Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28

Society for Music Theory

Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28Author(s): V. Kofi AgawuSource: Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 9 (Spring, 1987), pp. 1-17Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society for Music TheoryStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/746116Accessed: 25/07/2010 22:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press and Society for Music Theory are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Music Theory Spectrum.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/746116?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal

Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28

V. Kofi Agawu


V. Kofi Agawu


V. Kofi Agawu


V. Kofi Agawu


V. Kofi Agawu


V. Kofi Agawu

The most successful theories of musical structure are those that treat musical compositions as dynamic totalities, invoking a beginning-middle-end paradigm as referential construct

throughout the analysis. Heinrich Schenker's theory of tonal music is a case in point. Musical events are explained with reference to both their local and long-term function, as well as on several mutually-interacting levels. Each event, in other words, is perceived as part of a larger, dynamic, and total structure.

Schenker's insights are most fully represented in his multi- levelled graphs-surely one of the theory's most powerful and attractive features-and it is perhaps because of these repre- sentational means that the view of a musical work as a dynamic totality is so successfully elucidated. In contrast to Schenker, however, analysts who operate in a verbal-descriptive medium often invoke a discriminatory approach in which the emphasis shifts from the total structure to a few isolated events usually found at or near the beginning of a piece, the criteria for such choice rarely being made explicit. Thus, under the yoke of an

organicist tradition, an analyst like Rudolph Reti confines his comments on the Prelude to Wagner's Tristan and Isolde to the

piece's beginning, leaving the impression that later events are

I wish to thank Donna Lynn for her stimulating comments on earlier ver- sions of this essay. Thanks are also due to Professors Arnd Bohm, Laurence

Dreyfus, Jeffrey Kallberg, and Arnold Whittall for several helpful suggestions.




































generated by the initial ones. To spell out the process of genera- tion would be to state the obvious.'

No one would deny the significance of opening gestures in music. Because they are the first things we hear in a composition, they naturally provide procedural as well as material

points of reference for much of what happens later.2 But it is

precisely because of the need to follow through with the impli-

'Rudolph Reti, The Thematic Process in Music (London: Faber and Faber, 1961), 336-43. In contrast to Reti's selective approach, thorough studies of the prelude have appeared in recent years. William Mitchell, "The Tristan Prel- ude: Techniques and Structure," The Music Forum 1 (1967): 162-302, offers a Schenkerian approach to the piece's linear-harmonic structure, while Leland Smith accounts for practically every one of its vertical sonorities in A Hand- book of HarmonicAnalysis (Stanford: Department of Music, Stanford Univer- sity, 1963), 142ff. Benjamin Boretz combines a rigorous search for intervallic consistency with an equally vigorous search for voice-leading patterns in "Meta-Variations, Part IV: Analytic Fallout (1)," Perspectives of New Music 11 (1972): 146-223, while Robert P. Morgan's paper, "Formal Circularity in the Tristan Prelude" (delivered at the national meeting of the American Musi- cological Society, Philadelphia, 1984), argues for a circular, rather than a linear process in the prelude as a whole.

2There is as yet no systematic study of opening gestures in music. A few pertinent remarks may be found in Edward T. Cone, Musical Form and Musi- cal Performance (New York: Norton, 1968), 12-13. A preliminary classifica- tion of beginning strategies is given in Lewis Rowell, "The Creation of Audible Time," The Study of Time 4, ed. J. T. Fraser, N. Lawrence, and D. Park, (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981), 198-210. In the field of literature, on the other hand, the situation is more encouraging. Edward Said's Beginnings: Intention































2 Music Theory Spectrum 2 Music Theory Spectrum 2 Music Theory Spectrum 2 Music Theory Spectrum 2 Music Theory Spectrum 2 Music Theory Spectrum

cations of the opening that one is surprised to find few analytical studies of the middle-end portion of a work's paradigm. If it is important to know how and where a piece begins, then it is

doubly important to know just what happens to that beginning. What we need, therefore, is a mechanism that will allow us to

acknowledge the procedures of endings within the framework of a composition's total structure.

