WILLEM IBES
Beeoven’s Piano Sonaa Opus 11 in A-fla Major: Te Mysery of e Missing Cas A analizing enigma presened iself in e course of analyzing e second movemen of Beeoven’s Opus 11, leading me o e enaive conclusion a a measure may be missing in all prined ediions of is work. I seems possible a beween measures 1 and 2 of is second movemen, one wole measure as been inadverenly lef ou as e resul of an orograpic ambiguiy in e auograp (e original score in e composer’s composer’s own andwriing). I was a paricular meod of analysis developed over e course of many years a led me o is ypoesis. Tis meodology consiss of ree main essenial elemens a differeniae i from oer generally acceped analyical procedures: (1) a maemaical-proporional undersanding of e moif, (2) e proper idenificaion of e moif, and (3) e associaion of e moif wi a ex and a meaning. Firs, I use a maemaical manner of analysis wic concenraes primarily on e proporional-merical aspecs of e music, e leng of e moif and is placemen wiin e measure, a is, weer i sars on a srong(er) or weak(er) bea. Te leng of e moif can, of course, be alered by e devices of diminuion and augmenaion, and i comes as no surprise a Beeoven’s lae sonaas wi eir weal of counerpoin exibi ese rais in abundance. Second, I believe a e generally acceped undersanding of wa consiues a moif as been e cause of misundersanding e musical discourse of especially e eigeen and early nineeen cenuries. Abou weny-five years ago, afer aving become acquained wi e Ur-ex (unedied) ediions of e Scarlai, Beeoven, and Mozar sonaas and e larger works of Bac, I began o wonder abou e easier composiions by ese masers a I aug o my early and inermediae piano sudens. For example, all e familiar ediions of e famous Bac Minue in G major (wic pianis as no played i?) inser a slur saring from e firs measure ino e firs bea of e
No.3—006
second measure (see Example 1). Tis always seemed o make perfec sense bu wa began o boer me was a e nex wo quarer noes in e second measure, e repeaed Gs, didn’ seem o ave any of wa only muc laer I would begin o ink of as meaning . Over e course of many years I became more and more disurbed by ese wo “cliff-angers,” as well as by e prasing of e lef-and figures in, for insance, mm 13 roug 1, wic were also always slurred across e bar line (see Example 2):
I fel e same uneasiness wen eacing e equally famous Beeoven Sonaina in G Major (see Example 3). Te prasing of e firs measure ino e firs bea of e second seemed sensible, bu e las ree beas of e measure, oug sounding pleasan enoug, lef me anging in e air, exacly as e wo Gs ad in Bac’s Minue.
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
3
Afer deliberaing inernally over many years, I sared o correc my sudens’ copies. I ad come o undersand a, almos wiou excepion (and always clearly marked), e moifs and moif-syllables do no cross e bar line bu are conained wiin i. Of course, I sould ave cecked ediions like Henle’s of e Beeoven Klavierstücke for ese sorer works, bu I simply sayed wi wa I myself ad been aug and aug in urn for fory years. One mig ink a finally aving Bac’s and Beeoven’s Ur-ex ediions in and would ave made me see e lig, bu e virus a infecs e work of us all unforunaely remained undeeced. So, wa is is virus a as sealily burrowed is way ino our inerpreaions of Baroque, Classical, and a good number of laer composers? I is simply e almos irresisible urge o fall ino e cadence, o always play across e bar line or ino e sronger bea of e measure (in a / measure ino e ird bea, in a / measure ino e four bea). Te moif of Bac’s Minue in G Major (see Example ) consiss of wo syllables, “a” and “b,” wo perfecly symmerical measures: in e firs measure (leaving ou e passing noes) ree quarer noes, D G B; in e second measure, D G G. Te relaion beween ese wo “syllables,” wic ogeer consiue e complee moif, is one of esis and arsis, of down-bea and up-bea.
I is essenial a ese wo pars be properly idenified in order o avoid e meaningless “cliff-angers.” Te srucure of e firs alf of e musical senence (aneceden) us becomes clear: a+b; a+b; a; a; a+b (see Example ). As sown in Example , is ariculaion of e moif and is syllables remains consisen rougou e piece:
No.3—006
Beeoven does no differ from Bac in is respec. His early Sonaina in G Major as a srucure a is idenical o e Bac Minue, a srucure a is difficul o pin down wiou a clear idenificaion of e moif. Te moif is composed again of wo symmerical syllables a and b. (Example gives e slurring e way Beeoven wroe i, no e “correced” version of a presumpuous edior.)
