# What is programmatic music?



## vamptillready

I know this may seem like a straightforward question, but I got into a debate about it with another conductor and wanted other people's opinions:
Can you define what programmatic music is? My argument is that almost 90% of music is programmatic for the composers are, most of the time, trying to convey an opinion of something, a revolution against something, a declaration of something, or even the most simple definition; the portrayal lay of extra-musical things, like a season, or e countryside.

Any thoughts and examples would be great!


----------



## Winterreisender

I generally think of Programmatic Music to be, as you say, the musical portrayal of extra-musical things. Some examples might be Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique, or Richard Strauss' Don Quixote. In these pieces there is some sort of narrative which is conveyed through recurring and developing motifs. 

But there doesn't have to be a story; Vivaldi's Four Seasons are programmatic as they try to capture the mood of various things in nature. I particularly like Winter mvt. 2 where the Pizzicato strings remind me of the gentle pattering of rain. Chopin's Raindrop Prelude perhaps achieves a similar effect (although not quite so gently!). 

I would generally say that any piece with a title invites programmatic interpretation. Even something like "Eroica" symphony leads to interpretations over possible political messages and the nature of heroism. In addition, the majority of Couperin's pieces have programmatic-sounding titles, but no-one has the faintest idea what the "Mysterious Barricades" actually means. But we can still of course speculate!

But I would say that the majority of instrumental music is not programmatic. I'm not sure how extra-musical meaning could be attached to, say, a Scarlatti Sonata or a Mozart Concerto.


----------



## PetrB

To qualify as programmatic, it must be music written specifically to convey a literal narrative, or depict a scene of some sort. (Some of it succeeds better than much of the genre usually does.)

Certainly, especially without a grasp of form, i.e. formal structure and the syntax of music itself, many a listener will find themselves conjuring up either a story line, or picture a scene or a series of scenes which are also narrative in that they "tell some sort of story."

I would suggest that whatever story or image stream a listener might imagine could seem to be 'the true meaning' of the piece, where they are reacting to the musical sense of the internal logic and structure of that piece -- since the piece is cohesive, the narrative they imagine will be cohesive, ergo, their story seems "the right one."

_*A "good" piece of programmatic music does not rely on the meaning of the program to hold the listener's interest.*_

Couperin, by the way, loved to give titles with some humor to them, and sometimes his titles are a non sequitur or a red herring -- i.e. misdirection, or mocking the need to title a piece at all -- and some were meant to directly convey an image or idea.

A good number of the titles by which many know pieces of the classical era were given after the fact of composition, either suggested to the composer, who either agreed or said something akin to "Why not?" (_Beethoven, "Pathetique" sonata, the title suggested by his publisher_) ... or they were given to the pieces by others, sometimes after the composer was deceased 

Debussy's preludes, both books, have the title printed after the double bar, the index reading simply Prelude I, etc. We know sometimes Debussy had a title in mind when he began writing a piece, and just about as often, he did not 

Certainly, the minute you name a piece other than opus ___ or by form alone (sinfonia, partita, sonata, etc.) _that is setting up a frame of mind in the audience bound to color most listeners perception,_ and sometimes that is a calculated idea, other times, an afterthought.

Still, you should know that some of those names seemingly welded to some pieces are in reality titles given after the fact of the music having been written: maybe the composer had some associative moment after the piece was done and gave the title. Others may work differently, the title giving them a transliterated idea of how the piece should sound, the form it takes, etc.

It seems the first "Tone poem" of Liszt got titled well after the fact of its actual composition...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_pr%C3%A9ludes

I think far too many people put way too much emphasis on "the meaning of music," including some of those pieces with actual titles.

All the names for the Chopin Etudes and Preludes were given those pieces by either editors, publishers, or music journalists: a few of the names given Beethoven sonatas were suggested by an editor, the infamous "moonlight" named by a music publisher after Beethoven was dead. *Knowing this, many a composer will put a title on a piece because they know if they don't, someone else will!*

And the vast majority of the repertoire, hiding secret stories or not, is titled very neutrally by form, or more modern appellations like "Music for Stringed Instruments, Percussion and Celesta," or "piano and string quartet."

That 90% of yours is more a fact if you reverse that to 90% of classical music is abstract, or "Absolute."

Whatever floats your boat, though


----------



## Guest

vamptillready said:


> I know this may seem like a straightforward question, but I got into a debate about it with another conductor and wanted other people's opinions:
> Can you define what programmatic music is? My argument is that almost 90% of music is programmatic for the composers are, most of the time, trying to convey an opinion of something, a revolution against something, a declaration of something, or even the most simple definition; the portrayal lay of extra-musical things, like a season, or e countryside.
> 
> Any thoughts and examples would be great!


In essence there is "absolute" music and "programmatic" music. Absolute music is not intended to convey anything beyond itself. Programmatic music is intended to convey an impression beyond itself like a picture or some event like a war scene, flowing river, etc.

I doubt that 90% of music is programmatic. Here I'm including only the better known material that is performed/recorded at least once in a while, not literally everything that's ever been written. The percentages are more like the other way round, but I wouldn't want to imply any precision.

Early programmatic music was material like concert overtures designed to give a preview of the the play or opera they preceded. Liszt developed this idea and created "tone poems" or "symphonic poems" as they are sometimes were called. He wrote 13 tone poems in total but some of his other music was infused with a programmatic concept. Several later composers wrote tone poems, e.g. Smetana, Dvorak, Sibelius, Delius, Bax. They're mostly orchestral in nature but there does exist the occasional chamber piece (e.g. by Ives).

Whether or not it was a sensible development for classical music to become more programmatic in nature, or whether it should remain absolute and retentive of principles established by earlier 18th/19th Century masters, was a fiercely contested issue in the mid 19th Century among two opposing schools. It became known as the "War of the Romantics" with Brahms, Clara Schumann, Joseph Joachim being the main champions of absolute music and Liszt, Wagner, von Bulow representing the new Weimar ("New German") school.

Brahms himself pointedly refused to write any programmatic music, so his entire output is all absolute. He saw himself, and so did his admirers and supporters at the time, as the keeper of all that was good and solid in classical music in Beethovenian tradition, against the kind of music being written by "upstarts" like Liszt and Wagner.

I like both types of music probably because a lot of the so-called programmatic music that was ever written carries only a tenuous link (to me at least) to the thing or idea the work is supposedly about. In most cases the external (i.e. programmartic) aspect neither enhances nor reduces my perception of the quality of the work.


----------



## Guest

In comparing 'programmatic' with 'absolute', itt is, as PetrB suggests, important to distinguish between music written with the specific intent of conveying a narrative or a scene, and music which attracts labels after composition.

Just as important is to identify music that is intended to convey something other than the music itself, but which is not quite so literal as a story. Beethoven labelled his 3rd Symphony, "Napoleon" and later changed it to "Heroic". What might have been just a dedication to an individual became a dedication to an abstract. It seems reasonable to me to ask, then, in what way might we hear any connections between the music and the heroic.


----------



## Mahlerian

I'd like to add to the discussion that the description "programmatic" generally isn't applied to works including a sung or spoken text, as it is taken for a given that the text will influence the music.

Also, what works as absolute music for listeners today, that is, needs no additional explanation or guiding hand for comprehension, is in some cases something that would have otherwise been difficult to an audience of the time. The example of Debussy above is a good one; the etudes for piano are to this day some of his least popular works. Although in musical terms they are not far removed from his other piano works, the abstract titles offer no interpretations that might help the listener.

For another example, look at _Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima_, which would certainly not have caught on nearly as well if it had retained its original title, 8'37". Yet people hear atomic bombs and screams in the music even knowing that the title was not in mind while the piece was composed. _Appalachian Spring_ is another example. Copland knew nothing of the ballet scenario or its eventual title while he composed the piece, but people "read into" the music all the same. In this case they are getting Martha Graham's interpretation.


