Intensification and Erasure: Finding the new way

An Essay for 20th Century Theory class by Tom Palny

The two pieces I would like to refer to in this essay are Ravels Soupir and Stravinskys Symphonies of Wind Instruments. Ravel in his arrangement of the song Soupir has some aspects of composition that are actually very much rooted in the classical past and some other aspects that are clear diversion of that. He does erase some ideas and intensifies others: from the first notes of the piece it is clear that Ravel intensifies the idea of colors of sound that was already starting to emerge in the late romantic period and unusual ways of using the sound of particular instruments in this case the strings. He uses the harmonics on the strings in a repeated way that creates a cloud of sound, a very unique color that was not used in the classical past, but that is emerging from the idea of using the instruments timber for color, and therefore I see it as an intensification of the classical. The accompaniment is not only unique in color but unique in its rhythm aspect as well. It is repeating over and over again the same pattern in each voice but with combination of different rhythmic units, namely, 4 against 3 (1st vln and 2nd vln) while the voice, the flute and the piano are hovering on top of that fluid sound cloud in slower and larger rhythmic units: half notes, quarters, eighths and triplets of eighths, creating a most complex rhythmic field of sound with no real sense of beat for the listener a clear intensification of the rhythmic ideal of classical music. I see it as a continuation of Brahms complex rhythmic field of different rhythmic units against one another while attempting to confuse the natural sense of beat and bar lines. This all changes in the middle of the piece, which is the middle of the poem, on the words Vers LAzur!, and followed by a contrasting section with a more unified rhythmic values (rehearsal no. 3) of the strings, getting more chromatic then before. This is again a continuation of the classical ideals of form and contrasts. The voice writing is very smooth and in a natural, comfortable range for the voice, which reminds very much of the Italian aria style an intensification of the classical. The tonality of the piece is the only aspect that shows an erasure of the classical ideal there is no clear tonal center in the piece. The piece consists of a combination of different scales pentatonic, chromatic and modal scales that are a clear erasure of the classical tonal ideal.

Stravinsky, on the other hand, tries in his piece Symphonies of wind instruments to erase every possible ideal of classical tradition he can, with one small exception voice leading which I will elaborate later. The piece is not based on any tonality in the classical sense of it. Rather it is using fragmented motives that have each a unique collection of notes and that usually create collectively the famous 8-note scale, or the octatonic scale, so favored by Stravinsky. The motives and their fragments lead to the discussion of the form: The form is made to erase any former classical ideal of a theme or large contrasting theme sections, achieved by minimizing the musical material to mere motives. The form is entirely made of contrasting motives and their fragments, changing rapidly, and sometimes heard simultaneously in layers in different voices. There is only one clear change in the piece in rehearsal no. 65, when a slow funeral march is heard with no faster contrasting motives interchanging until the end of the piece. The motives are usually very clear and have a unique sound that is created by using mostly the same instrumentation or the same register when a motive is heard again later in the piece, with few exceptions. The tempi markings are also more or less the same, with many instructions such as Piu Mosso, or Meno Mosso. The rhythm is once again a clear erasure of the classical. Stravinsky uses in many of his pieces the same technique: repeating 3 or 4 notes in each voice with different rhythmic units and layering other 3 or 4 notes against them while changing the meter every bar or every other bar (beginning of the piece for example, as well as rehearsal 46-51). This creates a unique rhythmic field and a unique sound for each motive. The rhythm is crucial in the piece because it is used to differentiate the motives: each motive has its own unique rhythmic identity. The rhythm is one of the most important aspects in Stravinskys music. When Stravinsky writes for instruments, he very often writes for the most unnatural, uncomfortable and unique sounding register in order to create a unique sound that cannot be transposed to a different register. This way he achieves the effect that a percussion instrument has in a way from every instrument of the orchestra. He is also one of the most particular composers when it comes to articulation. He writes very specific instructions on almost every note in order for it to have a unique sound that only the specific instrument can produce (for example, rehearsal number 51). The only exception, as I said before, for Stravinskys clear intention of erasing any classical composition ideal is the voice leading. Most of the time (clearly not all of the time), the voice leading for the instruments in the piece is linear and melodic. This is the only time I can say that Stravinsky is embedding one classical ideal in his music. But again, with exceptions.