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
Te complee firs (musical) senence, as in e Bac Minue, is: a+b (mm. 1,2); a+b (mm. 3,), a (m. ); a (m. ); a+b (mm. ,). Wa is i, afer all, a makes music inelligible? In oer words, ow does music express meaning ? No very differen from e way language does. As a book consiss of capers a consis of paragraps consruced ou of individual senences, emselves buil ou of words, syllables, and individual leers, so a sympony, sonaa, concero, or quare consiss of movemens a are divided ino secions, wic in urn consis of individual (musical) senences, emselves made up ou of moifs, moif-members (moif-syllables) and individual noes. Here, owever, e comparison sops. Wereas language needs many words o make a senence, in music, a single moif and is permuaions almos always suffice o make a (musical) senence, a movemen, and someimes — as in e case of Opus 11 and 111 — a wole muli-movemen sonaa. An obvious requisie for meaning, or inelligibiliy, in language as well as music, is a leers (noes), words (moifs), and senences (prases or musical senences) are grouped correcly. A word like min ceme at makes no sense, wereas mincemeat is clear. Well, i is my conenion a for almos wo cenuries now we ave made and coninue o make mincemea of Beeoven’s composiions, as well as e composiions of many oer composers. If I were o wrie, “Tesa Turd aynig s, Owa sbe enabi gsu cc es swi e Eni. recomm uniy,” for good measure adding in some sraegically misplaced capial leers, commas, and periods, no a soul would undersand a I was commening on e success of e Saurday nig sow. All e rig leers are ere, bu were is e meaning ? Ta is exacly Beeoven’s exasperaed cry o Karl Holz wen e wries in uer frusraion (leer from Baden, daed Augus 12): “Te noes are all rig — only undersand my meaning rigly.” In e same leer Beeoven coninues: “Te slurs mus sand jus as ey are! I is no a maer of indifference weer you play or . Mind you, is comes from an auoriy, so pay aenion. I ave spen e enire morning and e wole of yeserday afernoon correcing ese wo movemens, and am quie oarse wi cursing and samping.” I am afraid poor Beeoven would compleely lose is voice were e o reurn now, afer wo cenuries, and ry o grasp ow we could possibly, and so uerly, ave deformed is oug and oblieraed e meaning of is music.
6
No.3—006
On e mos elemenal level, meaning depends, quie simply, on ow we group e leers ino words, separae one word from anoer, were we sar and were we end a senence. If my name is Wim Ibes (pronounced E-bes) and I wrie Wimi Bes or WimI Bes I ave canged only e grouping of e leers in ese wo words, bu, as Beeoven so bierly complained, e meaning is gone. Wa en consiues e moif, e Gesal, e Eidos of a composiion, and ow does a composer work wi a basic idea? Forunaely Beeoven, especially lae-Beeoven, gives us some solid ins by generously supplying is scores wi slurs. Tose slurs delineae e moif as well as e (musical) senence. We can argue endlessly abou one ousand deails, bu wen a basic undersanding of moif is lacking, all e res becomes guesswork. Te rules of puncuaion apply o music as muc as o language; commas, periods, colons, semi-colons, quesion marks, and exclamaion marks are no a luxury bu a necessiy. In music, ese necessary rules are expressed by “silences of ariculaion,” a erm explained in 1th and 1th cenury reaises and one a we would do well o re-inroduce ino our musical vocabulary.4 To recapiulae our invesigaion us far we can say a e correc delineaion of e moif, in conjuncion wi a maemaical-proporional approac, provides e blueprin of a composiion. Leaving ou (iniially) all e oer elemens of music suc as melody, armony, dynamics and even rym (bu mos definiely including e placemen wiin e meer) i uncovers for us e fundamenal geneic maerial, e DNA of e work. In simple pieces like e Beeoven Sonaina is meod allows us o easily follow e musical discourse. In complex works, owever, we need more precise labeling an is made possible by mere leers of e alpabe. Te ird of my ree main analyical devices is now called for. Already in an earlier analysis of e piano sonaa Opus 11 I ad — unwiingly a e ime — followed Beeoven’s suggesion wen e advises one someimes o pu (underlay) a fiing ex under a difficul-o-undersand passage and o sing i. [… rieth ferner bisweilen passende Worte einer streitigen Stelle unterzulegen und sie zu singen….]5 A ex or moo wic correcly imiaes e merical srucure of e moif (focusing mainly on is merical-maemaical properies) enables us o rack all e peregrinaions of a moif.
