Ethan Hein discusses Thelonious Monk's Bemsha Swing

Happy Thanksgiving. One of the things I'm thankful for this day is for the music of Thelonious Monk and that Ethan Hein discussed another one of Monk's pieces. :)

https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2023/bemsha-swing/

I might have to write more at this spot after holiday festivities but for the time being enjoy Ethan's discussion of this wonderful piece. 

November 24, 2023 4:30pm 

My own approach to this musical gem is, perhaps ironically, to jettison any discussion of harmony except as background for the linear writing.  Yes, we're totally looking at two-thirds of a twelve-bar blues that recursively turns around on itself ad infinitum.  If we don't know about what a twelve-bar blues is supposed to sound like do we even hear the relentless momentum that tacit expectation creates?  I'm going to say probably not.  

For those of us who know "Bemsha Swing" leverages the expectation of a 12-bar blues that is never released this overt manipulation of a conventional expectation is what gives the song its relentless drive.  For people whose musical experience doesn't draw from either jazz or blues they can't hear an expectation subverted that they don't know about to begin with.  Thus music education is immensely valuable for understanding what Monk has done in this song.  

Granting that, I did say I was going to discuss Monk's linear writing.  Because this piece is so short I've taken the liberty of borrowing Ethan Hein's score to highlight the places where Monk uses chains of oblique, contrary and similar motion in the two voices in the score to create compelling counterpoint.  The voice-leading in this song is as solid as granite.  

In "traditional" contrapuntal studies you'll be told that it's dangerous to rely on too much of one kind of motion, especially similar motion, when you're writing out two voices.  It is best to switch things up between oblique, similar and contrary motion.   Since, if I recall correctly, Ethan has discussed the distinctions between these forms of motion I don't want to belabor terms.  Instead I want to highlight Monk's elegant shifting back and forth from oblique to contrary to similar motion within his four-measure phrases and how he uses contrary motion out to multi-octave strong beat arrivals at the start of each of his four-measure phrases on the roots of his core harmonies.

PHRASE 1 (I)

measures 1-4, measure by measure 

oblique motion, contrary motion, similar motion, oblique motion

from measure 4 to 5 contrary motion outward to two-octave interval on tonic

PHRASE 2 (I)

measures 5-8, measure by measure

oblique motion, contrary motion, similar motion, oblique motion

from measure 8 to 9 contrary motion from upper C natural and lower G flat to four-octave interval on subdominant

PHRASE 3 (IV)

measures 9 to 12, measure by measure

oblique, similar, similar, oblique

from measure 12 to 13 contrary motion from upper G natural and lower D flat outward to two-octave interval on C, the tonic

PHRASE 4 (I)

measures 13-16, measure by measure

oblique, contrary, similar/contrary

Of course you shouldn't just take my word for it. I should show you what I mean.  

A point of clarification for how and why I have designated certain measures as having oblique motion is in order. The G naturals on the second half of the fourth beat of each measure of 4/4 are so metrically weak they function as anacruses. In other words, for harmonic/linear considerations we could cut them out altogether and they don't change the overall linear progression of the two voices.  Thus from measures 1 to 2 in Phrase 1 I consider the movement to be oblique.  The C natural stays where it is while the bass voice descends from C down to A natural and reaches A flat by descent at measure 2. If you fixate on that G in the treble clef at the end of measure 1 and try to think of it as a harmony or as a metrically significant tone you'll get thrown off.  Think of it this way, if you literally don't play that G on the last eighth of measure 1 does the harmony change?  No.  Now melodically it's a necessary part of the song. as it reaffirms the rising perfect fourth interval that permeates the melody and is reinforced by the I-IV harmonies.

What makes Monk's linear writing so great is that within each phrase he continuously cycles through varied forms of motion but at each "arrival point", the transition from a measure 4 to a measure 5 or the transition from a measure 8 to a measure 9 he uses contrary motion to hit octaves on the roots of the core harmony of each phrase, the proverbial I and IV in the two-thirds blues turnaround.  Across the phrases he uses a sequence of oblique then contrary then similar the oblique to contrary motion for his tonic phrases.  He uses oblique to similar to oblique motion in his subdominant phrase and uses contrary motion to shift from Phrase 3 to Phrase 4, with Phrase 3 recapitulating the oblique to contrary to similar to contrary sequence of forms of motion.  

The reason you can go with the barest of bare bones harmony of spiral out into more complex options in "Bemsha Swing" is because Monk's linear writing is so immaculate the song is indestructibly great as long as you respect the melody and the bass line as the foundation for whatever it is you want to do.  As Ethan pointed out, there's also the fact that the head tune lends itself so beautifully to imitative procedures.  A melody that can be played against itself with a measure's separation (or two) is, colloquially speaking, the apotheosis of good contrapuntal writing.  Having said that, here's an annotated image of the score to show Monk's linear writing you can find at Ethan Hein's original post. Thanks to Ethan for writing about Monk again.