For your blog post due Wednesday, January 15 at 9 am, please
consider our class discussion as led by Prof. Miyake from the afternoon on Tuesday,
January 14, and comment in 250-500 words on the following points:
· What did you know
about today’s subject before the listening and/or discussion session?
· What did you find
most surprising about today’s subject?
· What would you
like to know more about after experiencing today’s class?
Your post should be placed directly in the comments to this blog
entry, and is due at 9 am on Wednesday, January 15.
Today’s lecture from Professor Miyake was really enlightening about the second movement of the third symphony. Before the lecture, I was familiar with the movement because of the oboe excerpt, which is called for on every professional audition. I also was aware that the form of the movement involved moving from C minor to C major and back to C minor, but I didn’t realize anything else intricate about the form.
ReplyDeleteThere were two things in the lecture today that surprised me the most. The first was the form of the movement, and Beethoven’s flagrant distancing from classic ABA form. When Beethoven tries to return to the A theme, the first two times it is thwarted. I think it’s fascinating to hear the theme try and then fail again and again to return in full force. I thought that Professor Miyake’s description of the form was spot on, also. When the theme finally returns, it is without opposition. Shortly after, though, it struggles and staggers to its end, near the end of the movement. I think that this is a bold statement and it always surprises me in the music. The second big thing that surprised me was Beethoven’s focus on the Ab throughout the movement. The Ab seems to really represent longing, vulnerability, and pleading. I really felt its importance throughout the movement, and I was intrigued by the ways that Beethoven snuck it into the themes and transitions to highlight it’s mysterious qualities.
I would like to learn more about the in-depth theory side of things, where Professor Miyake could point out such interesting things about form and the use of certain notes to represent feelings or characters. I’d like to learn more about what Beethoven does with symbolism in the symphonies we have not yet tackled.
Before today, I had listened to the movement many times. I was familiar with the large scale A B A->Fugue + various A's form.
ReplyDeleteI saw the different A's as various excursions rather than derailments, and, as with the first movement, hadn't attached meaning to them by comparing Beethoven's form to what the "normal" form would be. I heard meaning in the piece in and of itself, of course, and that meaning was similar to my understanding now, but looking at the form added another fascinating layer of musical meaning. I love that, instead of a second B, Beethoven writes a fugue based on the inversion of B. The possible normal A B A B A has gotten really messed up! What we get is more like A B a8 aAa. Through the examination of form, I'm starting to consciously understand why I find Beethoven so engaging and so different from Haydn and Mozart - why I could live without listening to Haydn and Mozart's symphonies (sorry boys) but not without Beethoven's.
I wouldn't call it surprising - maybe instead "genius" - but my favorite thing we looked at today was the prevalence of Ab in this movement. It shows up again and again in different guises - in different characters, in different parts of the phrase, in different instruments and registers, as different scale degrees. My Dover edition is going to get really colorful!
After today (and yesterday too) I really want to study form in each and every piece I play and love. Knowing the precise form clarifies the music - and purely musical meaning - so dramatically; I feel like I'm missing so much by not examining it.
Before the class, I have heard the second movement of the “Erica” symphony a lot under different circumstances. I have an abstract image of this symphony, that it is called as the Funeral March, and the movement is often referred to as “the death of a hero”. Romain Rolland calls it "all men carry the coffin of a hero" , which Berlioz compares to Virgil's poem in memory of Pallas. The movement is also one of the most influential of Beethoven's works. It is solemn, sad, full of beauty and unique emotional tension, developed from a simple theme into a variety of changes, is the representative of Beethoven Mature Style.
ReplyDeleteAfter went through the whole movement in details on today’s lecture, I would say the most impressive idea for me is how Beethoven use single notes to express complicated emotions. The A flat Prof. Miyake mentioned is fascinating. In the theme one melody, it serves not only for the highest pitch, but also for the specialty: this A flat is the most touching note in the melody. In the last section, when the A flat appears in the baseline with a sf, again it indicated a sudden attack that violently interrupted the fragile surface of the music. Everytime when this note is being performed, it is always intriguing, which gives the second movement a vulnerable feature.
The whole second movement is in a not-typical rounded binary form. Instead of ABA, it is actually structured as A-B-A attempt-fugue-A attempt-A-A attempt. It takes a lot of time for this music to return to the A part and to close this movement. This is similar to the first movement, since the ending both sound “unresolved”: unfinished motive, undone theme, etc. Since the second movement is a funeral march, it is reasonable to compare the ending to the idea of death. But still, it shows that Beethoven loves to do some complicated things for ending his music - I’d like to say this is part of his signature in his music.
I’d really like to hear more details of the second movement just like the analysis on the A flat. This is really fascinating and I believe I need to dig into it more since there are special notes need to be found.
Prior to our discussion, I was familiar with the second movement (“funeral march”) of the 3rd symphony, especially its main theme. I also had a general idea of the form of the movement. This is because I had studied Prof. Miyake’s annotated score and description of the form before class. The movement is, generally speaking, in an A-B-A structure.