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
Te second movemen of Opus 11 graciously supplies e implici ex, a folksong in Silesian dialec, “Das liebe Käzcen” (see Example ). Beeoven ad sen i, ogeer wi anoer folksong, in is own andwriing (wic e rused e publiser would be able o deciper!) wi a somewa insipid armonizaion o Simrock in Bonn, peraps as some kind of joke, peraps oping for some oer favor.6
Here, in e second movemen of Opus 11 (see Example ), e uses e melody wi a subsanially revised accompanimen, wi ilarious resuls.
Translaed ino more or less sandard German, e second movemen’s Scerzo gleefully relaes: Unser Katz hat Kät-zle g’habt , and ino Englis wi correc meeraccens: “Ou-r (wo syllables) ca did kiens ave,” and en e punc line: drei und sechsi’ nai-ni! [Tree and sixy did se ave!] Te opening 1 measures (excluding e repea) exclaim: Ou-r ca did kiens a-ve; THREE AND SIXTY DID SHE HAVE! THREE AND SIXTY! THREE AND SIXTY! THREE AND SIXTY DID SHE HAVE! (Te capialized words sou ou fore.)
No.3—006
Te nex 2 measures (see Example 1) are based on anoer popular melody wi e following ex: Ich bin lüderlich, du bist lüderlich, wir sind alle lüderlich [I am lecerous, you are lecerous, all of us are lecerous].7
A raer bawdy diy, i is surprisingly sopisicaed: a sor break beween e firs and second quarer noes, like e iccups of a drunken sailor, a repeiion of e firs (wo-measure) moif, en e repeiion of jus e firs (one measure) moifsyllable, followed by an augmenaion of e second measure a e end (see Example 11). Everying is exploied in ypical fasion wi umor and verve.
Before proceeding I mus poin ou a, for a correc analysis, i doesn' make muc difference weer or no Beeoven ad ese exs in mind wen e wroe is second movemen. I am using e ex simply as a device o undersand e srucure, following e advice of e Maser o find passende Worte . If readers prefer a ex like Jesu, meine Freude (afer a famous Bac Canaa) for e firs four measures, and repeaing a fortissimo for e nex four, placet . Tey will reac subsanially e same conclusions since mine are based on e raer immuable laws of maemaics. I believe ere is no e sliges doub a Beeoven was familiar wi bo melodies and exs of ese folksongs. Weer ese exs acually also offer a furer, deeper level of meaning, in oer words weer ey express e rue caracer of is movemen, is someing I will address in an as ye o be publised analysis of e Sonaa as a wole. Te firs secion, a Scerzo in all aspecs, is followed by a middle secion, e Trio, afer wic e Scerzo is repeaed as is sandard for e form. If we accep for e
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
sake of our analysis e ex of e Trio (as was e case wi e Scerzo secion, e ex is no made explici in e score) as wa Beeoven ad in mind, en we find e composer reurning ere o is prolific ca, saring forissimo a measure and coninuing piano in eac of e ree wo-measure sequences unil e end (see e Appendix B for a visualizaion of e srucure) as follows: Mm /1 THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm 2 roug ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve; eac wo measures in leng (equivalen o e firs measures of e Scerzo in diminuion) Mm / THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm roug ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve Mm / THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm roug 3 ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve Mm / THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm roug 1 ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve Mm 2/3 THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm — in mock surprise asking e reorical quesion THREE AND…?? is cu off in mid-senence wi an imperious sou: Mm / THREE AND SIXTY!! Mm roug 2 ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve Ten, in piano dynamics (diminuendo): Mm 3/ Tree and sixy (no exclamaion mark!) Mm roug ree imes: ou-r ca did kiens a-ve Dropping o a pianissimo: M 1 A varian of e original wo quarer noes in m (and laer e.g., in m ) embellised ino four eig noes “Tree and .…..” Tree and wa? O dear, sixy cas are missing. Wa appened o em?
