"Human Supervision and Control in Engineering and Music" |
Workshop Proceedings | Orchestra Concert | Ensemble Concert | About us |
L. Poundie Burstein Interrelationships in
Beethoven’s Second Symphony Abstract There are
various striking similarities between the movements of Beethoven's Interrelationships in
Beethoven’s Second Symphony It has often
been claimed that the movements of Beethoven’s Second Symphony portray
a type a psychological journey: its movements do not merely
follow one another, but rather are intimately bound together so as to
seem to unfold a narrative. Much of the sense of unity in this
symphony relates to an odd harmonic procedure that is found at the
climax of each of its movements and which has important ramifications
throughout. The unusual harmonic device that
plays such an important role appears during the approach to the
recapitulations in the various movements. Typically, a
recapitulation will be preceded by a grand cadence on a V chord, a
chord which points back towards the main key. The V chord usually
will be prolonged for a number of measures, so that a large proportion
of the development will prepare harmonically for the return to the home
tonality. In some compositions, however,
Beethoven plays a trick on us by pointing to the “wrong” key at the end
of the development section. Such is the case in the Second
Symphony. For instance, consider its first movement. Since this
work is in D major, one would expect the development section to end
with a semicadence on an A chord (the V of D). Instead, however,
there is a huge semicadence on a C-sharp chord, the V of the distant
key of F-sharp. Not until the last two bars of the development
section does an A chord enter to jolt us back to the home key of D
major. The harmonic maneuvering here
creates the unusual chromatic chord progression “VII#-V-I” (fig.
1). This progression is found at the point of recapitulation in
only four other pieces Beethoven. Surprisingly, one of these is
the last movement of the Second Symphony. That is, in all of
Beethoven’s compositions, he uses this striking procedure only five
times, and yet two of those times occur within the Second
Symphony. This hardly seems coincidental. And not
only is this striking procedure used in the first and last movements,
but a VII#-V-I progression is also found immediately before the
recapitulation of the second movement, and a related harmonic device is
used at an analogous point of the third movement.
Furthermore, the
interrelationships between the movements are not limited to the central
climaxes, for the harmonic twist that occurs at these climactic moments
interacts with other elements in the work. For example, in the
first movement, the harmonic gesture at the climax of the development
section is echoed at the climaxes of the exposition and the coda.
Each of these climaxes involves a pronounced chromatic ascent from
either B-sharp or C-natural. B-sharp and C-natural are, of
course, enharmonic equivalents (that is, in equal temperament, B-sharp
and C-natural are the same pitch). But whereas (in the key of D
major) B-sharp normally pulls up and towards distant harmonic regions,
C-natural normally pulls down, leading towards the local key of G (the
key of IV). Significantly, however, in this movement a C-natural
pushes up—contrary to its natural tendency—at the climaxes of both the
exposition and the coda, thereby paralleling the upward motion from
B-sharp at the climax of the development section. The chromatic ascents at these
climactic moments come as reversals of previous tonal gestures that
emphasize downward-resolving C-naturals. In this regard, one might
divide the exposition and development into three stages: (1) In the
first stage, tonal disturbance is created by repeated emphases on
C-naturals that resolve downward; (2) in the second stage, there is an
increase in melodic stability that coincides with the entrance of a
diatonic theme; (3) and in the third stage (at the climax), there is
great tonal disruption as C-natural (or B-sharp) ascends to C-sharp. Let’s consider this layout within
the exposition. The first theme of the exposition begins with a
distorted fanfare involving a strong emphasis on a D7 chord (in bars
42-43). This D7 chord features a chromatic disturbance in the form of a
C-natural, which resolves downward as part of a V7/IV (fig. 2a).
This is then followed by a straightforward statement of a D7 chord
fanfare, which twice reaches a highpoint on an accented C-natural (fig.