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> ... Beethoven labelled his 3rd Symphony, "Napoleon" and later changed it to "Heroic". What might have been just a dedication to an individual became a dedication to an abstract. It seems reasonable to me to ask, then, in what way might we hear any connections between the music and the heroic.


We know Beethoven lionized / idolized or near worshipped Napoleon for his politics and actions, that is until Nappy grabbed yet another sovereignty not his and imposed his law and order upon it, which made Beethoven realize Napoleon was the tyrant he was (rather like first extolling the virtue of Hitler for creating the Autobahn and stimulating the invention of the Volkswagon, then later realizing there was a lot of nastiness going on as well.)

The original title page of the Eroica still bears its original dedication to Napoleon, but Beethoven so vehemently scratched out that dedication with ink and quill that he wore a hole in that page. (What I don't know is certain is if Beethoven simply dedicated his latest symphony to Napoleon, or whether he wrote that symphony _because of_ his opinion / feelings for and about Napoleon)

Left with the fact the work was dedicated to a man he had thought a hero, he then named it "Eroica," -- and Bob's your uncle, as they say


----------



## Guest

So, do we think that the Eroica conveys anything that goes with the title?


----------



## Ukko

MacLeod said:


> So, do we think that the Eroica conveys anything that goes with the title?


The Eroica stimulates emotions in a lot of people, sometimes strong enough to make interpersonal comparisons possible. 'Heroic' is non-specific enough to up the chances for agreement. That's as far as I am willing to take it.


----------



## Aramis

PeterB said:


> rather like first extolling the virtue of Hitler for creating the Autobahn and stimulating the invention of the Volkswagon, then later realizing there was a lot of nastiness going on as well


Nothing like that at all, actually.


----------



## Blancrocher

For those interested, here is an interesting review essay of Scott Burnham's "Beethoven Hero" in the NYRB. The author is Joseph Kerman, who I think is generally worth reading.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1996/oct/03/the-beethoven-takeover/

*ps* I see it's now only available to paid subscribers now--my apologies.

*pps* Burnham's book can be previewed on Google Books. It opens with some reflections on programmatic interpretations of the Eroica, and some analysis of his own.


----------



## Ukko

Blancrocher said:


> For those interested, here is an interesting review essay of Scott Burnham's "Beethoven Hero" in the NYRB. The author is Joseph Kerman, who I think is generally worth reading.
> 
> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1996/oct/03/the-beethoven-takeover/
> 
> *edit* I see it's now only available to paid subscribers now--my apologies.


That's OK. The blurb is enough. 

It's just long enough to produce the notion that the book is yet another attempt to convert opinion to fact, as is the review in all likelihood. I criticize the blurb as being too long or too short to inoculate the reader with an overpowering need to buy a subscription.


----------



## KenOC

Ukko said:


> It's just long enough to produce the notion that the book is yet another attempt to convert opinion to fact...


What book on music isn't? BTW I have Burnham's book and am one of perhaps four people in the whole world that have slagged through it cover to cover (Ms. Burnham being another I'd guess). If you want my opinion, expressed as fact, ask. Maybe I'll respond. Maybe.


----------



## Blancrocher

KenOC said:


> What book on music isn't? BTW I have Burnham's book and am one of perhaps four people in the whole world that have slagged through it cover to cover (Ms. Burnham being another I'd guess). If you want my opinion, expressed as fact, ask. Maybe I'll respond. Maybe.


I would appreciate your opinion (expressed as fact), if you don't mind.


----------



## Winterreisender

re: Beethoven's Eroica.

When I think of "Heroic," I tend to think of great battles and triumphal marches. These seem to be among the themes that Richard Strauss explores in his Ein Heldenleben, but I don't think Beethoven is quite so brash.

Given that Beethoven dedicated the symphony to "the memory of a great man" (i.e. a man who used to be great but now isn't?), one could interpret the symphony as being about the death of heroism, perhaps a sort of funeral oration. In this context, the sombre funeral march of the seond movement makes sense. And if you wanted to push this interpretation (as Berlioz does in his critical essay on the symphony), the scherzo could symbolise "funeral games, constantly darkened by thoughts of death, games of the kind that the warriors of the Iliad would celebrate around the tombs of their leaders" (http://www.hberlioz.com/Predecessors/beethsym.htm#sym3). I'm not sure how seriously one should take Berlioz's work as a critic, but it is nevertheless interesting that he wants to read something programmatic into everything!


----------



## Eschbeg

Partita said:


> Brahms himself pointedly refused to write any programmatic music, so his entire output is all absolute.


Not quite. Roughly two-thirds of Brahms's works are vocal pieces. These days the vocal works are not considered essential to his output, with the exception of the Requiem, which shows that Brahms's image as a composer of absolute music requires some selective reading of the evidence and is, more generally, symptomatic of the enormous prestige absolute music acquired over programmatic music (or at least non-absolute music; as Mahlerian alluded to, the two are not exactly synonymous) in the twentieth century.


----------



## Aramis

Eschbeg said:


> Not quite. Roughly two-thirds of Brahms's works are vocal pieces.


Not to mention the "tender portrait" of Clara Schumann in D minor concerto or the whole Werther issue with his Piano Quartet.


----------



## Eschbeg

True. As several of the above-mentioned examples show, it doesn't matter how abstractly a piece of music is conceived; all it takes is the addition of a title, even after the fact, and it will be perceived as "program music." Conversely, no matter how programmatically a piece of music is conceived, all it takes is an abstract title and it will be perceived as "absolute music." In both cases, the door has been left wide open to endless debate over the merits of musical vs. extra-musical elements in music. That all of this debate can hinge on something as (potentially) arbitrary as a title is, in my opinion, an indication of how trivial the matter really is.


----------



## KenOC

Blancrocher said:


> I would appreciate your opinion (expressed as fact), if you don't mind.


Prof. Burnham's opinion: "Safely removed from speech, music allows us to escape to older, more comforting notions of the centrality of self... The values of self instantiated by Beethoven's heroic style have long been outmoded philosophically, shucked away as the absurd wrappings of what is now thought to be an absent center. Our continued acceptance in the musico-aesthetic marketplace of such defunct philosophical currency is an indication that such currency still buys us something we value, something no longer dreamt of in our philosophy."

My opinion: The book is enormously hard to get through because of its dense academese in most places. It could have made its point in ten pages but instead goes on and on (and on), traversing a lot of terrain that has little connection with Burnham's main argument. In fact, whole sections seem to be unrelated essays looking for a chance to be published.


----------



## moody

Blancrocher said:


> I would appreciate your opinion (expressed as fact), if you don't mind.


You are thrice blessed---maybe !!!


----------



## quack

MacLeod said:


> So, do we think that the Eroica conveys anything that goes with the title?


When I first saw the subtitle Eroica I read it as Erotica and assumed it would be sensual and erotic, which is kind of is if you sort of think like errm....

:embarrassed smiley:


----------



## Ukko

quack said:


> When I first saw the subtitle Eroica I read it as Erotica and assumed it would be sensual and erotic, which is kind of is if you sort of think like errm....
> 
> :embarrassed smiley:


!


Some of the 'strong' emotions have elements in common, eh?


----------



## PeterJB

To me, music needs to tell a story or create some kind of picture in my head. I don't like absolute music or music that's purely academic and technical in nature. It needs to have extra-musical qualities to it.


----------



## PetrB

PeterJB said:


> To me, music needs to tell a story or create some kind of picture in my head. I don't like absolute music or music that's purely academic and technical in nature. It needs to have extra-musical qualities to it.