I shall refer to such a mechanism as closure, which may be taken to mean the tendency to close. This will not by itself be a sufficient definition, of course. The ramifications, however, are best dealt with in reference to actual musical examples. For this

essay I have selected Chopin's Preludes, Opus 28, which seem to me to raise important questions about closure.3 But before

and Method (New York: Columbia University Press, 1975) is a provocative study of how works of literature begin, and what sorts of questions are raised by such beginnings. Many of the points raised in the first two chapters, "Beginning Ideas" and "A Meditation on Beginnings" could be profitably adapted to the

analysis of music. 3I am not the first to sense the importance of closure in Chopin's music. As

far back as 1888, Frederick Niecks, in his biography of the composer, drew attention to the "premature conclusion" of Chopin's Prelude, opus 28, no. 11, and to "the peculiar closing bars" of no. 13 from the same collection (Chopin as a Man and Musician, 2 vols. [London and New York, 1888], 255). Gerald Abraham wrote in 1939 that "Chopin's codas are often memorable as perfect roundings-off of perfect poems, but. . . they not infrequently have a structural function as well" (Chopin's Musical Style [London: Oxford University Press,

1939], 47). Nicholas Temperley has described Chopin's cadences as "conspicu- ously original" ("Chopin," The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musi-

cians, ed. Stanley Sadie [London: Macmillan, 1980]) without telling us wherein this originality lies. By far the most important discussion of closure in Chopin is

Jeffrey Kallberg's "Compatibility in Chopin's Multi-Partite Publications," Journal of Musicology 2 (1983): 391-417, which draws its illustrative material from the Mazurkas. Although for Kallberg, "to speak of closure at the higher levels is for the most part ... to discuss codas, and codas do not serve the same function for Chopin in all genres," the general principles presented in his essay are indispensable to further work on closure in Chopin's music. Other work on closure is of a general sort. Scattered throughout Leonard B. Meyer's Explain- ing Music: Essays and Explorations (Berkeley: University of California Press,
























































embarking on a systematic study of closure, it is desirable to

acknowledge the importance of endings per se in music. The rhetoric of nineteenth-century music in particular shows that the strategy by which a composer takes leave of his audience is of fundamental importance to the work's total effect.

When the nineteenth-century performer, critic, and com-

poser, Ludwig Spohr, dismissed the ending of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony as "empty noise," he simply failed to grasp the

significance of forty measures of tonic reiteration.4 "Why bother to repeat a cadential gesture that many times?" he would seem to ask. One answer comes from E.T.A. Hoff- mann's well-known review of the work, where the hypothetical naive listener seeks (and finds) an explanation for this most dra- matic of endings:

The close ensues forty-one measures later after many magnificent, ju- bilant figures. Even the closing chords, themselves, are strangely po- sitioned. To be specific, the chord which the listener believes to be the last is followed by a measure of rest, a repetition of the chord, another measure of rest, another repetition of the chord, another measure of rest . . . and finally a C played in unison by the full orchestra. The perfect calmness which the heart feels as a result of the several closing figures that are linked is destroyed by these single struck chords and pauses. These last chords make the listener anxious once again and remind him of the striking of single chords in the Allegro of the Sym- phony. They have the effect of a fire which again and again shoots high its bright, blazing flames after one had believed it extinguished.5

Although Hoffmann clothes his discourse in metaphorical lan-

guage, his insights touch on issues that are fundamental to any

1973) are comments on closure. A recent application of Meyer's ideas is Ro- bert G. Hopkins, "Secondary Parameters and Closure in the Symphonies of Gustav Mahler," (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1983). Edward T.

Cone, in Musical Form and Musical Performance (New York: Norton, 1968), 17-23, offers comments on closure.

4Quoted in Elliot Forbes, ed., Ludwig van Beethoven, Symphony No. 5 in Cminor (New York: Norton, 1971), 187.

5Quoted ibid., 162.












5Quoted ibid., 162.












5Quoted ibid., 162.












5Quoted ibid., 162.












5Quoted ibid., 162.












5Quoted ibid., 162.

Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3 Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3 Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3 Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3 Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3 Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28 3

study of musical endings: the ending as recall; the play on the listener's expectations as to when the work will conclude; the expectations generated by the ending itself; and the appropri- ateness of the ending. Yet, the modern analyst remains dis- satisfied with a mode of discourse rooted in metaphor and first- hearing strategy, especially if it does not offer a technical discussion as corollary. This last is hinted at by Donald Francis Tovey, who alludes to what might be called the "rhetorical" and "structural" functions of this particular ending:

When musicians regard the last forty-odd bars of Beethoven's C mi- nor Symphony as a meaningless noise they are as far from the truth as the most naive listener to whom a fugue is a tuneless chaos. These forty bars are meaningless without the rest of the symphony, but the symphony ends as truly within its own length as the Et in terra pax of the B minor Mass [my emphasis].6

Such divergent views on the ending of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony affirm that the ending is important (or significant) and therefore that it has to be dealt with in any analysis of the work. Once we begin to think about endings in this way numerous nineteenth-century compositions come easily to mind. We are all familiar with many of Schumann's songs that do not at- tain full closure-the first of the Dichterliebe cycle, with its ending on a dominant seventh chord, is a good example. The famous El thrown into the closing chord of Chopin's Prelude in F major, opus 28, no. 3, is another (we shall return to this piece later on). Then there is Mussorgsky's 1868 composition, "Det- skaya pesenka" (Child's Song), which finishes stubbornly on an unresolved seventh chord. And perhaps most famous of all is Mahler's Das Lied von der Erde, whose terminal sonority (an added-sixth chord), though pregnant with verbal-textual asso- ciations, overturns, in one defiant gesture, the conventional- but not necessarily logical-donnee of a consonant ending.7

6Quoted ibid., 198- 99. 7For an explanation of the logic of this ending as a fusion of two "tonic com-

plexes," c/C and a/A, see my essay, "Mahler's Tonal Strategies: A Study of the Song Cycles," Journal of Musicological Research 6 (1986): 17-19.


























There is room, then, for a theoretical-analytical study of nineteenth-century musical style that will emphasize closure. Although a single essay such as the present one cannot accom- plish such a task, it can at least suggest the terms in which the theory might be couched. This essay therefore offers an explo- ration of various methods of closure in the Chopin Preludes as the first installment of an ongoing study. The discussion begins with a definition of closure that draws on analogies between music and poetry. The main part of the essay is then given over to close readings of selected preludes.

Towards a Definition of Closure: The Poetic Analogy

Most writers on the music of the nineteenth century acknowledge the existence of a strong "poetic" element in this music. Schumann's comments on Chopin's Preludes are a case in point:

[Unlike the Etudes, the Preludes] are sketches, commencements of studies, or, if you will, ruins, single eagle-wings, all strangely mixed together ... One recognizes him by the violent breathing during the rests. He is, and remains, the proudest poet-mind of the time.8

This premise continues to inform contemporary discourse about nineteenth-century music, as exemplified by a recent

study by Lawrence Kramer.9 It would take us too far afield to consider here certain fundamental questions regarding the nature of the parallels between music and poetry. If I may treat the existence of such connections as axiomatic, I should like to suggest that the issue of closure offers insights into the nature of these parallels. Following Barbara Herrnstein Smith, I now offer, in the form of three statements, a definition of closure that will be invoked in the analyses that follow.10

8Quoted in Niecks, Chopin, 255. 9Lawrence Kramer, Music and Poetry: The Nineteenth Century and After

(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984). 10I am greatly indebted to Barbara Herrnstein Smith's Poetic Closure: A

Study of How Poems End (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968), for















































1. Closure is a function of formal principles and/or generic signs. Because poetry, like music, unfolds in time, the analysis of its internal dynamic may usefully consist of the set of answers to the question, "What keeps it going?"11 Such answers will in- evitably embrace the generic conventions in which closure operates. For example, the trained reader (or listener) ap- proaches a lyric genre such as the Shakespearean sonnet with a set of expectations regarding its length, meter and rhyme scheme. The awareness of this scheme mediates the experience of the poem, and therefore of closure. The same is true of musical genres such as minuet and trio, nocturne, concerto, and prelude, genres in which various types of signs-some conventional, others arbitrary-are used to inform the listener of how or when a piece is going to end. The absence or presence of these signs contributes equally to the perception of closure.12

