***
In my late teens and early twenties I
got into ragtime. While my study of the style was not necessarily deep it
was enthusiastic; although I’m a guitarist I studied and practice just enough
piano to learn how to play “Maple Leaf Rag” while I was also picking up a few
Bach pieces and teaching myself how to play excerpts from Hindemith’s Ludus Tonalis. During those years I made several attempts to
compose rags of my own. At length I settled into my primary love, composing for
the guitar and for a long time set ragtime aside.
What I never set aside, however, was
the conviction that ragtime and sonata forms ought to be perfectly suited to
each other. Although I was not always very sure how, I took it as given
that, in principle, the style of ragtime and various sonata forms could
ultimately be synthesized. To paraphrase Iannis Xenakis, the most ambitious
forms of interstellar travel that technology may provide for us may not carry
us so far as liberation from our mental shackles could. If I never
accepted the shackles of assumptions that ragtime and sonata forms could not
mix I would have a lifetime to find out how they could mix.
One of the gentle warnings Leonard
B. Meyer had about musical analysis is that we not forget the distinction
between musical analysis as a matter of form
and musical analysis as an observation of process.
That these two aspects of musical analysis often overlap does not mean we won't
run into trouble if we misdiagnose early on which of these two aspects of
analysis will be most relevant to whatever we study. The kind of modular
architectonics that are useful for delineating themes and transitions in a
sonata form may be useless in evaluating the contrapuntal processes guiding a
fugue, and might even lead us astray. While linear expansion and
development in a fugue "might" give us insights applicable to a
sonata form the expectation of a continuously developing thematic economy may
run aground in explicitly dance-derived forms, so the way we'd analyze a Bach
fugue will be of little help in assessing a rag by Joseph Lamb.
That said, being thoroughly steeped
in both the history and literature of the sonata, as well as the history of
ragtime can open up possibilities for the fusion of both idioms that may
remain, as yet, under-explored.
Of course to explore those possibilities we need to establish basic observations that may be made about these idioms. Rather than attempt to discuss ragtime in terms more suitable for the unfamiliar, I'm simply going to briefly go over the basic outline of the "Joplin" rag as it's commonly described.
AA BB A CC DD
Give or take an introduction, any
transitions, and a coda, that's the basic formal outline of a rag.
We know that not every theme will be
repeated and there are cases in which a theme that appears earlier may appear
again in a modified form. For instance, the B strain in James Scott's
Modesty Rag is recapitulated at the end where the "D" strain would be
and it's slightly recomposed. This example alone should satisfy for the
sake of this essay that recapitulating the B group as the final strain in a rag
already opens up possibilities for a sonata form cast in a ragtime style.
For that matter, where the return of
the A strain would typically be could very easily be replaced with what in more
traditional understandings of sonata form would be the development
section. The syntactic climax of the return of the A material in a
ragtime may be spatially displaced to a point later in a ragtime than we might
expect it to conventionally appear but the syntactic climax of the reprise
would still take place. If we bear in mind a simple proposal, that the A
or B sections do not have to refer to explicit, literal repeats but may stand
as a cumulative time-space, then what we'd call the BB section or B section of
a ragtime can be the space in which the second (or also third) thematic strains
can be introduced with some suitable transitional materials.
This would be a way of synthesizing
ragtime and sonata form in cases where we have sixteen-measure ragtime
strains. Of course this would not be the only way a sonata form in a
ragtime style could be composed. In fact if we were to make use of
material more characteristic of early (rather than late) 19th century sonata
materials we might find themes are more apt to be as short as eight
measures. If our thematic strains are 12 measures or less then immediate
and literal repetition might be ill-advised; it might also be less effective,
given the fact that so very often thematic differentiation is a weakness in
ragtime compared to other styles.
Any structural repetitions we might
plan to introduce that could bridge the conceptual space between a rag and a
sonata form would have to lean more toward a conventional understanding of a
sonata form than a rag. Ragtime repetitions are so conventional as to
overpower the often ignored conventions of structural repetitions in sonata
forms.
This basic adjustment to small-scale
sonata form to resemble the style of ragtime is actually not the least bit
difficult. Rather than an AA BB paradigm as we'd expect in ragtime we
could substitute a short repeating exposition that would present as AB AB that
could fill the commensurate durational space of AA BB. George Rochberg's
concept for this, called "time-space" is inelegant and bluntly
literal, but it's arguably the best possible term we're looking for. Corresponding
durational time-spaces within sonata forms and ragtime won’t need to be very
strict.