People make up their own stories when the music, and title, give no hint of one: they do it all the time. Even the most abstract of music still is a kind of "narrative," though that narrative is often enough only a musical one, about music.

Feel free, then, to find your own stories if you need them -- there is very little actual 'program' music, some from the pre-classical era, and another handful from the mid to late romantic. Stories can be found anywhere, just as images and stories are found by almost anyone looking at an "abstract" Rorschach blot.


----------



## Blake

PetrB said:


> People make up their own stories when the music, and title, give no hint of one: they do it all the time. Even the most abstract of music still is a kind of "narrative," though that narrative is often enough only a musical one, about music.
> 
> Feel free, then, to find your own stories if you need them -- there is very little actual 'program' music, some from the pre-classical era, and another handful from the mid to late romantic. Stories can be found anywhere, just as images and stories are found by almost anyone looking at an "abstract" Rorschach blot.


True, it doesn't take long for the mind to try connecting the dots. Many times it's better to leave things open and not try to quantify everything.


----------



## PetrB

Vesuvius said:


> True, it doesn't take long for the mind to try connecting the dots. Many times it's better to leave things open and not try to quantify everything.


I value open always, the closed-circuit tune, self-contained melody, specific meanings tacked onto abstracts -- each and any just limits the possibilities for the audience.


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> So, do we think that the Eroica conveys anything that goes with the title?


Yes, (agreeing / seconding Ukko's post here) a general "Heroic" quality, but nothing else more specific.


----------



## Guest

Winterreisender said:


> In this context, the sombre funeral march of the seond movement makes sense.


If it is a "funeral march" then the program is obvious, isn't it? My point is, isn't it difficult to avoid conjuring certain ideas from the music when it has such obvious features?



Eschbeg said:


> True. As several of the above-mentioned examples show, it doesn't matter how abstractly a piece of music is conceived; all it takes is the addition of a title, even after the fact, and it will be perceived as "program music." Conversely, no matter how programmatically a piece of music is conceived, all it takes is an abstract title and it will be perceived as "absolute music." In both cases, the door has been left wide open to endless debate over the merits of musical vs. extra-musical elements in music. That all of this debate can hinge on something as (potentially) arbitrary as a title is, in my opinion, an indication of how trivial the matter really is.


I can't agree that determining the "meaning" of music is trivial. What you seem to be suggesting is that music that carries a risk of programmatic interpretation is of less worth than 'absolute' music.



PeterJB said:


> To me, music needs to tell a story or create some kind of picture in my head. I don't like absolute music or music that's purely academic and technical in nature. It needs to have extra-musical qualities to it.


Whilst I wouldn't go that far - that music _needs_ to tell - I would agree that many listeners might inevitably build pictures and ideas in their heads that the music provokes. Like a funeral when an adagio is played.

What is being shied away from, it seems to me, is any attempt at analysing what it is about the music (say, the _Eroica_) that might successfully convey what the composer has in mind.


----------



## Winterreisender

MacLeod said:


> If it is a "funeral march" then the program is obvious, isn't it? My point is, isn't it difficult to avoid conjuring certain ideas from the music when it has such obvious features?
> 
> ...
> 
> What is being shied away from, it seems to me, is any attempt at analysing what it is about the music (say, the _Eroica_) that might successfully convey what the composer has in mind.


To my knowledge, Beethoven himself gave the second movement the title "Marcia funebre" and accordingly the movement contains a slow but steady duple meter and a solemn minor key, both features typical of this genre. Given that this is a genre which usually serves a specific function (i.e. to accompany a funeral procession), its appearance in a different context (i.e. the symphony) is likely to conjure up the same images. If it is difficult to avoid making these associations upon hearing this work, then surely it is successful programmatic music?

That said, I think any attempt to impose a programmatic agenda upon the 4th movement would be doomed to fail.


----------



## Guest

Winterreisender said:


> To my knowledge, Beethoven himself gave the second movement the title "Marcia funebre" and accordingly the movement contains a slow but steady duple meter and a solemn minor key, both features typical of this genre. Given that this is a genre which usually serves a specific function (i.e. to accompany a funeral procession), its appearance in a different context (i.e. the symphony) is likely to conjure up the same images. If it is difficult to avoid making these associations upon hearing this work, then surely it is successful programmatic music?


I agree. Which is why I'm puzzled by what seems to be a resistance to acknowledge the programmatic in great works. OK, I don't think that anyone has actually come out and said it, but I sense a view among _some _members that 'programmatic' is of lesser quality than 'absolute'; that what is sometimes described as (loosely and erroneously, IMO) 'extra-musical' is a contaminant.


----------



## ShropshireMoose

MacLeod said:


> I agree. Which is why I'm puzzled by what seems to be a resistance to acknowledge the programmatic in great works. OK, I don't think that anyone has actually come out and said it, but I sense a view among _some _members that 'programmatic' is of lesser quality than 'absolute'; that what is sometimes described as (loosely and erroneously, IMO) 'extra-musical' is a contaminant.


I think a lot of people still suffer from the arguments over programmatic music that were rife in the late 19th century, when those who sided with Brahms and co. tended to disparage those on the side of Liszt and Wagner. Thus somehow even remotely admitting to any external influence on your music seems to have become a cardinal sin, especially in the halls of academia. This is palpably nonsensical, since composers live in the world after all, and must therefore, to some extent be influenced by the times they are living through, deny it as they will. Vaughan Williams used to get cross when people suggested that his 6th Symphony was a reaction to the second world war, "Doesn't it occur to them that a man may just want to write a piece of music?" he said (or words to that effect- I'm quoting from memory here), be that as it may, the Symphony was written at the end of that war, and surely he must have been affected by living in those traumatic times, even if the influence was subconscious. VW was always a man who lived in the present, so I can't believe that that symphony was not affected by the time it was written in- and I think no less of it for so being. Likewise I think no less of Beethoven's "Pastoral" Symphony for having a most definite programme, as opposed to some of his other symphonies that don't. The question surely is, does the music work on some level for you, if it does then it matters not whether there's a programme or otherwise. And here endeth today's lesson!!


----------



## Ukko

Looks like you guys need to get a handle on what constitutes 'programmatic' music -_ before_ picking on aficionados of absolute music. What you say "The question surely is" it surely is not. Must be you haven't been paying attention.


----------



## Eschbeg

MacLeod said:


> What you seem to be suggesting is that music that carries a risk of programmatic interpretation is of less worth than 'absolute' music.


I'm suggesting close to the opposite: that both of the terms, "programmatic" or "absolute," are of little use in determining the "worth" of music.


----------



## Mahlerian

Winterreisender said:


> To my knowledge, Beethoven himself gave the second movement the title "Marcia funebre" and accordingly the movement contains a slow but steady duple meter and a solemn minor key, both features typical of this genre. Given that this is a genre which usually serves a specific function (i.e. to accompany a funeral procession), its appearance in a different context (i.e. the symphony) is likely to conjure up the same images. If it is difficult to avoid making these associations upon hearing this work, then surely it is successful programmatic music?


I would hesitate to agree to the notion that it's programmatic simply because it conforms to a specific archetype.

What "story" does it relate? Someone being carried to their grave? A ceremony? It's ambiguous at least.

If one takes it far enough, all of the minuets in Mozart's symphonies would be "programmatic" because they relate to archetypes associated with dancing, although they could never actually be used for actual dance music.

But I agree with Eschbeg above. Being programmatic or absolute is not something of much relevance in how good something is as music.


----------



## Ukko

Mahlerian said:


> [...]
> But I agree with Eschbeg above. Being programmatic or absolute is not something of much relevance in how good something is as music.


I also agree - but how did that get to be the question?