2. Closure is not the same thing as an ending. The ending of a poem or piece of music refers simply to the terminal elements in that structure (we use terms like coda, codetta, and cadence to describe such musical elements). Closure in poetry, however, has to do with "the sense of finality, stability, and integrity,"13 and its effect depends primarily upon "the reader's experience of the structure of the entire poem."14 Musical closure is similarly dependent for its effect on the listener's experience of the entire composition. It is the sum total of all the tendencies to close that occur in the composition, whether or not these are ac- tually fulfilled. An ending is therefore only part-albeit a significant one-of the mechanism of closure. To put it differently, an ending refers to local elements in the musical struc-

arousing my interest in musical closure and also for providing some direction for its analysis.

"Smith, Poetic Closure, 4. '2An illuminating study of such a play on generic convention in the music of

Franz Josef Haydn is Janet Levy, "Gesture, Form and Syntax in Haydn's Mu- sic," Haydn Studies, ed. J. Peter Larsen, H. Serwer, and J. Webster (New York: Norton, 1981), 355-62.

'3Smith, Poetic Closure, viii. 14Ibid.































ture, whereas closure denotes a global mechanism. In the example of Mahler's Das Lied von der Erde cited earlier, the ending is the cadence involving the added-sixth chord in measures 567-568 (the last of several occurrences), but the mechanism of closure includes all the events that prepare this close- the various manifestations of the tonic-submediant relationship that are then enshrined in the final chord. Closure is therefore a dynamic concept, one which attempts to capture the sense of what David Epstein has called "the compositional dynamic."15

3. Closure is afunction of both syntactic and semanticprinci- ples. A fundamental distinction in the analysis of poetic structure is that between syntax and semantics, between closure as the "completion of a line and sentence" and closure as the "completion of (a specific) utterance."16 A sonnet is not only a syntactically correct organization of linguistic symbols" but also a "statement or speech of some kind: an argument, perhaps, or a declaration, or lament."17 The musical equivalent of poetic syntax is the set of rules that govern the succession of notes. For example, a 2 I cadence offers the correct syntax for effecting a cadence. On the other hand, the musical equivalent of an utterance, the semantic component, is not so easy to deci- pher. For whereas poetry can exploit such terminal features as "the sense of truth" and "the tone of authority," using words like "last," "finished," "no more," "end," "rest," and "peace"'8 to disambiguate its semantic domain, music can only do so with reference to certain rhetorical procedures that are style-specific. It will often be necessary in the following analysis to invoke the elements of a phenomenological category to ad- dress this aspect of Chopin's music. To this end, I have developed a set of dichotomies that carry roughly the same connota-

15David Epstein, Beyond Orpheus: Studies in Musical Structure (Cam- bridge, Mass.: M. I. T. Press, 1979), 195.

16Smith, Poetic Closure, 5. 17Ibid. 18Smith, Poetic Closure, 172.






















tions as syntax-semantics: structure-rhetoric, form-expression, and structure-utterance. More specifically, references to structure always denote the harmonic-structural or melodic- structural aspects of a piece, as distinct from its ornamental as-

pects. "Semantic" on the other hand embraces the sense of the musical gesture, the meaning that emerges from the particular arrangement of notes. Passages with similar structural under-

pinnings may reveal quite different utterances.19

Prelude 22: The "Feel" of Closure

Evidence for the primary structuring role of closure in this collection of preludes is most accessible in no. 22, where we sense the compositional dynamic (or "forward drive," or

"drama") within the framework of a number of avoided closes that retroactively structure the piece. The effect of these avoided closes is twofold. First, they serve to "foreground" (i.e. to make dominant in our perception) the phenomenon of closure.20 Second, and consequently, they elevate the music's

metaphorical utterance (its semantic domain) to a level above

19Dichotomies such as form/expression, structure/rhetoric, and syntax/ semantics are conceptual constructs designed to facilitate the description of two aspects of music, one having to do with the technical ordering of musical elements, and the other having to do with the meaning that emerges from such an ordering. The latter has generated much discussion, although there is as yet no consensus on what exactly constitutes meaning. Nor are the dichotomies able to provide a hard and fast distinction between the two domains, for certain

aspects of musical structure already carry inherent expressive attributes. Schenker's ursatz, for example, enshrines an expression of tension and the resolution of that tension. There is obviously room for a study of expression/ semantics/utterance which might take a powerful explanatory model for musical grammar (such as Schenker's theory) as point of departure.