ReplyDeleteIn our discussion, there were a few things that really surprised me. The first is Beethoven’s deliberate and pronounced deviation from conventional ABA form. For example, in the return of the A section, the music tries to restate the opening theme but then stumbles into a long fugue, which almost could be considered a full section. In fact, the main theme “blunders” twice before finally re-stating itself in the oboe in measure 173. Even in the codetta, the resolution is prolonged by a deceptive cadence and an excursion into remote harmonic territory. Once it finally resolves into an authentic cadence, we hear the main theme one last time, but this time it has been distorted beyond recognition. The rhythm is purposely “stop-and-start”, and it gives us a sense of death, or someone taking their last gasps of breath.
The second big thing that surprised me was Beethoven’s emotional attachment to A flat in this movement. In this movement, Beethoven achieves so much with this one note alone. Every time he presents it, it has some sort of expressive meaning that stands out. Most often, it represents vulnerability, loneliness, and tragedy. Sometimes, it also serves to transition into a new section or key.
I thought Prof. Miyake’s extra-musical interpretation of Beethoven’s second movement was interesting. She thought it wasn’t mourning the severe flaws of Napoleon, the Enlightenment’s purported savior, but rather an intense expression of Beethoven’s personal sorrow due to his loss of hearing. She inferred that Beethoven was expressing his despair at his condition and, in effect, the potential collapse of his artistic career. Indeed, Beethoven wrote the Heiligenstadt Testament, a poignant letter to his brothers expressing his anguish, not too long before his work on the Eroica.
I would love to learn more about the symbolism of formal elements in Beethoven’s symphonies. I find Prof. Miyake’s analyses regarding form to be fascinating, because she always connects the details with a presumed emotional function or symbol.
Day two of Symphony No. 3! Of course, I heard this piece yesterday in our listening session, and heard Professor O’Leary lecture about the first movement. I also listened to the second movement again before class today to find my favorite spot in the movement.
ReplyDeleteI thought that Professor Miyake’s lecture tied in very nicely with how Professor Pau talked about jokes in his lecture, but in a much darker way. Triplets in a march don’t seem quite right. Putting the fugue upside down is somewhat odd. Professor Miyake also mentioned how Beethoven purposefully omitted repeat signs to sort of distort the rounded binary form– the A section tries to come back, but it can’t quite do it. Then it tries again successfully, but it doesn’t end there. The last time, the theme fizzles out and dies. All of these, to me, seem like jokes that aren’t very funny. Perhaps if they happened in a more chipper way, rather than a funeral march, it would be funnier.
Professor Miyake presented the idea that the funeral march may have been a way for Beethoven to mourn the loss of his hearing, which is something that has been suggested before regarding other symphonies in other classes. I’m open to this concept, but I’m hesitant to push an extramusical interpretation onto a piece if there isn’t concrete evidence supporting it. I think you could say that this movement might have been Beethoven mourning his loss of hearing, but I think it’s possible to say the same about other movements and pieces he wrote.
The thing I would like to know more about after today’s class is how a fugue fits into a funeral march– is that a normal thing to happen? Are there any connotations surrounding that? Did Beethoven think he was doing something creative by doing this? Someone asked a similar question, but about a funeral march fitting into a symphony, rather than a fugue fitting into a funeral march, but I do wonder about the latter.
Prior to this class, I had listened to this movement several times, a few times following with the score. Similarly to yesterday, I was vaguely aware of the style, form, meaning, and profound points in the funeral march, but not nearly to the extent Professor Miyake presented the information. I had also picked up on the importance of A-flat and D-flat before class, being generally interested when there’s a neapolitan figure or beautifully expressive musical contouring, but again was more tangentially aware of significance, where I’d struggle to find confidence in a detailed analysis of that which I had intuited. I was surprised at just how important these notes are to the movement, and in what way they carried weight.
ReplyDeleteI was very interested to hear about the programmatic side of this funeral march. The short discussion we had regarding the death of Beethoven’s hearing and Napoleon was very intriguing. I’d like to dive into this topic more. I know we covered a lot about this topic in Professor O’Leary’s lecture, but I’d like to hear more about what Professor Miyake has to say about the loss of Beethoven’s hearing in this symphony. Does it just apply to this movement? If so, why switch topics so suddenly and include this movement in the Eroica? Does that have implications for who the hero is in the first movement?
I’m very happy to have spent so much time on just two movements of the Eroica Symphony, but it does leave me wondering about the third and fourth movements. When I hear the first two movements, even prior to these lectures, I feel I have more than enough content in a symphony to be going on with. After the funeral march, I’ve even felt slightly disinterested in the final two movements. I know very little about either movement and I wish I had more information about them. Are they ordinary movements, at least relative to the first two? What do they ‘mean’ in the context of the hero, or Beethoven himself?