In my usual driftiness I thought the 'question' was whether the 'program' interferes with the listener's ability to listen to the music without ratiocinating about it. The responding posts give me the impression that a lot of people _always_ ratiocinate while listening to _any_ music, and so for them that question would be meaningless; for them there is always a program, self-administered or otherwise.

Makes the official program sort of a crutch for the unimaginative then? Or do these folks always follow the official program if there is one?

[I have deliberately ignored the listening while-thinking-about-dinner procedure.]


----------



## Guest

Eschbeg said:


> I'm suggesting close to the opposite: that both of the terms, "programmatic" or "absolute," are of little use in determining the "worth" of music.


Not 'the opposite' if we're talking 'comparative worth' - even two things of little worth can be compared!



Mahlerian said:


> Being programmatic or absolute is not something of much relevance in how good something is as music.


I agree.


----------



## Eschbeg

MacLeod said:


> Not 'the opposite' if we're talking 'comparative worth' - even two things of little worth can be compared!


I don't quite follow, but the point is that comparing the worth of pieces based on their status as programmatic absolute works is a silly endeavor since it assumes that either term confers any important value, which they don't.


----------



## Guest

Eschbeg said:


> I don't quite follow, but the point is that comparing the worth of pieces based on their status as programmatic absolute works is a silly endeavor since it assumes that either term confers any important value, which they don't.


I don't think you and I are disagreeing, actually. I've certainly not said that a work's worth should be judged on the extent to which it is absolute or programmatic.


----------



## Winterreisender

Mahlerian said:


> I would hesitate to agree to the notion that it's programmatic simply because it conforms to a specific archetype.
> 
> What "story" does it relate? Someone being carried to their grave? A ceremony? It's ambiguous at least.
> 
> If one takes it far enough, all of the minuets in Mozart's symphonies would be "programmatic" because they relate to archetypes associated with dancing, although they could never actually be used for actual dance music.


I'm not sure whether a piece requires a story for it to qualify as programmatic. Most people would consider Beethoven's 6th to be programmatic not because of any continuous narrative but rather because it attempts to capture various scenes in nature. That's the sort of thing I had in mind with the funeral march from the 3rd: a depiction of a certain extra-musical scene rather than a story.

I take your point regarding Mozart's minuets, but at the same time I would suggest that, by Mozart's time, the minuet had long been established as a style which could exist independently of the dancehall setting. In contrast, I'm not sure how many composers before Beethoven had used the Funeral March outside of the funeral setting. Largely by virtue of its unexpectedness in the symphonic context, I am tempted to read something programmatic into the Eroica's second movement.


----------



## ahammel

But the 6th _does_ have an explicit story, and Beethoven was very specific about the scenes that he was depicting. What scene does the funeral march in the 3rd depict? A funeral? Whose? Anybody's in particular? (It can't be the idea of Napoleon as a hero, for chronological reasons. Is it depicting Boney's eventual death? Is it for Beethoven's own sense of hearing?) Does the trio in C major depict any part or aspect of a funeral in particular?

If Beethoven intended a program at all, it's a very vague and ambiguous one.


----------



## Winterreisender

ahammel said:


> But the 6th _does_ have an explicit story, and Beethoven was very specific about the scenes that he was depicting. What scene does the funeral march in the 3rd depict? A funeral? Whose? Anybody's in particular? (It can't be the idea of Napoleon as a hero, for chronological reasons. Is it depicting Boney's eventual death? Is it for Beethoven's own sense of hearing?) Does the trio in C major depict any part or aspect of a funeral in particular?
> 
> If Beethoven intended a program at all, it's a very vague and ambiguous one.


I would tentatively suggest the symbolic death of Napoleon's heroism or of heroism more generally? At least that is what it suggests to me.


----------



## ahammel

Winterreisender said:


> I would tentatively suggest the symbolic death of Napoleon's heroism or of heroism more generally? At least that is what it suggests to me.


Wasn't Beethoven still infatuated with Napoleon when he wrote it?


----------



## DavidA

KenOC said:


> Prof. Burnham's opinion: "Safely removed from speech, music allows us to escape to older, more comforting notions of the centrality of self... The values of self instantiated by Beethoven's heroic style have long been outmoded philosophically, shucked away as the absurd wrappings of what is now thought to be an absent center. Our continued acceptance in the musico-aesthetic marketplace of such defunct philosophical currency is an indication that such currency still buys us something we value, something no longer dreamt of in our philosophy."
> 
> My opinion: The book is enormously hard to get through because of its dense academese in most places. It could have made its point in ten pages but instead goes on and on (and on), traversing a lot of terrain that has little connection with Burnham's main argument. In fact, whole sections seem to be unrelated essays looking for a chance to be published.


Isn't that what a lot of academics do - make a living out of making the obvious appear abstruse?


----------



## DavidA

There was a time, hopefully passed now, where certain people used to extol the virtues of absolute music over programmatic music. Surely the answer is both are equally valid when they are done well.


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> What is being shied away from, it seems to me, is any attempt at analysing what it is about the music (say, the _Eroica_) that might successfully convey what the composer has in mind.


LOL. That is because, between notes on a page, played in the air, vs. words recited or read, there is just no good or reliable translation. Those who seem to find a story or meaning in most music, and you seem to be one of them, are the ones who would have to have a go at that. For those like me, who don't get any of that sort of stuff as a transliterated narrative, I doubt if anything you could come up with would convince me music has literal meaning or that it contains some general narrative which could be translated, because whatever was said or proven, to those who don't hear it that way, think of it that way, about any story-line attached to it sounds, uh, tacked on, or interchangeable with many another story, those too not really seeming to belong to or be part of the piece.

I would not mistake the fact that because some claim there is no literal meaning or actual narrative from music that they are trivializing the meaning of music -- nor am I or others being coy when they say there is tremendous meaning to music, but there are, literally, no words for it... there are dozens of quotes from artists, writers and musicians, all boiling down to this paraphrased version, "Music begins where language ends."

I invite you, or others most keen on the subject, to find or draw up the Rosetta Stone which will open up the door and let some light in. Whatever is come up with, I believe it would seem grafted on, and to me that graft would not seem at all in any way really attached to the object to which it was grafted.


----------



## Guest

PetrB said:


> *Those who seem to find a story or meaning in most music, and you seem to be one of them,* are the ones who would have to have a go at that. For those like me, who don't get any of that sort of stuff as a transliterated narrative, I doubt if anything you could come up with would convince me music has literal meaning or that it contains some general narrative which could be translated, because whatever was said or proven, to those who don't hear it that way, think of it that way, about any story-line attached to it sounds, uh, tacked on, or interchangeable with many another story, those too not really seeming to belong to or be part of the piece.
> 
> I would not mistake the fact that because some claim there is no literal meaning or actual narrative from music that they are trivializing the meaning of music -- nor am I or others being coy when they say there is tremendous meaning to music, but there are, literally, no words for it... there are dozens of quotes from artists, writers and musicians, all boiling down to this paraphrased version, "Music begins where language ends."
> 
> I invite you, or others most keen on the subject, to find or draw up the Rosetta Stone which will open up the door and let some light in. Whatever is come up with, I believe it would seem grafted on, and to me that graft would not seem at all in any way really attached to the object to which it was grafted.


Starting with your point I've emboldened, I think you misunderstand me on three counts. First, I don't find, or expect to find, or even look to find "a story or meaning in *most *music"; I've no idea what I've said that enabled you to draw such an inference.