20To "foreground" in literary-critical circles is "to bring something into the

highest prominence, to make dominant in one's perception" (M. H. Abrams, A Glossary of Literary Terms, 4th ed. [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Win- ston, 1941, 1981], 166). The term has been used principally by Russian Formal- ists to define an aspect of "literariness." Music theorists, on the other hand, use the term "foreground" (Schenker's Vordergrund) to denote the level of a com-
























































the syntactical. Put differently, the rhetorical mode-that which is concerned with persuading the listener-takes prece- dence over the structural-the grammatical means by which such persuasion is effected. This condition makes a metaphorical critical account particularly alluring. Accordingly, we shall

begin with a diachronic account of the prelude as would a hypothetical naive listener.21 Such an account might go as follows:

The character of the prelude is akin to a series of waves whose course meets with a number of resistances. The function of these resistances is to postpone closure, while their effect is to heighten the tension re- sulting from frustrated expectations. The first of these resistances occurs in measure 8. Here, we sense a partial completion of a brief utterance. The motion is then resumed [in the second half of m. 8] using material heard earlier [mm. 1-4], now in a brighter register. Things continue differently, however, as the action in the second phrase is intesified, first, by the inclusion of foreign notes [in mm. 13-16] and then by the arrival on a plateau [mm. 17-20] which seems to prepare for a cadence. By the nature of this preparation, the first authentic cadence should come at the end of this phrase [on the down beat of m. 25]. It doesn't, however. Instead, we get a wholesale repeat of previous material [mm. 17-24 = mm. 25-32], the effect of which is a heightening of the pre-cadential tension. Our expectations for closure seem somewhat urgent at this point. Then [in mm. 33-34], what begins as a repeat of earlier material [mm. 23-24/31-32]-the effect of which is an apparently more reliable promise of a cadence-turns out

position closest to its literal surface. Note that the term is used as a verb by literary theorists and as a noun by music theorists. I retain that distinction throughout this essay.

21This nebulous construct, the "naive listener," is, alas, none other than myself, or, in Robert Scholes's description of his hypothetical reader, "an ide- alized version of myself" (Robert Scholes, Semiotics and Interpretation [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982], 37). This is pure fiction, of course, but useful fiction in so far as it enables me to present certain aspects of the musical experience from which I can extract "structural" elements. The naive listener's account has been annotated with measure numbers and an occasional explanatory word in order to make it easier to follow, the point being that the naive listener would not use such specific locations in his description.



























to be a false indicator, for [in the l.h. of m. 34] the opening material returns, signalling a reprise of some sort. The expectations generated by this return of more familiar material are even more implicative, for the return promises to balance out the larger proportions of the piece. When [in m. 37] the motion fails to correspond to its earlier precedent [m. 37 "should be" the equivalent of mm. 3 and 11] we know that something is up again. But we are not deceived this time, for the hold- ing back that results from repetition [m. 36 is repeated as m. 37 and, in registral transposition of the r.h., as m. 38] is a preparation-in the sense of a springboard-for what is perhaps the most striking (because emphatic) gesture in the entire prelude: m. 39. This is the point of greatest tension, and the tension is gradually diffused, first, by [a half measure of] silence-the only such event in the piece-and then by a normalizing final cadence-also the only such cadence in the entire prelude.

