Out of the various approaches to analysing music have emerged throughout history I have chosen to review Immanuel Kant’s and Heinrich Schenker’s forms of analysis. The historical origin of a form of analysis is significant as the method and theory of these analytical approaches materialise from political and social circumstances of society of the time. For example, the discourse of period will manipulate the way a piece of music is discussed, and the understanding of discourse associated with a form of analysis will affect the way in which that approach is performed.
Accordingly, the most effective way to critique the usefulness of each method is to remove them from their historical origins. This can be done by analysing a ‘timeless’ piece of music. Comparing a piece composed before but still relevant in the birth of both of these methods will demonstrate the specific qualities each form of analysis concentrates on. The piece analysed was Beethoven’s 9th Symphony. Analysis is generally categorised under two subheadings; rationalist and empiricist.
Rationalism aims for an approach uncontaminated by the observer’s experience this objective knowledge is achieved through engaging in rational and logical thought. Empiricism is the opposite, based on the belief that knowledge can only develop through experiences as it’s considered impossible to remove subjectivity from observation. Analysis is used to represent organicism; the idea that music is an organism which parts combines together to function as a whole. It is a reference point in which analysist base their approach. Organicism can linked to empiricist and rationalist methods. he rationalists believe that growth that has led from smaller cells from which the whole piece grows.
While from an empiricist perspective organicism reflects the evolutionary process of growth that is established by experiences of the composer, and the interpretation by the listener. Kant’s theory aims to find the middle ground between rationalism and empiricism. Kant’s criticism is Based on four moments; disinterested pleasure; pleasure from the object itself and not how it could benefit us. Universal pleasure; the pleasure and sense of community that comes from universal appreciation. urposiveness without purpose; an object is purposeful but purpose is irrelevant in analysis.
And necessary pleasure is the need for something to be accepted by others for it to be accepted by us. These ideas are good in theory but issues arise when putting this approach into practice. As the interpretations of the moments vary, so does the method of analysis. A paradox to the purpose of Kant’s theory which tries to escape an evaluation based on scientific understanding and understanding based on experience, even though the approach requires understanding itself.
It’s a forced mindset and thus can’t be a disinterest approach as it has a desired outcome. Demonstrated in the analysis of Beethoven’s 9th symphony Kant’s analysis cannot vastly affect a mind already manipulated by experience. Kant’s approach recognises that to a that analysis is interpretation, unfortunately the human mind is incapable of being completely intuitive and we are subconsciously affected by the past.
Therefore, is there a purpose in trying to be? The benefits associated with 9th Symphony come from the prestige of Beethoven’s name, the success of the piece, the esteemed valuation of music produced in the Classical era. nd the universal pleasure that results from these factors. this apparent educated universal pleasure is so prominent in the music industry that lack of appreciation of Beethoven means a lack of musical understanding this was represented in all areas of art. “I am afraid there are moments in life when even Beethoven has nothing to say to us. We must admit, however, that they are our worst moments. ” Henry James, The Portrait of a Lady. It seems beneficial to disregard the established identity of a piece, to not rely solely on what has been experienced.
As society manipulates what music listeners experience and are exposed to. 9th symphony can be its pleasurable without it being beneficial. This involves disregarding its reputation, association without the interest of personal gain. Live performances a contradiction to this idea. it is egotistic as they are expensive to attend, historically reserved for the upper classes and it’s an opportunity for performers to be applauded for their technical skills. The melody of ‘Ode to Joy’ commonly features in beginner’s piano books but this is pleasure as a result of developing practical playing skills.
Scientific studies by Helsingin yliopisto (University of Helsinki) Have proven the intellectual and physiological benefits of music. These are all legitimate characteristics of the Beethoven’s 9th symphony, but all depend on society, the current and historical context which creates the purpose of the music. Kerman argued this idea in his paper ‘A profile for American Musicology’ which states musicology’s proper directions is sociology. Kant’s 3rd moment ‘purposiveness without purpose’ disregards the typical foundation of analysis concerning the capabilities of piece of music fulfilling its purpose.
The primary purpose of music has changed overtime from religion in the middle ages period to a humanist focus in the renaissance. 9th symphony obvious purpose is as a religious piece. Kant is implying that beauty is best judged by its form, and not how that form was achieved. But how is a greater understanding acquired by forced ignorance? pleasure and purpose are more of a reflection of society than the music itself. But music only exists because of society, whether it’s in the interpretation of sounds made by nature or composed. he relationship between society and music is therefore important.
Judging an object but removing significant characteristics is unrealistic. It’s like judging a book by its cover, not fulfilling its purpose by reading it and not relating to any experiences to bring the story to life through imagination. Beneficial pleasure isn’t just a result of the object but a part of the object, like how the music requires instruments to be heard we require society’s opinion. Just because these factors aren’t the sounds we hear doesn’t mean it’s not a relative part of music.