Second, just because I am willing to accept that there may be some 'meaning' where a composer offers some comment on what the music is 'about' (whether by explicit title or explanation, or by the use of standard forms such as funeral marches!) it does not mean that I can actually _hear _that meaning in the music. I'm certainly not looking for music that is crudely descriptive of a story or narrative, even when the composer offers the narrative, but I can see that some music is designed to provoke/evoke emotions that might correspond to the emotions in that which is referred to (eg slow, sad, minor key = sadness, grief at a funeral). So, I'm happy to suggest that I can hear something 'heroic' in the Eroica, but I don't have the technical skill to describe in musical terms what I can hear - only in non-technical interpretative terms. I'd also go so far as to say that, for example, I can hear some sounds that make some tentative links with 'Joy' in the 9th Symphony, but I'm not going to say simply that the final movement is "about" joy. Nevertheless, it does make me joyful! I am of course aware that just because that is my emotional response, and even that LvB wanted to evoke joy in me, that does not give the symphony a 'meaning'.

Third, I am not accusing some/others of trivialising the meaning of music when they claim that there is no meaning or narrative. I am suggesting that there are some who seem to want to reject the meaning-finding approach lest it taint their beloved absolutism. I don't care whether there is or isn't an actual meaning to be found in the music; but, like those who get tired of being criticised for liking 'atonal' or 'dinosaur' music, I just dislike being criticised for wanting to explore the possibility that there might be 'meanings' conveyed in the music.

Finally, I don't agree that "music begins where language ends." I don't care who said it: it's trite - or do I mean glib?


----------



## Ukko

Macleod: "So, I'm happy to suggest that I can hear something 'heroic' in the Eroica, but I don't have the technical skill to describe in musical terms what I can hear - only in non-technical interpretative terms."

The problem with that is that 'heroic' cannot be directly expressed in music, or even unequivocally insinuated. Technical skill with musical terms won't serve. The best they can do is define some musico-methology that has a chance of evoking some emotional reactions. Nothing anywhere near as _specific_ as 'heroic' though. To get that you must be influenced by somebody's story.


----------



## EdwardBast

Winterreisender said:


> That said, I think any attempt to impose a programmatic agenda upon the 4th movement would be doomed to fail.


Actually, the theme of the fourth movement derives from music for a ballet entitled, _The Creatures of Prometheus_, and it has figured in a number of programmatic interpretations.

Speaking of which, Burnham's _Beethoven Hero_ contains a rundown of all of the major trends in the programmatic interpretation of the Eroica, with a focus on the first movement. Wouldn't recommend it as reading for amateurs, but check it out of the library if you are curious. There is a lot of interesting information and perspective in it.


----------



## ahammel

It would be very odd indeed if there wasn't "something heroic" in the Eroica, but "something heroic" does not constitute a programme. Nor does an unexpected form, or a title meant to evoke the emotional content of the work. When most people say "programmatic music", they mean music which conveys the sense of a _specific_ scene or narrative.


----------



## Guest

Ukko said:


> Macleod: "So, I'm happy to suggest that I can hear something 'heroic' in the Eroica, but I don't have the technical skill to describe in musical terms what I can hear - only in non-technical interpretative terms."
> 
> The problem with that is that 'heroic' cannot be directly expressed in music, or even unequivocally insinuated. Technical skill with musical terms won't serve. The best they can do is define some musico-methology that has a chance of evoking some emotional reactions. Nothing anywhere near as _specific_ as 'heroic' though. To get that you must be influenced by somebody's story.


*"'heroic' cannot be directly expressed in music"*

No, but,

*"Music can be written that has the potential to evoke feelings that might in some way connect to ideas of heroism, though not because of a specific arrangement of "these notes in this order at this speed at this volume on these instruments [etc]" but possibly because "when I play you this type of music, doesn't it conjure up thoughts of the things we associate with heroism?"*

But come on, cut some slack - it's such a bl00dy mouthful to type all the time!

In the specific case of the 3rd, I'm not getting anything from anyone else's story, I'm possibly getting what implied in the title! .


----------



## Guest

ahammel said:


> It would be very odd indeed if there wasn't "something heroic" in the Eroica, but "something heroic" does not constitute a programme. Nor does an unexpected form, or a title meant to evoke the emotional content of the work. When most people say "programmatic music", they mean music which conveys the sense of a _specific_ scene or narrative.


So, round we go...

I think this point was covered on page 1, posts#2 and #3. The OP has not yet returned to say whether s/he is happy with the answers so far received.

Others have, I think not unreasonably, wanted to extend the conversation to include things that are not programmatic music but...

Perhaps we should all have stopped after post #3 and just waited for vamptillready to return.


----------



## Ukko

MacLeod said:


> *"'heroic' cannot be directly expressed in music"*
> 
> No, but,
> 
> *"Music can be written that has the potential to evoke feelings that might in some way connect to ideas of heroism, though not because of a specific arrangement of "these notes in this order at this speed at this volume on these instruments [etc]" but possibly because "when I play you this type of music, doesn't it conjure up thoughts of the things we associate with heroism?"*
> 
> But come on, cut some slack - it's such a bl00dy mouthful to type all the time!
> 
> In the specific case of the 3rd, I'm not getting anything from anyone else's story, I'm possibly getting what implied in the title! .


But sir, in your bolded text, the message beginning with "but possibly" doesn't hold water. You are getting 'heroism' from extraneous information - apparently the title. Without that input the music could 'conjure up thoughts' about lots of stuff; heroism may be among the possibilities... .

I'm pretty sure we are 'talking past each other'. Happens frequently in conversations at TC, possibly because of the wide range of backgrounds involved?


----------



## Guest

Ukko said:


> But sir, in your bolded text, the message beginning with "but possibly" doesn't hold water. You are getting 'heroism' from extraneous information - apparently the title. Without that input the music could 'conjure up thoughts' about lots of stuff; heroism may be among the possibilities... .
> 
> I'm pretty sure we are 'talking past each other'. Happens frequently in conversations at TC, possibly because of the wide range of backgrounds involved?


Yes, I'm influenced by the title. But not 'somebody's story' as you said earlier.


----------



## Ukko

MacLeod said:


> Yes, I'm influenced by the title. But not 'somebody's story' as you said earlier.


Sure. That must be a significant distinction where you are. In my neck of the woods it's nit-picking.


----------



## PetrB

Like Freud said about cigars... sometimes, a funeral march is just a funeral march. 

I'm almost afraid to tell you how long I've known how Beethoven's third goes, while not until it was here mentioned on TC did I think "funeral march" for that movement, nor did I ponder "Napoleon / Heroic" or any such stuff. To me, it is Beethoven's 3rd Symphony, it works more than well, one movement to the next, and I can guarantee you that I am missing nothing when it comes to what seems to me to be an extra-musical story or very minor extra-musical historic footnote.


----------



## Guest

PetrB said:


> Like Freud said about cigars... sometimes, a funeral march is just a funeral march.
> 
> I'm almost afraid to tell you how long I've known how Beethoven's third goes, while not until it was here mentioned on TC did I think "funeral march" for that movement, nor did I ponder "Napoleon / Heroic" or any such stuff. To me, it is Beethoven's 3rd Symphony, it works more than well, one movement to the next, and I can guarantee you that I am missing nothing when it comes to what seems to me to be an extra-musical story or very minor extra-musical historic footnote.


Who said you might be 'missing' something? Not me.


----------



## Guest

Ukko said:


> Sure. That must be a significant distinction where you are. In my neck of the woods it's nit-picking.


I think in my neck of the wood's, a story usually contains more than one word. But if you want to say I'm nit-picking, go right ahead!

(Oh, you just did.)


----------



## PetrB

ahammel said:


> It would be very odd indeed if there wasn't "something heroic" in the Eroica, but "something heroic" does not constitute a programme. Nor does an unexpected form, or a title meant to evoke the emotional content of the work. When most people say "programmatic music", they mean music which conveys the sense of a _specific_ scene or narrative.


_Gaaaaassssp!_ You mean the meaning as found in most dictionaries vs. the empirical made up definition idiosyncratic to the individuals who are not inclined to open up a dictionary?