The experience of closure implicit in the naive listener's account draws on a variety of conceptual categories, revealing a cross-dimensional view of the piece. Two fundamental principles of closure issue from this account. First, and most obviously, the charting of the closural path transcends the various dimensions of the prelude. Measure 39, which constitutes an important turning point, illustrates this well. Its unique disposi- tion demands a consideration of register, for it is clear that it spans a considerable registral space (C# 2-G6); it, in fact, sums up the registral limits of the piece as a whole. One account of closure might therefore be based on the chronology of registers in the prelude. At the same time, a listener focusing on harmony will recognize the chord in m. 39 as the familiar German sixth in second inversion; this will suggest a consideration of the prelude's consonance-dissonance interplay, and its history of harmonic distance. And there will be a third listener for whom the fact of arrested physical motion remains the most accessible feature of this measure. For that listener, the piece has hitherto been propelled by a referential instability in the form of a joint rhythmic-harmonic syncopation between l.h. and r.h. The ces- sation of motion therefore heightens this dialectical play, and











with it, the utterance generated by the horizontal domain of the prelude. Now, it is not that no listener can take in all three- and possibly several other-dimensions at the same time, but rather that the foregrounding of different dimensions at different points in the musical discourse demands a corresponding change in analytical perspective. The analysis of closure therefore invites a strategic flexibility in the selection of dimensions that most fundamentally define its path.

The second point to emerge from the naive listener's account offers, in contrast to the first, a hierarchical system for the analysis of closure. Because the fundamental source of dynamic motion in the piece is the suppression of full closure until the very end, and because the intensity of expectation differs in places, we need to distinguish between various strengths of cadential signification. I shall refer to three kinds of closure that are operative in the syntagmatic chain: local, intermediate, and global. A local close articulates the smallest meaningful units of the piece. These usually occur within the phrase or on the level of the phrase. A syntactical V-I progression is required (as for the global close), although the specific voice-leading situation remains flexible. An intermediate close nests one or more local closes by controlling a phrase or multiple phrase (section). The- oretically, all intermediate closes are local ones as well, although their longer term function confers on them a higher status than local ones. A global close secures closure for the entire piece. As a rule, there is only one such close in the piece; all others are necessarily subservient to this most decisive one. A global close also nests both local and intermediate closes, but transcends these in terms of its large-scale structural function. The succession local-intermediate-global provides a hierarchy for defining closural signification for each prelude.

Examination of Prelude 22's structural procedure within the framework of this hierarchy enables us to incorporate the naive listener's intuitions into a more formal scheme. Measure 8 constitutes a local close, indeed an understated one, for although the diminished seventh (but dominant functioning) chord in

















Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22 Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22 Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22 Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22 Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22 Example 1. Progression by fifths in mm. 23-24 of Prelude 22

V V V V V V I I I I I I I I I I I I

I X I X I X I X I X I X

that measure is the primary or referential sonority, it is so

weakly represented that the very sense of a local close-already low in the abstract hierarchy of closes-is rhetorically under- mined. Between m. 16 and m. 17, there is no formal close, and we would not punctuate the piece here were it not for the fact that the passage in m. 17 returns in m. 25. What is defined here, by its absence, is an intermediate close. By far the most appeal- ing violation of cadential tendencies is in mm. 23-25, where the

preparation for an authentic cadence-outlined as a series of descending fifths in the bass line (see Ex. 1)-is thwarted and

replaced by a return to familiar material (the hypothetical com-

pletion is given in brackets). The cadence promised, but not delivered, also falls into our intermediate category, since it, too, would have closed a section of the piece.22 Finally, the two- measure stock cadential phrase in mm. 40-41 secures global closure. It answers to all the suppressed and/or understated closes encountered earlier in the piece, and it offers the most decisive completion of the structural process.

22The other possibility for resolving the dominant seventh chord at the end of bar 24 is to move to the submediant. Whether the resolution is to the tonic or to the submediant, the point remains that the gesture of the passage promises a

cadence, which in this case is withheld.




































It should by now be clear that the phenomenon of closure is as dependent on specific closes that occur in the piece as it is on closes that do not occur. The effect of a promised cadence is in some ways comparable to that of an actual cadence. The mechanism of closure subsumes both functions, since both absence and presence contribute equally to the dynamic quality of the piece. It will also have emerged that there are invariant factors that must be addressed by any analysis of closure. A comparison of the foregoing commentary on Prelude 22 with E. T. A. Hoffmann's comments quoted earlier makes this clear. Both reveal a concern for expectations generated by musical gestures; both seek to explain an utterance defined by syntax; and both read the sense of the piece as a whole with implicit reference to closure.