2b). As before, the C-naturals of this D7 chord resolve downward,
thereby following their natural tendency. (a) (b) fig. 2: Second Symphony, first
movement, exposition. FIRST STAGE: tonal disturbance involving
downward-resolving C-natural (a) harmonic and rhythmic reduction
of bars 34-57; (b) straightforward D7 chord fanfare, bars 47-53. The presence of a V7/IV within a
first theme is by no means unusual. Yet in this theme the V7/IV
chord plays a far greater role than is normal, for it is asserted with
an almost obsessive force. The great emphasis on C-natural here
can be appreciated by comparing this passage with the theme as
Beethoven first composed it in his sketches. Beethoven initially
planned the theme to begin with an arpeggiation of a simple D major
triad, without a C-natural (fig. 3). The emphasized C-naturals in
the final version, therefore, were literally imposed on what was
originally conceived as a diatonic arpeggiation. fig. 3: First theme, according to
Beethoven’s early sketches. The next stage of the layout
begins with the entrance of the second theme (fig. 4). This new
theme is a type of variant of the first theme. The new theme has a
greater sense of stability, however, owing to its smoother rhythm,
higher register, more balanced phrase structure, and from its
abandoning of the chromatic chordal seventh that was so prominent
during the earlier theme. fig. 4: SECOND STAGE:
diatonic, stable second theme, bars 73-76. The newfound sense of assurance is
soon disrupted, as the second theme group reaches its climax in the
third stage of the layout (in bars 102ff.). At this point, there
is an extremely agitated, explicit allusion to both the rhythm and the
pitches of the opening of the exposition (fig. 5a). As in the
earlier D7 fanfare (see fig. 2b), the ascending motion here halts upon
reaching C-natural. Portentously, however, the C-natural does not
immediately resolve down, as it did in the first theme. Instead,
there is first an implicit motion up from C-natural to C-sharp (fig.
5b). This foreshadows the B-sharp-to-C-sharp motion that will
appear at the climax of the development section. (a) (b) fig. 5: THIRD STAGE: agitated,
upward moving C-natural at climax of second theme group (a) quotation,
bars 99-108; (b) analytic sketch of voice leading, bars 98-112. To review: in the first stage, the
opening theme of the exposition reiterates a D7 chord fanfare that
highlights a downward-resolving C-natural. In the second stage,
stability increases with the entrance of the diatonic second
theme. And in the third stage, the emotional climax of the
exposition is reached with a tense return of the material from the
first theme, in which C-natural contradicts its natural tendency by
momentarily moving upwards. This basic layout is repeated
during the development section, although with much greater
intensity. In the first stage, the development section greatly
expands a D7 chord (fig. 6a; note how the modulation in bars 138-158
presents an enlarged motion from D to C-natural, the defining interval
of the D7 chord fanfare). This passage concludes with a series of
forthright statements of the D7 chord fanfare, now presented even more
emphatically than in the exposition (fig. 6b). The C-natural of
this fanfare resolves downwards, leading to the second stage, in which
the sturdy second theme reappears in the key of G, a local key on the
“flat” side of D major. This is soon counterbalanced in the third
stage by the reappearance of C-natural’s enharmonic equivalent,
B-sharp. This B-sharp leads to the climactic cadence (in bars
198ff.) on C-sharp, the V of F-sharp, a distant key on the “sharp” side
of D major. (a) (b) fig. 6: (a) Analytic sketch of
voice leading in development section, bars 138-216; (b) D7 chord
fanfare, bars 170-181 (compare with fig. 2b). The recapitulation that follows,
of course, more or less repeats the exposition, with the second group
transposed to the tonic key. In the first theme of the
recapitulation, the codetta of the recapitulation, and in the beginning
of the coda, D7 chords returns prominently, each time highlighting a
downward-resolving C-natural. At the climax of the coda, however,
there is one final reversal of this, as the D7 fanfare reappears in a
wildly distorted fashion in the bass (fig. 7). As with the
previous climaxes in the exposition and development section, the
C-natural in the coda’s climax moves against its natural tendency by
pushing up towards C-sharp. fig. 7: Climax of coda, bars
326-40. Following this bold upward motion,
the movement concludes with a final straightforward statement of the
fanfare. Significantly, in this final statement the D chord is
arpeggiated as a simple diatonic triad, without a C-natural (fig.
