répons)可以追溯到 Boulez 的后期(243)。Goldman (2011) 同样认为 1975 年是一个重要的转折点。[3] Éclat 所采用的构图技术保留了他 1950 年代中期许多作品的特点,即通过多层(通常是同时)推导来制作材料的实践所产生的复杂性。确实,音乐表面不可否认的复杂性使生成过程的感知和结构内涵成为问题。在本文中,我将论证 Boulez 在此期间的基本关注点之一是应用组合技术,从而形成可感知的中间层组织。[4] 争论将分两个阶段进行。在初始阶段,我将基于素描研究进行分析,阐明这部作品中使用的构图技巧以及和声和形式结构的重要元素。 (8) 虽然与他早期作品中使用的构图技巧有关(特别是音级乘法),(9) Éclat 中的作曲技术在强调完全有序的音高空间间隔序列方面有些不同,(10) 而不是之前作品的部分有序的 pc 间隔间隔配置。此外,它们不会出现在十二音的语境中。(11) 在第二阶段,我将批判性地研究将转化理论应用于这项工作如何产生超越串行方法带来的洞察力的洞察力。 (12) ) Éclat 的连续分析的存在使这件作品成为讨论将素描研究和转换理论应用于 Boulez 音乐的分析方法的好处的理想测试案例。草图、派生及其对和声和形式结构的影响 [5] 皮埃尔·布列兹 (Pierre Boulez) 的 Éclat (1965) 的音乐草图为音乐学者提供了丰富的信息。(13) 在第一版 Don(钢琴,声音,1960,示例 1)的五线谱之间和乐谱的空白处潦草地注释,如果正确解读,可以阐明导致 Éclat 的作曲过程的每个阶段。本文将展示这些注释如何勾勒出 Éclat 的整个开场钢琴华彩乐章的骨架(背景方案)(14)。(15)通过深入探讨前景材料是如何产生的问题,以及为什么使用这些过程,分析表明华彩乐段的结构与传统协奏曲华彩乐段非常相似,由生发和弦的扩展组成。这是一个令人惊讶的发现,因为 Boulez 在他职业生涯的这个阶段避免参考传统的形式和谐波模型。此外,它表明生成技术背后的同构关系具有结构和音乐影响,指导从草图到最终音乐产品的转移。最终,分析会生成图表,汇总草图中显示的流程的各个阶段,并说明它们如何阐明可感知的中间层组织。[6] 示例 2 总结了华彩乐段的形式结构。在钢琴的介绍性开场蓬勃发展之后,华彩乐段由两种不同的部分交替组成,主要通过速度和清晰度的强烈变化形成对比,并分别用大写和草图中的小写字母。(16) 并置增加了张力,随着小写 c 部分的打开而达到高潮。正如 Goldman (2011) 在 Boulez 后期作品中所指出的那样,对比材料之间的这种交替是 Boulez 的形式方法的特征。 (17) 解决感知问题的 Éclat 研究(Schoeller 1986,Deliège 1989)专注于可感知性这些大规模的正式关头。我的分析将显示这些部分如何通过它们的和声内容在基本层面上形成对比。我还将进一步论证,华彩乐段作为一个整体描述了一个可感知的谐波轨迹,与材料的派生方式有关。[7] Boulez 在这个华彩乐段中的生成过程涉及在各种不同的结构层次上复制精确的音高间隔方案。这是音级乘法的音高空间版本,它通常不会保持精确的音高音程配置并倾向于消除重复的音调。这种音高空间乘法采用三种形式:直接、反向和逆。(18) 直接音高空间乘法(如示例 3 所示)包括一个过程,其中复制给定的音高间隔模式(从锚定音符计算) (19) 反向音高空间乘法(如例 4 所示)保持相同的顺序但方向相反(同样,当从给定的锚定音符计算时)。它与直接音高空间乘法的主要区别在于锚定音符的选择,这是分析过程的一个重要部分。在示例 4 中,B 4 是选定的锚注。如果 B3 被选为锚定音符,该示例将代表直接音高空间乘法。这两种类型的音高空间乘法都会导致音符在两个不同的结构层次上重复出现,并在音乐中通过它们在开头和结尾的位置以及重要单元的注册极端来强调。最后,逆音高空间乘法(如例 5 所示)反转顺序和方向。(20) 锚定音符(从中计算中间音程的音符)对于由此派生的每个和弦是通用的,并且在这种方案的直接表示中,会在音乐表面。如示例所示,在所有情况下,结构和弦在时间空间中的配置延伸出某种被认为是同时性的东西。这就是 Boulez 所说的对角线维度,它消除了音乐垂直和水平维度之间的传统区分。 (21) [8] 在这个分析中,我将使用两种不同的方式来描述和弦的音高间隔配置; 这两种将弦结构概念化的方法在这项工作中都具有重要的结构意义。尽管这些工具在文献中已有先例(特别是在 Chapman 1981 和 Morris 1995 的工作中),但它们在重要方面与以前的公式不同,尤其是它们强调了区间序列 (IS) 的概念。第一个也是最常见的(如示例 6 所示)是注册邻接区间系列 (RAIS),
更新日期:2019-05-01
down
wechat
bug