10
No.3—006
If we look a e auograp, page 2 of e facsimile ediion, Icys Verlag, Sugar, we come upon e soluion. Te sixy cas a we find in e firs measure of e second sysem (a se of saves) in e auograp were misakenly considered as aving been crossed ou by e composer! I is rue, e following bars ave a generous orizonal “X” drawn roug em and e op leg of e “X” descending from e lef exends a bi ino e erriory of e previous measure. Bu, as sown in Example 12, e ascending leg of e “X” sars from e lower lef, precisely a e bar line of — measure 2!
In e auograp, measure 2 coninues e downward paern wi e expeced8 F C E-fla D-fla in e lower regiser, wi e ig F in e reble on e second bea.9 In oer words, if we realize a m 1 is a varian of e Scerzo’s measure , i is no difficul o realize a mm 1 and “new” 2 repea, pianissimo, mm and (or , 1; , ec.): drei und sechzig , embellising is ime no jus e drei bu also e original wo quarer noes of e sechzig as four eig noes. Wa a relief! All drei und sechzig cas are ere. I is rue a, a e end of is Trio, e composer did no exend is prasing slur over ino e second sysem o include e new m 2 (see Appendix A). I is erefore possible a e prasing is correc and a e composer is asking anoer reorical quesion as in m — is ime pianissimo — “ree and,” giving e answer in e (old) 2, 3, , , e four imes repeaed “ree-andsixy” menioned above. However, I believe ere is noing ere in is ebbing away diminuendo o sugges anying — like e surprising jol in m — o warran suc an inerpreaion.
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
11
We sould also keep in mind a Beeoven slurs are no infrequenly ambiguous. Tere are many insances were ey do no exacly pinpoin e beginnings and endings of prases and, in fac someimes are erroneous. Te pedal markings delineaing e “ree and sixy” moif are wrong in Henle bu Scenker follows e auograp correcly. All ediions are rife wi ediorial legerdemains — e plural is no exaggeraion since one “lig and” alone could no possibly accoun for e massive and disasrous ediorial idiosyncrasies, especially wen i comes o prasing slurs. Ignoring e laer makes Beeoven uninelligible, for e primary means of giving meaning o individual noes is ow ey are grouped o form moifs and prases. I is almos unimaginable, as George Bar as amply demonsraed in is “Te Pianis as Oraor,” a e falsificaion of Beeoven’s oug and wriing sared even in e composer’s own lifeime and a e main culpri was none oer an Carl Czerny of “Euden” fame, wo a one ime sudied wi e Maser imself.0 I goes wiou saying a, as in all Beeoven’s works, a performer mus employ proper “breaing” pauses beween e differen moifs and moif-syllables. In casu, ere mus be a brea beween mm /1 and m 2, wi smaller breas beween mm 3 and , mm and and again a sligly larger one in mm and . Tis can only be undersood in e lig of a correc analysis, e following of Beeoven’s advice o underlay e noes wi an appropriae ex, and, in e presen case, following e pedal markings as e composer wroe em. I mus admi, afer aving performed is Trio for e pas fify years or so wiou is missing measure, a adding i in does ake some geing used o. Bu i becomes more and more graifying o ge e full-Mony cadence of e onic spread ou over wo bars, insead of e runcaed brus wi e onic a m 1 (or , , ec.) alone provides. Tis pair of measures finds, as we may wan o remind ourselves once again, eir origin in measures and of e Scerzo were ey solidly empasize e C major cord. So, even oug my analysis is based solely on e maemaical-proporional properies of e moif (muc more fundamenal an eier melody, armony or even rym), aided of course by musical elemens suc as dynamics, pedal markings and ariculaion, bo e armony and e melody — ow saisfying a ig F! — confirm is validiy. One also canno fail o sense — once again, assuming a e ex of e folksongs is wa Beeoven ad in mind — ow muc more naurally e following measures (e new 3–) confirm e previous full D-fla major cadence, as ey coninue wispering in amazed diminuion “ree and sixy, ree and sixy, ree and sixy, ree and sixy.” I sould be noed a, besides e Auograp, ere exis a copy of e wole