8). This diatonic arpeggiation sounds particularly triumphant, as
though celebrating a victory over the chromatic C-natural that has
asserted such strong disruption throughout the movement. fig. 8: Final statement of the
fanfare, without C-natural, bars 350-352 (compare to Example 2b). I should emphasize that the
dramatic motions that I have noted involving C-natural (and its
enharmonic B-sharp) are not random, isolated events. They are
highlighted in almost every section of the piece, especially at its
crucial junctures. As part of the D7 chord, C-natural follows its
natural tendency by resolving down throughout most the exposition, most
of the development section, the first theme group and codetta of the
recapitulation, and the beginning of the coda. At the climaxes of
the exposition, development section, and coda, this tendency is
reversed as C-natural (or its enharmonic B-sharp) moves upwards towards
C-sharp. By defying the natural, descending tendencies of
C-natural, these climactic ascents seem to involve an imposition of
human will, as though portraying a struggle against fate. Of
course, the sense of human struggle against fate is one that is
prototypically associated with Beethoven. In this symphony, this
sense derives not merely from the conventional heroic gestures found
throughout, but also from the linking of these heroic gestures with the
interrelated harmonic motions and conflicts that permeate the
composition. The same elements involved in the
tonal struggles of the first movement return in the second
movement. The second movement is a pastorale whose serenity
initially seems to provide refuge from the turmoil of the previous
movement. This serenity is not to last long, however, for the
bucolic mood soon gives way to increasingly restless passages.
Significantly, these restless passages heavily involve C-natural, the
pitch that was engaged in so much of the turbulence in the first
movement. It is within the second movement’s
development section that C-natural makes its first prominent
appearance. Within this section, there are two semicadences in C
major. The climax of the movement comes after the second of these
semicadences, where the bass climbs up from G (the V of C) towards
C-natural. This bass ascent does not stop upon reaching the
C-natural, however, but rather continues up past C-natural to C-sharp
and D. Remarkably, the bass C-sharp and D support a VII#-V-I
progression in the local key of D major (fig. 9a). In other words, much
as in the first movement, at the climax of the second movement there is
a chromatic ascent from C-natural (= B-sharp) to C-sharp, leading to
the unusual VII#-V-I progression in D major (fig. 9b). (a) (b) fig. 9: (a) Second movement,
climax (bars 147-54); (b) analytic sketches comparing bass lines of the
climactic passages in the first and second movements. The poetic effects of this
progression in the two movements are quite different, however. In
the first movement, the VII#-V-I progression stands precisely at the
juncture of the development and recapitulation. Furthermore, it
is punctuated by flourishes and arpeggios, so as to give it a heroic
feel. In the second movement, on the other hand, the climactic
VII#-V-I motion is couched within a larger progression, one that ends
in a peacefully, with its energy gradually dissipating. It is as
though the second movement demonstrates that the conflicts seen in the
first movement are but one aspect of our world, as they are ultimately
embraced within a larger, peaceful framework. This produces a
sense of reconciliation, offering a gentler alternative to the
treatment of the tonal conflicts seen in the opening movement. The last two movements of the
symphony also conspicuously confront elements similar to those found at
the highpoints of the first two. Though the third movement does
not directly involve the C-natural/C-sharp conflict or the VII#-V-I
progression, the central part of its Trio section nevertheless bears a
striking resemblance to the central climax of the opening
movement. Immediately before the thematic return in the Trio—much
as in the analogous part of the first movement—there is a sudden motion
to the key of F-sharp minor. This is followed by a rapid decrescendo
and then by a sudden forte statement of a V chord—again, much like in
the first movement. In the third movement, of course, this
passage is simpler and more lighthearted, as though parodying the
monumental climax of the first movement. By noting the use of parody here,
I am not suggesting that the movement itself is trivial or
buffoonish. Though in its lowest forms, parody might seem to rely
simply on clownish antics, in its elevated manifestations—as in the
Second Symphony—it can be quite sophisticated. In all parody, a
comic effect is achieved by imitating something in an exaggerated and
lighthearted fashion. The greater the degree of similarity
between the thing that is parodying and the thing that is being
parodied, the stronger will be the sense of parody. Yet there
must also be a contrast between the integrity of the subject and that
of the parody. The sense of parody increases in direct proportion
to the degree of contrast between the seriousness of the subject and
the lightheartedness of the thing that is parodying it. Through
such means, the thing being parodied becomes less forbidding: what once
seemed overwhelmingly powerful may be approached in a more ready manner
after having been parodied. The sense of parody may be found
in even greater abundance within the finale. The tomfoolery here
may be witnessed from the very opening gesture of the movement, which
sounds somewhat like the braying of a donkey (fig. 10). Similar
comic gestures such as frantic leaps, sudden starts and stops, and
barnyard-like sounds continue throughout the movement. fig. 10: Fourth movement,
beginning, bars 1-2. This happy exuberance does not
merely contrast with the more dignified natures of the first two
movements: it comes at their expense. In spite of its great
difference in mood, the finale shares many elements with the opening
movements of the symphony, especially the first one. The
strongest correlation between the outer movements may be found in the
development sections, which parallel each other closely (fig.
