Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Haydn, part 7a

The last* example from Haydn is the slow movement of the string quartet, op. 76n2. This was also mentioned in a footnote to my "Ascending Urlinie" article, twice in fact. In footnote 29, I included it among pieces that use the "^5-^6-(^8)-^7-^8 model or one of its variants"; in footnote 31 it was "the form ^5-^6-(reg.)^7-^8." These refer to different form sections of the piece. Of these two readings, the first is very clear, but the second I no longer agree with. Details below.
*Actually, there is one more: an "extra" example in the Haydn series is the trio in the third movement of this same quartet -- it will be discussed in tomorrow's post.
The design of the movement is ABA with an extended coda. Section B starts in the tonic minor, but is unstable (the tonic minor lasts only a bar before we settle into its own bVI region, which lasts for about half the section's duration). The reprise is complete except that a fairly lengthy coda is initiated by a deceptive cadence on what should have been the final cadential tonic.

The main theme (A) is a closed small form with repeats. Its treatment of a rising background line is quite clear and straightforward: an apparent ^3 (F#) at the beginning is supplanted by ^5, which looked to be a cover tone at first but before long takes over as the principal register. Note the (^8) that supplies a note for the melody over the cadential dominant's 6/4; and ^7-^8 is doubled in the second violin.


A brief B-section offers an unusual turn by ending firmly on F# minor (iii in D major; iii is generally considered the "weakest" of the diatonic triads, a characterization that extends to its tonal region). The explanation is that Haydn thus allows himself a play on the opening motive A-F#—f#: ^3-^1 turns into D: ^5-^3 without benefit of any transitioning harmonic progression. In this case, note that Haydn could easily have included the cadenza perfetta between first violin and viola but instead doubles the third of the final chord. The third was doubled in the opening statement of the theme, too, and we have to assume that there was something about the sound that appealed to him.


In the reprise of the A section, the Urlinie form is altered to another variant that I discuss in the JMT article: ^5-^6-(^5)-^7-^8. Note that the second violin follows this figure note for note (* and box).



In m. 50 is the deceptive cadence I referred to above. What follows from it is a strongly profiled descent to a dramatic diminished seventh chord and a brief cadenza for the first violin (m. 57).

Here are the immediately following measures (58-62), which finally bring the principal cadence. In footnote 31 of the JMT article, I applied ^5-^6-(reg.)^7-^8 to this movement, meaning by it this ending. The treatment of register, however, is more complicated than it was in the Eb sonata or other pieces where ^6 dropped down to ^7. Here ^6 does drop to ^7 (m. 61), but ^7 also drops to ^8 (or ^1). That, combined with the downward figuration in mm. 60-61, seems to me not just to conceal but effectively to erase the rising-line formula here. Reading this as a rising cadence gesture reminds me of those tortured Schenkerian readings that dip down into inner voices or imply this and that in order to come up with an acceptable line. For this kind of event, I prefer the proto-background model—see the next example.


The figure that *does* make musical sense here is the fifth-frame of the violin's repeated figures in mm. 60-62. The upper end (^5) is never effectively abandoned, and the lower end (^1) moves to its lower neighbor only to fit into the cadential V7. The intervallic frame, then, is as shown at the lower right.