Friday, April 24, 2020

Ragtime and Sonata Forms, Part 15: Leonard B. Meyer on the shift from the 18th to 19th C from seeing sonatas as "scripts" to seeing sonatas as "plans"


15.     Leonard B. Meyer on the shift from the 18th to 19th centuries of seeing sonatas as patterned on scripts vs developed by plans

In addition to being somewhat humorless, and committed to a philosophy of organicism in “how things are made”, Romantic music was very committed to plans.  The difference between following a script and having a plan is not at all subtle and Meyer only touches upon those differences.  As I’ve done before, I’ll quote him at some length:


STYLE AND MUSIC: THEORY, HISTORY AND IDEOLOGY
LEONARD B. MEYER
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS
COPYRIGHT (C) 1989 BY LEONARD B. MEYER
ISBN 0-226-52152-4

page 225
... Organicism, which posits the naturalness and virtues of gradual transformation, encourages the emergence of a syntactic gesture from earlier materials; such emergence, at the same time, tends to disguise the presence of the conventional.

page 231

Of the many factors serving to disguise the presence of schemata in nineteenth century music, perhaps none is more obvious than magnitude.  ...

Magnitude tends to mask schemata, --especially those defined by syntactic relationships--because of the constraints of aural memory. ...

page 245-246

... While music of the Classic period employs plan-based patternings, these are almost always coordinated with and dominated by syntactic scripts. In the nineteenth century, the situation is more or less reversed: what had been specific syntactic scripts tend to be subsumed within or transformed into general plans. For instance, from this very broad point of view, the history of the practice and theory of sonata form during the nineteenth century might be interpreted as the transformation of a script--a tonally defined hierarchic schema of slots--into a thematic plan, often of a dialectic or narrative sort (thesis/antithesis --> synthesis; opposition/conflict  ---. resolution). [emphasis added] More generally, as suggested earlier (and argued later), the role of the secondary parameters in the shaping of musical forms and processes becomes increasingly important during the course of the nineteenth century. The forms and processes thus shaped are based on plans, not on scripts.

footnote 62
This calls attention to a relationship that may be more than coincidental; as the relative importance of scripts declines and that of plans increases, programs (which quite literally provide scripts) become more common.

The difference between a script and a plan can be put as simply as this—you can go off script any time you want but once you stray from your plan you need a new plan.  This is why I am convinced that a fusion of popular American styles with classical forms is not something anyone steeped in any of the Romantic ideologies regarding music will be capable of imagining.  By contrast, I have found that early music specialists ranging from the figured bass era to the galant era to even medieval music all seem to recognize that improvisation is part and parcel of those styles and that conceptual overlaps with contemporary popular styles are relatively easy to imagine.  It seems to be the Romantics and those musicians committed to some form of Romanticism, who insist that the divide between the divine high art music and the lowly pop music drivel cannot possibly be bridged. 

I trust by now it’s obvious how wrong I think those people are.  What to a Romantic would be anathema, imagining that themes and transitions can be fitted into slots that correspond to points in a script, is exactly what I’ll be doing to demonstrate how a ragtime sonata can be composed.  I have Rochberg’s concept of time-space to even help visualize what such a script could look like.  The visual metaphor can be a musical train assembled by way of cars hauled by an engine, or a row of wooden blocks for which temporal-spatial correspondences between a Joplin style rag and a Haydn-style sonata movement can be explored. 

As Richard Taruskin put it in his Oxford History of Western Music, it’s ironic that the archetypal composer of the “textbook” sonata form, Haydn, so rarely ever actually wrote “textbook” sonatas. 

The Oxford History of Western Music
Richard Taruskin
Oxford University Press; Revised ed. edition (July 27, 2009)
volume 2
ISBN-10: 0195384822
ISBN-13: 978-0-19-538482-6
… The discrepancy between Haydn’s own culminating and epitomizing symphonic movement and the later academic description of “sonata form” is an integral part of the history of nineteenth-century music and music education, but it ought not color our understanding of eighteenth-century musical style. For Haydn, and his audience, the sonata form was made intelligible through a tonal, not a thematic, contrast (page 584)

Learning that the composer who supposedly “made the rules” never really followed them can be an ear-opening experience, but it can also make you really angry at your music teachers if they ever taught you what Adorno warned Americans to never teach, that Haydn “standardized” sonata forms.

Why am I focusing on Haydn? Let me quote Charles Rosen on Haydn:

The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (Expanded Edition)
Charles Rosen
Copyright (c) 1997, 1972, 1971 by Charles Rosen
W. W. Norton & Company
ISBN 0-393-040208
ISBN 0-393-31712-9 pbk

By 1790, Haydn had created and mastered a deliberately popular style. The immensity of his success is reflected in the volume of his production in the next ten years, the decade after the death of Mozart. … Today when Haydn is almost a connoisseur’s composer, whose music cannot compete at the box office with that of Mozart or Beethoven, this atmosphere of enormous popular success must be borne in mind in order to understand the late works, above all the symphonies and the oratorios. There have been composers who were as much admired and others whose tunes were as much whistled ad sung during their lifetimes, but none who so completely won at the same time the unquestioned and generous respect of the musical community and the ungrudging acclaim of the public. (page 329)

The procedures of Haydn and Mozart must be understood in a larger context, that of the creation of a popular style which abandons none of the pretensions of high art. … Only for a brief historical period in the operas of Mozart, the late symphonies of Haydn, and some of the Schubert songs, has the utmost sophistication and complexity of musical technique existed alongside—or better, fused with—the virtues of the street song. (page 332)

Why one brief historical period?  Should we take it as given that such a fusion of musical technique with the virtues of street song has never happened since Haydn, or cannot happen again? Haydn was no more or less flesh and blood than you or I, was he?

By now I trust you know that I’m going to use Haydn as a reference for writing a ragtime sonata because had a Haydn with Haydn’s training lived later I like to think he would have done that.  If Scott Joplin had been able to train with a Haydn, perhaps we could have lived in a world that already had many ragtime sonatas from Scott Joplin’s hand. 

Of course no such world existed and Joplin died with his piano concerto lost and his opera a marginal work. We should be able to love music not for what Romantic ideologies say we should think of a finished musical “work”, we have the option of loving the music of the past for the pathways it opens for us in the present.  Joplin’s music, in terms of works and performance traditions, is the touchstone of whole histories of American popular music.  Joplin, James Scott and Joseph Lamb may not have “elevated” ragtime to the level of sonata forms but their work is beautiful enough and rich enough with possibilities to give us a basis for a ragtime school of sonata forms. I submit that the path toward such a ragtime sonata is more readily taken with Haydn, and not Beethoven or even Mozart, as our potential guide.

So, if we’re going to go with sonatas as scripts rather than as plans, what are the next steps?  Fortunately, there has been a renewed interest in formal analysis of eighteenth century music so sprawling or succinct theory books on eighteenth century musical forms are close at hand for figuring out how a Scott Joplin who received the musical training of a Haydn could have composed a ragtime sonata.

But we are, I’m afraid, not quite done with philosophical questions about aesthetics, philosophy of history, and notions of formal innovation in the arts.  Before I turn to William E Caplin I have something more from Leonard B. Meyer and something from Raymond Knapp. There may yet be crucial ways in which to make a new kind of art with the music Scott Joplin and his contemporaries have given us we have yet more of the baggage of the Romantic era to cast off that, ironically, involves a kind of Romantic rejection of parts of Romanticism that retains its underlying intellectual spirit.




No comments: