source file: m1428.txt
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:54:49 +0000

Subject: Schoenberg

From: "Patrick Ozzard-Low" <patrick.ozzard-low.itex@norfolk.gov.uk>

> Graham Breed wrote:
> 
> >  Was [Schoenberg] writing for, and being
> > performed by, string ensembles when making the progression towards
> > atonality?
> 
> Verklarte Nacht, and two string quartets (Nos. 0 and 1) preceded the 
> famous 2nd Quartet - with soprano, who sings 'I sense the air of 
> other planets'.  The 2nd Quartet is nominally in F# minor but is 
> usually considered Schoenberg's first 'atonal' work (whatever that 
> means).  
> 
> I say 'whatever that means' because in many so called 'atonal' works 
> (obviously not all),  tonality is very much _implied_but_not_stated_ 
> but also, which is confusing, frequently shifting and ambiguous.  
> This is one reason why atonality can generate such tension: 
> sometimes so much that it immediately and continually collapses.  
> Many listeners find this incomprehensible, and/or frustrating.  Other 
> listeners, who don't feel the implicit tonality of  'atonal' works,  
> either don't enjoy them at all, or seem to listen in radically 
> different way (focussing on texture, colour etc).   
> 
> > As regards the possibilities of 11- or 13-equal, 
> 
> Tune your keyboard/soundcard/piano to 11-ET;  doodle around a bit, 
> and write a melody (or harmonise a melody) using at least all 11 
> chromatic notes; distil this material to an 11 note row from 
> which it may be derived; write out the conventional (44) permutations 
> of the row; then try to compose a piece with this material using 
> harmonic timbres...  After that experience, try arguing that 
> Schoenberg could have been able to write as fluently and rewardingly 
> as he did, given his millieu, experience, aesthetic projects etc.     
> 
> >  Applying these
> > rules in 19-eq would give entirely different results, as it's
> > easier to avoid keys without using all 19 notes.  Did Schoenberg
> > ever consider this?
> 
> Pass.  Does anyone know if  S had any further correspondence with 
> Yasser not already mentioned on the list?
> 
> But I'm not entirely clear about your argument.  Having written quite 
> a bit of (what you would probably call) 'serial' and 'atonal' music 
> in 19-ET I am very aware of how difficult it is to structure a 19 
> note series that works well - I tend to use series of less than 19 
> notes.  But whether this supports the _principle_ (?) behind your 
> point I don't know. 
> 
> > "The Berg Violin Concerto is said to be the first fully serial
> > concerto, though it has many tonal twists to it.  The soloist
> > announces the series, a succession of rising thirds, topped by
> > a tritone: G, Bb, F#, A, C, E, G#, B, C#, Eb, F."
> 
> This should read:  G, Bb,***D***, F#, A, C, E, G#, B, C#, Eb, F."
> 
> You can see immediately that this row contradicts at least one 
> of your definitions of atonal (not that you said it is atonal, but 
> it is often called atonal music).  It's sort of dodecaphonic tonal 
> atonal.  But in my experience the violin concerto would not normally 
> be called a 'serial' work.  You are right that the term  serial is 
> (of  course) derived from the series, but the term 'serial' is 
> commonly retained for music in which the serial principle is applied 
> to other parameters ('total serialism' merely being an extreme 
> instance of this).  For example, Schoenberg Op 25 might be called the 
> first dodecaphonic work, rather than the first 'serial' work - which 
> would normally refer something written in the 40's.  
> 
> However, maybe someone on the list could identify when the terms 
> 'series' and  'serial' were first applied?     
> 
> > I think Wozzeck................... as a whole is atonal.
> 
> Do you think it does not have stunning tonal passages? Like 
> Marie's Lullaby?  Do you think the end is 'tonal' or 'atonal'?  What 
> in your view is the point of making the verbal distinction? 
> 
> But maybe we're getting off-topic, and should take this elsewhere?
> 
> Patrick O-L