But what sort of fun would it be if people actually went by the definition of the purpose and intent of the genre?


----------



## PetrB

another DoublePostWhoops.


----------



## Novelette

"It is obvious that things which can appear only objectively to perception can in no way furnish connecting points to music; the poorest of apprentice landscape painters could give with a few chalk strokes a much more faithful picture than a musician operating with all the resources of the best orchestras. But if these same things are subjectivated to dreaming, to contemplation, to emotional uplift, have they not a kinship with music, and should not music be able to translate them into its mysterious language?"

Liszt, Franz. Preface to the Symphonic Poems. Quoted from Alan Walker's "Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years", pg. 358 [translation Walker's]

Consistent with this is the introduction to his "Suisse" volume of the "Annees":

"I have latterly travelled through many new countries, have seen many different places, and visited many a spot hallowed by history and poetry; I have felt that the varied aspects of nature, and the different incidents associated with them, did not pass before my eyes like meaningless pictures, but that they evoked profound emotions within my soul; that a vague but direct affinity was established between them and myself, a real though indefinable, a sure but inexplicable means of communication, and I have tried to give musical utterance to some of my stronger sensations, some of my liveliest impressions."

Ibid.


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> Yes, I'm influenced by the title. But not 'somebody's story' as you said earlier.


I must have misread or read into one of your earlier posts something not at all there. I then apologize for saying you are one who seems to always want a meaning. That was my take-off point, i.e. other than the Eroica having the title, unless we can find when he assigned that title, it could have been after the double bar of the last movement was drawn. "Hmmm... think I'll dedicate this one to Nappy." If that was the history, then Beethoven, too, might have thought, after the fact, the piece had a heroic quality, so then plunked that name on it. Trouble is, what tangential and far-reached associations did Beethoven have when naming that piece? If all the documents surrounding attribution are, reliable or otherwise, second-hand reports, then we have to go on the fact it is only hearsay, not substantiated: that leaves us with a bucket-load of suppositions and maybes.

Which is why, exactly, I don't pay much attention to titles: the other reason being that a meaning like that is nigh impossible to somehow encode or transmit via "a bunch of notes." And that is what had me a bit surprised, that you seemed to give weight to the suggestion of the title, and were seeking how to find that in the music, and tag it specifically. I think that is a waste of time and a literal diversion away from 'getting' the full import of the piece.


----------



## Guest

PetrB said:


> I must have misread or read into one of your earlier posts something not at all there. I then apologize for saying you are one who seems to always want a meaning. That was my take-off point, i.e. other than the Eroica having the title, unless we can find when he assigned that title, it could have been after the double bar of the last movement was drawn. "Hmmm... think I'll dedicate this one to Nappy." If that was the history, then Beethoven, too, might have thought, after the fact, the piece had a heroic quality, so then plunked that name on it. Trouble is, what tangential and far-reached associations did Beethoven have when naming that piece? If all the documents surrounding attribution are, reliable or otherwise, second-hand reports, then we have to go on the fact it is only hearsay, not substantiated: that leaves us with a bucket-load of suppositions and maybes.
> 
> Which is why, exactly, I don't pay much attention to titles: the other reason being that a meaning like that is nigh impossible to somehow encode or transmit via "a bunch of notes." And that is what had me a bit surprised, that you seemed to give weight to the suggestion of the title, and were seeking how to find that in the music, and tag it specifically. I think that is a waste of time and a literal diversion away from 'getting' the full import of the piece.


Thanks for the apology.

Rest assured that I don't spend my time listening to the symphony and _agonising _over its 'meaning', but as a minimum - at the level of idle curiosity - flicking through the sleeve notes, and wondering at the composers' method (no, no misplaced apostrophe there) inevitably raises the question - for this listener, at any rate - if LvB did give it the title, why did he do so, and is there anything in the music that expresses...yadda yadda yadda...

Can I now be done with justifying my curiosity?


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> Thanks for the apology.
> 
> Rest assured that I don't spend my time listening to the symphony and _agonising _over its 'meaning', but as a minimum - at the level of idle curiosity - flicking through the sleeve notes, and wondering at the composers' method (no, no misplaced apostrophe there) inevitably raises the question - for this listener, at any rate - if LvB did give it the title, why did he do so, and is there anything in the music that expresses...yadda yadda yadda...
> 
> Can I now be done with justifying my curiosity?


You are welcome, though it certainly seemed owed - due when I read back in the thread a bit.

I don't think any curiosity needs justifying, and I'm all for curiosity 

Remember, though, well-meant, well-informed or not, that liner notes are rather like that line from a French Drawing-room Comedy, Where Grand-père enters with a newspaper in hand and exclaims, "Imagine! Every day just enough news to fill the paper."


----------



## EdwardBast

MacLeod said:


> Rest assured that I don't spend my time listening to the symphony and _agonising _over its 'meaning', but as a minimum - at the level of idle curiosity - flicking through the sleeve notes, and wondering at the composers' method (no, no misplaced apostrophe there) inevitably raises the question - for this listener, at any rate - if LvB did give it the title, why did he do so, and is there anything in the music that expresses...yadda yadda yadda...
> 
> Can I now be done with justifying my curiosity?


Macleod, I will argue that there are, in fact, aspects of the music of the Eroica that metaphorically embody something akin to heroism. I'll deal only with the principal theme, though the argument could be extended to the whole movement:

As a number of critics have noted, there is nothing particularly heroic about the first phrase of the Eroica Symphony's opening theme-an observation at once as true as it is hollow. For heroism in music, as in any sphere of human affairs, is not a matter of physiognomy or demeanor, but of action; specifically, action undertaken in the face of overwhelming resistance and danger. It is born of opposition and so, by definition, requires at least two independent dramatic agencies, a principal agent or protagonist who acts and an opposing force, condition, or antagonistic element which threatens it and impedes its progress. In the first movement of the Eroica, the opposing agencies are embodied in the two principal branches of the theme, mm. 3-22 and 23-36, henceforth protagonist (P) and antagonist (A) respectively. (Note that I am _not_ attempting to anthropomorphize here or to imply that these themes represent actual human agents - the conflict is a purely musical one, but part of its musical power, I'd claim, derives from its metaphorical resemblance to conflict in human terms.)

As one might expect, the antagonist's threat is defined in opposition to the protagonist's salient formal qualities, the most obvious being its solid metric and tonal stability. Each of P's first four downbeats, for example, is home to the tonic pitch, E-flat, three of them stressed as half notes, and if the semitone motion to the C-sharp of m. 5 is mysterious, it is nevertheless symmetrically balanced by the ascent through E-natural to F in mm. 18-19, the former an inward, contemplative turn, the latter a complementary turn outward to the real world of action and confrontation.

An assault on the metric stability established by P (stable triple meter, that is) is the antagonist's defining action. It introduces syncopations defining duple units, and after m. 27, all of the passage's important downbeats are suppressed, the continuous, duply spaced sforzandi falling only on weak beats and the downbeats of weak measures. The most potent metric disruption, however, is reserved for the end (mm. 33-4), where triple metric units return but displaced forward by one beat. The tension created through metric instability is, of course, heightened by the unusually lengthy stay on the dominant harmony, which spans the entire antagonistic passage. The protagonist's heroic character is only established by withstanding the antagonist's assault and reemerging with redoubled force in m. 37, and then primarily by virtue of the act of confrontation and reassertion, not superficial characteristics like its volume of sound and powerful orchestration, which in another context might have signified no more than exuberance or mere bluster.