Still, generally, if a ragtime
strain is conventionally understood to be sixteen measures long and a
conventional ragtime has an AABB procession before A returns, then the number
of measures in that durational stretch would be sixty-four measures. This
means that if you have a small-scale sonata exposition (something in the zone
of forty measures) then you would be able to fulfill the cumulative AABB in a
ragtime best with an AB exposition that has an internal structural
repeat. A simple but perhaps necessary observation about sonata forms in
the 18th century is to note that the repetitions should be considered structural. If you keep this in mind
then an exposition with two themes can be mapped out as:
exposition repetition
development recapitulation
A
B A
B
C
A B
Not coincidentally, what kind of popular form can this resemble?
verse chorus verse chorus bridge verse chorus
In strictly modular,
macro-structural terms, the sonata form with a repeating exposition that's
observed before the development and recapitulation can be thought of as
remarkably similar in its overall concept to a standard pop song format.
There are crucial, substantial
differences in thematic developmental economy between a sonata form and a pop
song, to be sure, but the differences are not necessarily reducible to a matter
of sheer modular form. Rather, we're looking at a continuum of
differences in the realm of procedural development, conventions for thematic
differentiation, and expansion of thematic content. When advocates of
high art musical culture dismiss popular music they do not necessarily reject
the elegant simplicity of pop music at the level of macro-structural
considerations. They're rejecting the rudimentary presentation and repetition
of thematic materials without long-form development.
Rejecting the possibility that the
musical materials of popular styles can be used within sonata forms depends, in
part, on a stereotyped and negative assessment of those materials. However,
such a rejection may also be predicated on a stereotyped view of what sonata
forms are, and this could be particularly true of those whose ideal sonatas
date not from the 18th century but the 19th.
In Style & Music (University of Chicago Press, 1989), Leonard B.
Meyer proposed that a key conceptual difference between 18th and 19th
century approaches to large-scale form consisted in the difference between a “script”
and a “plan” (pages 245-246). A “script”
approach to a sonata would not require contrasting thematic groups in the way a
“plan” approach to sonata, particularly in the post-Beethoven pedagogy, often
required. With Meyer’s observation in
mind, if a 19th century prescription for the sonata that thematic
groups display contrast is abandoned, the lack of strongly contrasting themes
within ragtime is no longer inherently incompatible with the syntactic scripts
of sonata forms.
In recent scholarship the most
extensive case made for understanding 18th century sonata forms as a
range of scripts has been undertaken by James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy in
their book Elements of Sonata Theory.
Without attempting to summarize their findings or the debates that have
surrounded their proposals, the Types 1 through 5 they delineate suggest that
we no longer need to think of sonata forms as tethered to the descriptions of
19th century or even 20th century pedagogy. We can make
use of their concepts of “rotation” and of the expositional and recapitulation
spaces to formulate syntheses of ragtime style with sonata forms. While there are many things that could be
said about the concepts they employ the simplest account of their proposed
sonata scripts hinges on principles of thematic differentiation.
If we combine Hepokoski and Darcy’s
concept of space within sonata forms with George Rochberg’s “time-space” we can
propose that the conceptual foundation for a fusion of ragtime style into
sonata forms has been established. The
architectural precepts are in place and the question that remains is a
practical one, could we demonstrate that it is possible to recompose an
existing sonata form in such a way as to generally conform to recognizable
rhythmic, harmonic and melodic traits we hear and see in ragtime?
Yes.
By way of example, we can turn to early 19th century guitar
music. Anyone who is studied in both
ragtime and early 19th century solo guitar sonatas may already be
able to observe the ways in which Giuliani’s second thematic group in his Op.
150 can be quickly transformed into a ragtime strain. While
I have written at length about 19th century guitar sonatas elsewhere,
there’s always the writerly axiom “Show,
don’t tell.
So let’s demonstrate the possibility
of rewriting a small sonata form into a ragtime style by way of recomposing
Fernando Sor’s Op. 29 etude in E flat into a ragtime style. [after the break]
You'll see that this would be a case
of an ABABCAB variant of sonata form with ragtime elements. The Sor etude
in E flat required very little manipulation in terms of melodic lines or
harmonic vocabulary to make the transition from a sonata form to a
sonata-ragtime hybrid. A slightly different (in substance) adaptation of
Sor's Op. 29, etude 10 in E flat into a ragtime/sonata hybrid can be heard over
here starting at 02:45 and ending
at 07:09.