Pleasure shouldn’t be discounted as just because its beneficial, as it may not be the only reason its appreciated. Kant’s analysis still judges what aspects of music and aesthetics are relevant or significant, this is an empiricist judgement as its based off Kant’s experiences of analysis. Schenker’s theory of analysis relies purely on the information presented by the score. It involves reducing music to its simplest form, Schenker refers to this form as a cell; this could be an interval harmonic progression or ‘the chord of nature’ a major triad.
The composition is seen as an embellishment and specifically the unfolding of the cell. This process is the defining source of great composer. Schenker’s analysis is accused of being designed to accommodate valued repertories, consequently Beethoven’s 9th symphony should fit the criteria of the great composer and the method of Schenker’s analysis. The choice of what compositions to analyse wasn’t as value neutral as it seemed, Schenker analysed Beethoven’s 9th himself around 1912 . Schenker’s analysis demonstrates how the musical ideas within Beethoven’s 9th symphony are connected.
The first movement is reduced structurally to a chord progression I, IV, V, I. Schenker states that the nature of this chords progression highlights the 3rd and 6th scale degrees. Intervals which emphasises the distinction between major and minor. This was the apparent foundation of tonality and timbre for 9th symphony. Schenker claims this approach mimics scientific papers but his method is just as theoretical as the any empiricist perspective. The idea of uncovering a poetics through examination of the score seems irrational as there is no specific formula to compose.
Professor Korsyn from the University of Michigan suggests that Schenker’s focus on macro and micro structure concerning the octave placement of musical fragment generates a new understanding of register. Beethoven’s sudden changes in register were often questioned in pervious analysis of 9th symphony. But Schenker’s organicist approach not only implies that these changes in register are a motif within itself but declares it a characteristic of Beethoven’s compositional style. And Just because 9th symphony can be analysed using this method doesn’t mean that is was the approach used by Beethoven.
The idea of the cell may only exist in the method of Schenkerian analysis. Much like how Barthes states in ‘Death of the Author’ that the meaning of piece only exists in the process of interpretation of the reader. If the composer or analyst doesn’t recognise the cell how can it exist? There are numerous aspects of 9th Symphony that Schenker neglects such as the lyrics, their meaning and how rhythmically and melodically text can influence a composition. The lyrics come from Friedrich Schiller’s ‘Ode to Joy’.
Schenker states that “What Beethoven did, he did in spite of text”, the only consideration of the lyrics in the analysis is a justification as to why vocals are acceptable on this one occasion. Schenker suggests that Beethoven’s need for parallelism overrode the need for programmatic considerations despite them being ‘logical inconsistency’. Other compositional context is also ignored by Schenker, ‘Ode to Joy’ was also commissioned by The Philharmonic Society of London. The basic melody was adapted from Henry van Dyke’s hymn “Joyful, Joyful We Adore Thee”.
And the lyrics refer to Elysium (Heaven) as the origin of joy achieved through loving god. These numerous factors which have shaped the composition of ode to joy but fail to be acknowledged by Schenker. Schenker’s concept of the term origin is the defining aspect of Schenkerian analysis. The method reduces the piece to its apparent structural source (the cell) but stops at investigating the origin of that source. If Schenker continued he would have reached aesthetics and the political, social world which influenced the composer and the composition.
But this aesthetical origin is subjective, even though Schenkerian analysis itself is a prejudiced system that assumes the development of a piece. Schenker wanted his systematic approach to achieve scientific creditability. Schenker’s theory helps develop an understanding of the score. It translates musical ideas into an approachable dialect and categorises the information, making it easier to process. Schenker’s focus on structure can also be helpful to uncover performance instructions. For example, measures within 9th symphony don’t include dynamics and expressive techniques.
Allows the analyst to review content on a deeper level, recognise similarities within the piece and make an educated assumption of how to play it according to context. The Breslau Orchestra Society sent a letter to Schenker concerning the performance of, should it be played with a staccato or not as there is no indications. This is the battle of epistemology the difference between justified belief and opinion. Relating to ideas of rationalism and empiricism. Both forms of analysis are based on an opinion, Schenker method hides behind facade of ‘justified belief’ whilst Kant is between unashamedly between the two.
Treitler stresses the importance of choosing the ‘correct’ form of analysis due to the relationships between analytical methodology and the style of music being analysed. This is Schenkerian perspective as Treitler assumes musical structure and style are interconnected. But as Kerman notes there are many musical traditions cannot be fully reviewed by German organicism. Culture may not be the deciding factor of analysis but music can change geographically. Along with what is consider the relevant features of analysis. This varies the way the composer and analyst view a piece of music.
Using multiple methods of analysis provides insight to how music functions through different perspectives. Forming a well-rounded study when applied in cohesion. Using multiple approaches uncovers data that may be neglected by only utilising a singular approach. its more effective to remove unnecessary material, then to limit a study. Some methods are more appropriate to the nature or characteristics of a piece. Thus why I believe Schenker’s method was more effective form analysis for Beethoven’s 9th Symphony. But with the use of both Schenker’s and Kant’s approaches I gathered a more comprehensive understanding compared to just using one.