So . . . Note that I am not claiming that the theme means heroism, or even expresses heroism in a simple direct way. I mean that the theme embodies an internal, "purely musical" (whatever that means) conflict that shares formal qualities with a heroic conflict. As it turns out, the conflict between these two elements of the theme is developed throughout the movement, and reaches its culmination in the climax before the emergence of the famous "new theme" in E minor in the development section. The conflict and its eventual resolution are played out at the deepest levels of the movement's structure.


----------



## PetrB

EdwardBast said:


> So . . . Note that I am not claiming that the theme means heroism, or even expresses heroism in a simple direct way. I mean that the theme embodies *an internal, "purely musical" *(whatever that means) *conflict that shares formal qualities with a heroic conflict.* As it turns out, the conflict between these two elements of the theme is developed throughout the movement, and reaches its culmination in the climax before the emergence of the famous "new theme" in E minor in the development section. The conflict and its eventual resolution are played out at the deepest levels of the movement's *structure*.


Thank you. A better explanation of how a composer strategically uses materials based upon an analogous dynamic which often will be heard as somehow conveying the basic idea of the analogy I've yet to see.

That fact the basis of the structure is analogous to another notion -- or a "purely musical metaphore" being where people trip up and fall on their literal butts...

That music tells a story, so often taught, is simply a far less intimidating and daunting introduction that still gives a hint to the neophyte about _structure, the musical architecture_, and with Beethoven, the brilliantly _planned and executed strategy of events within a piece_. It is just often misunderstood by both teacher and student as being a literal representation / transliteration of the composer's point of departure vs. an analogy.

Monet was asked why he had chosen to paint water lilies to such a degree. His answer was that he had chosen water lilies, but "it could have been anything."

So much of what inspires composers which then catalyzes a musical idea is parsecs away from any intent at a literal narrative.

Your example, a dynamic then transliterated into metaphor, that then stimulating an idea of a plan of execution, shows that very well. Broken down to that matter of fact level, a lot of the romanticized notions about inspiration, the emotive content, yada-yada, and what that translates into must, I hope, be busted


----------



## EdwardBast

PetrB said:


> Thank you. A better explanation of how a composer strategically uses materials based upon an analogous dynamic which often will be heard as somehow conveying the basic idea of the analogy I've yet to see.


Thank you!



PetrB said:


> Your example, a dynamic then transliterated into metaphor, that then stimulating an idea of a plan of execution, shows that very well. Broken down to that matter of fact level, a lot of the romanticized notions about inspiration, the emotive content, yada-yada, and what that translates into must, I hope, be busted


Well, in this case, given the subtitle and Beethoven's original plan, I think we are given a little more license for literalism than I took above or than you seem to allow for. It is thoroughly possible, after all, that Beethoven might have pictured something literally heroic and portrayed it in musical terms, right? And in this context, I think the funeral march suggests the death of - well, who knows? Could be an actual hero, or the death of heroism in a more abstract sense, or the death of a republican ideal when Napoleon claimed the mantle of power.

Also, I'm not willing to dispense with all of the romanticized notions about inspiration, emotive content, and yada-yada either. After all, if one can't indulge romanticized notions when discussing Romantic music, there must be something askew  (And I know modern scholars tend to classify Beethoven as a classical composer. To many of his contemporaries and successors, however, he was the quintessential Romantic - E.T.A. Hoffman in his review of the Fifth, for example.) But these are subjects for another time and another thread.


----------



## Guest

EdwardBast said:


> Macleod, I will argue that there are, in fact, aspects of the music of the Eroica that metaphorically embody something akin to heroism.


I'm very grateful for the effort you've put into your analysis...I wish I could understand it, but it works at a level beyond my ability to grasp - though I daresay that if I had a score in front of me, I might find it easier.

Is there another member who can confirm what EdwardBast is saying?

[edit] Listening to Barenboim/West-East Divan from 2012's proms. Actually, just realised how little I've 'listened' to the 3rd - the 2nd mvmt drags on doesn't it? Give me the 3rd mvmt - it's just so much fun!

I guess that makes me rather shallow!


----------



## PetrB

All the theoretic explanation can also readily be understood as analogous: you don't need to understand the technical.

EdwardBast very nicely limned out the mechanics which work upon the listener, whether or not the listener is conscious of those mechanical devices. While his explanation of those mechanics were directly applied to an analysis of the Beethoven, that same general set of working principles is "Good to Go." for much music up to about 1900.

What every listener has, including the rawest of neophytes, is a set of innate expectations of music and how it behaves or goes. Those are semiotic, as we similarly have expectations of what any of a number of varied types of house floor plans might be; whether we have built them or visited them or not, we are well familiarly aware of them. Much of what is semiotic is gotten unconsciously, via osmosis, from what is known and generally around us.

Placing a theme on a beat, then diverging and only later bringing it back off the beat, especially in a movement where the meter is constant, is enough to throw off the listeners' expectation which has been set by the initial presentation of that theme on the beat. Likewise, working within the diatonic tonal system we are all set up to expect an arrival of a following harmony (I feel compelled here to insert that the tonal system is not 'natural' or 'organic,' but once a cumulative body of works over several hundred years were all based upon that, a general set of expectations of "tonality" which are now semiotic are in place.)

If the expectation of a melodic completion or harmonic arrival is somehow suspended, delayed, or thwarted, the music manipulated in such a way as to lead the listener to believe it is about to arrive, but then a composer withholds that arrival -- through means of rhythm and time (so many extra beats, placement on a different beat), or a harmonic turn away from the expected arrival -- that will have the calculated effect.

All art (well, that may be tootoo absolute), works with and plays upon the semiotic expectations of its audience. You don't need to know theory to sense, say, a tension set up between the polarity of one harmony and another, or one key area and another, or to sense that a theme is not "complete" in that it does not run to some expected length in metric time or not make a usual or expected resolution. You don't really need theory to hear the voices of a fugue entering one after the other, or the interplay of that canonic game.

Composers in all genres depend upon those semiotic expectations being in place, or the entire game and strategy of how to affect the listener would have to be rethought and re-invented. (Which it has been, and repeatedly in degrees lesser and greater by composers throughout history. It seems most of the more highly admired composers are those who rethought music, pushed the envelope 

*Music is very much about listener memory,* what was heard before still somewhere in memory is the context which makes the later variant, shift or change palpable. _The least trained have operative musical memory far more than they might think._

A set-up will depend on how clearly / strongly it is set up: in both the past and present the set up and some surety the listener will then recognize a later appearance of a theme, etc. _depends very much upon its repetition and the listener's memory._ It then becomes a matter of how long the material runs until some element of change, subtle or great, i.e. _surprise_ comes along. [It is standard in teaching to deploy a three times around drill / explanation, that number of repetitions long proven to be enough to securely set the data in memory for most people.]

All that sort of manipulation of the materials work on us. While an analogy to its meaning is still not admissible evidence in a court case _(if there was a concrete meaning intended at all)_, as an adhered to premise, an argument for a meaning or at least a well met musical analogy parallel to a meaning can become fairly strong.


----------



## Ukko

^ ^ Sure. All of that manipulation is not going to convey any _specific_ data though. There is not even a guarantee that it will convey the intended emotion; the strong 'passions' tend to sound a lot alike.


----------



## PetrB

Ukko said:


> ^ ^ Sure. All of that manipulation is not going to convey any _specific_ data though. There is not even a guarantee that it will convey the intended emotion; the strong 'passions' tend to sound a lot alike.


I wholly concur, including that some gestures, orchestration and dynamic tricks, regardless of vocabulary, tend to leave the same or a very similar import or impression.

Where I go bonkers is that unless we have a document literally in the composer's hand, about what "inspired" the piece, or what extramusical quality they meant to convey, there is nothing to really talk about, let alone conclude, about the "meaning" of a piece save supposition and conjectures, some based on hearsay.