Now that approach to hybridizing
sonata form and ragtime depends on the brevity of the core themes. We'd
be talking about expositions that are essentially only about as long as playing
through two ragtime strains, and then repeating that material. What if we
wanted to synthesize ragtime and sonata form at a larger scale, something
approaching the traditionally longer or larger sense of scale we expect of
sonata forms in the art music tradition? Toward this end the
aforementioned work of Hepokoski and Darcy and George Rochberg’s “time-space”
concept will help us.
But first let's take a detour.
We need to review some details about ragtime that can be too readily missed by
those who aren't already steeped in the style. For instance, there's no
obligation to necessarily have four distinguishable strains. For
ragtime, we don't "have" to have D material at the end. James
Scott could recapitulate and recompose his B strain with a new ending,
as he did in the Modesty Rag. So we're going to have that
interrupting Trio but Scott presents us with a ragtime that has an A strain
followed by a B strain that has an A return and a B return. It would even
be possible to regard any introductory gesture as a theme upon which to draw in
a development section. Rags by Scott Joplin and Joseph Lamb can establish
readily enough that it’s possible to open with minor-key themes.
What would not be practical is to
repeat the second or third themes immediately after presentation. Here the conventions of ragtime would
overpower the conventions of sonata forms.
It would be very easy to repeat the first theme in an exposition and to
repeat a second theme in a recapitulation; but to repeat a second theme that is
presented within an exposition after a first theme would invite the ragtime convention
of the immediate recapitulation of the first theme we know from, say, “The
Entertainer”. For a ragtime/sonata fusion to work effectively we will need to
have the second (and/or third) theme launch immediately into development and
postpone the return of the first strain until we are prepared for a real recapitulation
space.
The development section, in this
large-scale fusion of ragtime with sonata form, would almost by necessity be
where in traditionalist ragtime the A material would be coming back. This
means that the syntactic climax of the A material would be, as we've noted
earlier, pushed forward. If we were to conceive of a sonata form and a
rag as a three-dimensional space that could map out the durational time-spaces
for thematic regions we could look at it this way:
Now there are a number of things
that could be said about the recapitulation space in a ragtime/sonata
fusion. The first is that in a recapitulation region the example of Haydn
shows us we could substantially reconceive the style or tone of a theme within
a recapitulation area. A secondary theme in a minor key in the exposition
could be brought back in a major key in the recapitulation. Another possibility is to recapitulate Theme
2 in one key and subject the theme to modal mutation in an immediate
repetition. Repeating the second theme
in the recapitulation would respect the ragtime convention of playing the
second strain twice and simply move it further forward within the temporal
space of the composition. It would also
be possible to recompose Theme 2 or Theme 3 into altogether different styles
while preserving the foundational gestures of the themes.
The reason this kind of intra-opus
thematic mutation could work is because of a concept Hepokoski & Darcy
introduced in their Elements of Sonata Theory, the concept of
rotation. The simplest way to describe a concept that has tripped up some
scholars and reviewers is to say that if A, B and C are presented in the
exposition then we should hear an observable procession of A, B and C in the
development section as well as the recapitulation section. The procession
needs to stay firmly in that order. Stylistic deformation will be possible so
long as the processional syntax of themes A, B and C (aka Groups 1, 2 and
sometimes 3) is preserved throughout the sonata form.
Obviously this isn't always the
case, certainly not in Chopin's B flat minor piano sonata, for instance, but in
the context of a sonata where we plan to drastically change the style or idiom
of a theme in a recapitulation then what rotation does is set up the
expectation that A, B and C definitely will return but that there is room for
surprise as to precisely how or in what form A, B and C will return. If
we were to humor an unsuspecting audience it would seem best to save the
dramatic mutations of recapitulation region themes to B and C material while
leaving the A material in tact. This would, not coincidentally, also be
the most plausible way to preserve all those syntactic points of commonality
between what we’d identify as a traditional sonata with a traditional
ragtime.
In summary, the possibilities for a fusion
of the style of ragtime with sonata forms have been latent within the ragtime
style since its inception. In the centennial year of Scott Joplin’s death
there is hardly any reason to doubt that his work and the work of other
composers of ragtime have gained a place in the American musical canon. Nor
is there reason to doubt that the style he helped pioneer is one that can be
adapted into sonata forms. If until now musicians and theoreticians have
doubted the possibility and viability of such a musical synthesis I would
propose these doubts may have depended on stereotypes about the vocabulary and
syntax of ragtime and sonata forms that should be abandoned.
No comments:
Post a Comment