1
No.3—006
sonaa, e so-called Uberprüfte Abschrift wrien in a differen and, bu wi copious annoaions in e composer’s own andwriing. Beeoven’s main concern in is “Abscrif” is wi empo, ariculaion, dynamics, fingerings, expressive and pedal markings, wi no apparen aenion being given o e ex iself, wic — aloug no wiou flaws (inaccurae slurring, missing slurs and pedal endings and a leas one exual oversig in measure 13 of e final movemen) — is a model of clariy and accuracy. In is very legible copy “my” measure 2 is omied. Again we may wonder: Did e edior of e firs ediion and e copyis of e “Abscrif” miss is paricular measure and did e composer fail o noice i? Or was i Beeoven’s inenion o leave a measure ou and, in doing so, leave us (if I may be allowed o mix meapors) wi a obbled orse? For Beeoven, music’s “arciec” par excellence, no o ave noiced is discrepancy wile composing e Trio and allowing no fewer an cas o disappear ino in air seems igly unlikely. In a case e quesion arises: Why? Wa was e composer’s reason for doing so and wa did e mean by is? Did e ave a differen ex in mind? No ex? Regardless, e enigma of a missing measure remains and e mysery coninues. Te las word on is esis may ave o awai e conribuion of musicologiss and I am eager o ear eir judgmen in e maer. Even afer e repea of e Scerzo, Beeoven is no finised ye wi is remarkable ca. Te Coda sars wi a forceful augmenaion of e Scerzo’s second eme, furer reinforced by pregnan ress, “W I R S I N D A L L E L Ü D E R L I C H.” Our felines en come one las ime peeping around e corner in a quick recapiulaion (in diminuion) of e opening eig measures of e Scerzo: “Un-sa käz äd ka-z’ln g’ab, drai und sex si, nai ni.” Incidenally, in e auograp ere is a pedal marking bu no (legao) slur under ese measures. Te Coda offers anoer ineresing clue concerning e “off-e-bea” counerpoin in e Trio’s lef and; none oer an a “iccuppy” (inebriaed, I dare say): “– wir – sind – wir – sind – lü – der … and en rusing a bea o end rig side up (i.e., on e srong firs bea) … lic.” No surprisingly, e Maser does no leave e smalles scrap of maerial unused.
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
13
Notes 1. Inmusic,the“motif”iswhatconstitutesthebasicidea,the“Eidos,”the“Gestalt”ofacomposition.The four-note“victory”motifoftheopeningofBeethoven’sFifthSymphonyisafamousexample.Thewhole firstmovementisderivedfromthatpregnantidea. . Goldsmith,Harris. Beethoven: The Late Quartets .Booklet. BudapestStringQuartet. ColumbiaRecords, 16.Beethoven’slettertoKarlHolzcanalsobefoundin The Letters of Beethoven ,translatedandedited byEmilyAnderson(NewYork:St.Martin’sPress,161)Vol.III,pp.11–.Thetranslationsvary. 3. Goldsmith,Booklet.AlsoseeAnderson,Vol.III,1. . AwealthofinformationisgiveninGeorgeHoule’sMeter in Music, 1600–1800: Performance, Perception, and Notation (Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,1).Perhapsthemostluciddescriptioncanbe found inFatherEngramelle’s“La tonotechnie”(1), withitsminute andsuccinct description ofthe “silencesofarticulation.”Seeespeciallypages110–3. . Schindler, Anton. Biographie von Ludwig van Beethoven (Münster: Aschendorff, 11), 36-3, my translation.Schindler’sbiographyhasbeentranslatedintoEnglish,Beethoven As I Knew Him (NewYork: W.W.Norton,1). 6. Anderson,Emily. Letters ,II,–. . MartinCooper,too,suggeststhatthesetwomelodies“lieattherootofthescherzo”inBeethoven: The Last Decade 1817–1827 (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1),10–1. . Cf.mm1,,,6,6,and(transposedinmm,6,and3).IhaveaddedAppendixAinan attempttoclarifythis. . Notetherighthandpartiswritteninthebassclef,thelefthandpartintrebleclef. 10. Barth,George. The Pianist as Orator: Beethoven and the Transformation of Keyboard Style (Cornell,NY: CornellPress,1).Seeespecially1–10. 11. Cf.Houle, Meter ,“silencesofarticulation”(110–3).
Appendix A TheendoftheTriowiththe"missingmeasure"inadottedline.
1
No.3—006
Appendix B StructuralAnalysisofBeethovenOpus110IITrio
H e a d w a e r s ACSB/SJUFacultyJournal
1