All those technical things mapped out so well by EdwardBast could just have readily been intuitively manipulated by Beethoven, who after the fact of penning the double bar, noticed more specifically what devices were in action and what he felt their affect was, and then he decided to pen "Eroica" on the title page. Unless there is concrete court-worthy admissible evidence, whatever meaning meant or intended by "Eroica" on the composer's part will remain forever not fully known. Going at trying to find / guess the meaning then becomes a pastime more like a parlor game than appropriate music history.

I should qualify this, that for me, gotten to very early, music is just music, and really illustrates not much of anything, at least really well, imo, and as far as story-telling, it is often the worst medium if one would care to be specific. "It is a language." Yeah, right, and a lot of analogous talk about it includes "syntax" and similar words.

Those are, however, all _just analogies_, analogies used precisely because there are no direct words for what it does. Lacking words, people will supply them in order to discuss music beyond "the harmonic function of a neopolitan sixth and how it can be used in a rapid and remote modulation," for example.

Unfortunately, much of the listening public takes those analogies quite literally, starting with early music ed or some college classical music familiarization course, people hear "Music tells a story." Every time I hear or read that, I'm vaguely ill, or at least disparaged from thinking people will ever hear music as just music


----------



## Ukko

PetrB said:


> I wholly concur, including that some gestures, orchestration and dynamic tricks, regardless of vocabulary, tend to leave the same or a very similar import or impression.
> 
> Where I go bonkers is that unless we have a document literally in the composer's hand, about what "inspired" the piece, or what extramusical quality they meant to convey, there is nothing to really talk about, let alone conclude, about the "meaning" of a piece save supposition and conjectures, some based on hearsay.


You and I, and probably _Macleod_ and _EdwardBlast_, are in agreement. The problem with any treatment of analogies - that gets longer that one or two short paragraphs - is that the reader loses the _analogy bit_.

Ahem: It's like losing the 'like' in a simile. Sort of.


----------



## Guest

Hmmm. Well, as I sat and read EdwardBast's post, I listened to the Eroica. I couldn't make what I heard fit his description. Let's look at the terminology that caused the problem:


I couldn't easily count the measures.
metric and tonal stability

downbeats, for example, is home to the tonic pitch, E-flat, three of them stressed as half notes, and if the semitone motion to the C-sharp of m. 5 is mysterious, it is nevertheless symmetrically balanced by the ascent through E-natural to F in mm. 18-19, the former an inward, contemplative turn, the latter a complementary turn outward to the real world of action and confrontation.

syncopations defining duple units, and after m. 27, all of the passage's important downbeats are suppressed, the continuous, duply spaced sforzandi falling only on weak beats and the downbeats of weak measures.

etc etc etc

I could catch a general sense of what he was saying - I think - that the structure and interrelationships of the measures, notes, keys etc presented a dual which could be analogous to ideas about protagonist and antagonist.

But that was it.

I'm pleased that he offered an analysis that showed a possible interpretation of the actual music that is analogous to the alleged theme. But I didn't hear it, not even semiotically!


----------



## EdwardBast

MacLeod said:


> I'm very grateful for the effort you've put into your analysis...I wish I could understand it, but it works at a level beyond my ability to grasp - though I daresay that if I had a score in front of me, I might find it easier.


Yes, a score would be essential - not because one needs to do intensive harmonic analysis or anything, but just because one needs to know which elements were being characterized as in opposition, which is the antagonistic force, etc. The "proof" requires analysis, but to grasp the argument in human terms only requires knowing exactly what part of the theme is being discussed at a given point.


----------



## Copperears

I continue to be plagued now, by this notion of programmatic, even if, like PetrB, it rubs me the wrong way.

Just as philosophers are in argument with previous philosophers over points large and small in the philosophical analysis; just as poets make reference, in parts, images, lines, structure to previous works they are in dialogue with inside their literary tradition; so too, must composers integrate elements from outside the pure originality, or even intrinsic, abstract and logical unfolding of the musical structure within a composition, that they bring into their work in dialogue, musically, with what else is happening in the composition. They must, in other words, consciously or unconsciously, be having a dialogue with music outside their own.

At the simplest level, there are referential phrases, constructions, lines of melody, rhythms, quotes, if you will, from the music of the composer's time and place. Many of these things the composer's contemporaries would hear, and instantly recognize for what they are, where they come from, even what their quotation might imply at that moment in the music.

With time, that listening context might be lost, and we might increasingly dimly, or even historically and musicologically accurately, sense it and try to understand it, but it has been lost to us as lived experience. So it becomes, for us, comparatively abstract music, without the meaning it had during the time of its composition.

I think the "original instruments" movement is a fascinating context to think about this in; even at the level of instrumental sonorities, we reconstruct the now-alien aspect of those sonorities, along with other historical research, not necessarily to reach an "accurate simulation of historical musical practice," but at its best, to refresh ourselves and our audiences in the hearing of the music, to reintroduce into it what has become alien to our ears, as a challenge to new interpretation, and a refreshed relationship with a previous point in musical history.

So, all of it has in some way to do with the programmatic aspect of music, in that the context of the composition's construction, the history of its performance, embodied in understanding of present and historical technique, the history of the instrumental and sonic balance, even the space within which the music is and was performed, all contribute to the "story" it is telling the listener.

Combine that with both the intrinsic musical context the listener is semiotically trained into by their cultural and historical situation, and the extrinsic elements of their lives, the moment they are listening in, the location, with whom involved, with what set of associations in the outside world, separate from the performance, may be arbitrarily but necessarily summoned at each moment in that performance, and once again we have at some level the impossibility of being able to listen without at least some programmatic factors coming to bear on the very seeming nature of what we're hearing.

So in that sense, and here I've argued myself around to a position I was passionately in complete opposition to yesterday in another thread, all music cannot but be programmatic.

Still, I continue to hold out against the grimly solipsistic referentiality most present listening is constrained to, whether it be by underfunded music teachers trying to compete with comic books and video games by insisting on the dramatic storytelling nature of music in introductory courses in an attempt to make music matter, or simply by the culture at large that is suffused with an absolutely monolithic literalism in the kinds of hardened, Fascistic associations it regularly drums into everyone's heads, as to what this or that sound, phrase, chord, key, composition is supposed to "mean." [this is a "happy" sound; this is a "sad" one; that is a "love song"; the other music is "angry"... and the other piece is "dramatic" etc. etc. ad nauseam]

Why do I hold out? Because it reduces music to something less than it is, turns it simply into the soundtrack for other things, destroys its chance to be considered valuable in and of itself as experience, without the need to be secondary to other purposes.


----------



## PetrB

Copperears said:


> ... I continue to hold out against the grimly solipsistic referentiality most present listening is constrained to, whether it be by...music teachers...insisting on the dramatic storytelling nature of music in introductory courses..., or by *the culture at large* that *is suffused with an absolutely monolithic literalism* in the kinds of hardened, Fascistic associations it regularly drums into everyone's heads, as to what this or that sound, phrase, chord, key, composition is supposed to "mean." [this is a "happy" sound; this is a "sad" one; that is a "love song"; the other music is "angry"... and the other piece is "dramatic" etc. etc. ad nauseam]
> 
> Why do I hold out? Because *it reduces music to something less than it is, turns it simply into the soundtrack for other things, destroys its chance to be considered valuable in and of itself as experience, without the need to be secondary to other purposes.*


Thanks, and _*Amen to all that*_.


----------



## Ukko

PetrB said:


> Thanks, and _*Amen to all that*_.


Thanks to both of you. The last quoted paragraph exaggerates my position a bit (the 'destroys'), but not by much. _Copperears _kind of blitzed me with big words, but it came out right.


----------



## WesleyKnust

My understanding of program music is that it refers to music which has a meaning outside of its own context.


----------