11). fig. 11: Comparison of development
sections from the first and last movements. Note that the development section
of the finale, like that of the opening movement, culminates on a VII#
chord that forms part of a VII#-V-I progression. The treatment of
this progression in the finale, of course, is much less serious than in
the earlier movement. The furious passage that prolongs the VII#
chord in the finale leads not to the entrance of a serious theme, but
rather leads to the comic “braying” outburst from the opening of the
movement. This humorous outburst ridicules not only the serious
pretensions of the previous passage within the finale, but also those
of the analogous passages from the earlier movements. Throughout the remainder of the
finale, serious passages continue to be suddenly deflated by
lighthearted ones. Again, many of these relate to passages heard
in the opening movements. An example of this may be found at the
conclusion of the finale’s recapitulation. In the first movement, as
you will recall, a series of D7 chord fanfares (along with their
motions towards the key of G) were presented in a bold manner, as were
the climactic ascents from C-natural to C-sharp. At the end of
the finale’s recapitulation, on the other hand, a D7 fanfare (in bars
278ff.) soon degenerates into a silly, squawking arpeggio (fig. 12a),
and the subsequent motion to and from G (bars 290ff.) is treated in a
flippant manner, as is the accompanying ascent from C-natural to
C-sharp (fig. 12b). As with many other such reminiscences within
the finale, these lighthearted passages seem to mock the severe
struggles seen within the first movement. (a) (b) fig. 12: Fourth movement, parodies
of the first movement (a) bars 282-88; (b) 290-93. Perhaps the most farcical moment
of the finale comes in the coda. Towards the end of the coda, the
bass repeatedly ascends to a C-natural, in a manner reminiscent of the
obstinate ascents to C-natural in first movement (fig. 13a). The
seriousness here is soon undercut, however, by squeaks in the first
violins, which in turn lead to a transposed variation of the opening
gesture. Previously, the opening outburst of the finale had
always outlined a V7 chord. In this transposed variant, however,
it outlines a tonic triad, so that even the tonic chord ultimately is
caught up in the opening gesture’s frenetic web (fig. 13b).
Again, the contrast with the first movement is significant. As I
have argued earlier, at the end of the opening movement, the
transformation of the D7 motto into an arpeggio of a diatonic tonic
triad was a moment of triumph (see fig. 7b). At the end of the
finale, on the other hand, the transformation of the opening gesture
into a tonic arpeggio comes as yet another instance of raucous fun. (a) (b) fig. 13: Fourth movement, coda (a)
bars 382-89; (b) bars 416-25. To sum up: there is great
similarity in the central climaxes of each of the movements in
Beethoven’s Second Symphony, three of which involve the unusual
VII#-V-I progression. Owing to the rarity of this progression, this
similarity seems too striking to be merely coincidental. Furthermore,
the harmonic gestures found at these climaxes interact with other
elements throughout, so that—in spite of their difference in moods—the
various movements are strongly interconnected. This interconnection helps allow
for the Symphony’s aforementioned portrayal of a psychological
journey. In one sense, the movements follow a format that is
typical for a symphony: its first movement is dignified and bold, the
second is thoughtful, the third is cheery, and the finale is
joyous. Yet largely owing to the strong relationships among the
movements, one might well think of the symphony as a relating a type of
narrative. Within this narrative, the heroic attitude of the first
movement is transformed into a conciliatory stance within the second
movement—only to be mocked by the twisted parodies of the final two
movements. Certainly, the powerful expression of this narrative
owes much to the intricate interrelationships that are so craftily
established throughout the composition. |