If Prelude 22 thereby confirms closure as a meaningful concept, then it is necessary to generate certain schema for analyz- ing closure. In what follows, I shall switch to a more technical mode of discourse and consider the specific musical processes that affect formal expression and therefore generate closure.

Prelude 1: Ideal Closure

Because Prelude 1 is so brief, and because it projects a single, unified gesture, closural effects do not intrude on its surface. Unlike the case of Prelude 22, closure is not foregrounded here. Rather, it enhances a lucid rhetorical process which takes the form of the archetypal nineteenth-century formal gesture: a set of preparatory processes culminate in a high point and then dissolve in a relatively brief resolution. The specific closes that define this gesture are a global close in mm. 28-29, an intermediate close in m. 8, and several local closes (depending on how one segments the piece), perhaps the most important being those in mm. 8-9 and mm. 24-25. Within the overall gesture, three subsidiary gestures, shaped by these closes, map out the

dynamic trajectory of the piece. The first (mm. 1-8) has the character of an opening out from a point of stability to one of


























I F I F I F I F I F I F


relative instability. The second (mm. 9-24) is considerably longer, beginning as before-mm. 1 and 9 are equivalent-and leading, by a series of shortened entries composed out in various dimensions, to a high point in m. 21. This turning point engineers a swift descent to the structural dominant in m. 24, the whole expressing, first, harmonic instability, and second, a tro- pism for the tonic. The third gesture (mm. 25-33) resolves the harmonic ambiguities of the second phrase, stabilizes the tonic, and completes an aspect of motivic interplay initiated in the first phrase (we shall return to this motivic process presently). These three gestures may now be placed in a general formal scheme that operates in many of the Opus 28 Preludes; I shall refer to this as the Basic Model (see Table 1).






Table 1. Basic Formal Model of Chopin's Preludes, Opus 28

Phrases Phrase 1 2 ... n-1 Phrasen

Formal Statement Restatement Closing area function with extension

leading to high point

Melodic 3-2 3-2 3 - 2- function

Harmonic I-V I-V I - V-I function (or X)

Formal Y 1.5Y to 3Y Y proportion




































A few words of explanation about the Basic Model are in order. The total number of phrases (or "gestures") varies from prelude to prelude; the model only fixes the opening and closing phrases, leaving a flexible middle phrase (or set of phrases),






hence the abstraction "phrase 2 ... phrase n-1." The invariant factor is the harmonic function of each phrase. Phrase l's function is an opening out expressed in the form of a I-V progression. The middle phrases often begin by retracing some of the initial steps, but their main function is to intensify the harmonic motion by postponing the arrival of the tonic (hence the unknown "X" in the model). Note that the melodic and harmonic functions indicated in Table 1 are abstracted from various idiomatic voice-leading situations. In other words, it is not always the case that scale degrees and harmonies given in the Basic Model occur, but rather that their functions are represented. (For example, 3 embraces the class of melodic degrees for which either 5 or 8 could be substituted; similarly, V7, VII, or VII could be substitutes for V). Phrase N completes the structural motion by securing global closure. The category "Formal proportion" draws attention to the relative lengths of phrases. In general, the outer phrases are comparable in length, although the last phrase is sometimes slightly shorter than the first. The main fluctuation in the model is in the length of the middle phrases, which varies from roughly 11/2 to three times the length of the opening phrase.23

Implicit in the Basic Model is a prescribed closural mechanism. Phrase 1 ends in either a local close or an intermediate one, depending on the proportions of the piece. The global close either introduces or occurs within phrase N. Local closes occur in all three phrases. In Prelude 1, the half-close in m. 8 is an intermediate close because it marks off the first of three ges-

23The Basic Model does not occur in all the preludes in this collection, nor does it always maintain the form described in Table 1. But there is enough consistency in its use to justify the explanatory power ascribed to it (see, especially, Preludes 6, 9, 13, 17, and 20). There are, of course, more traditional ways of describing the formal process in these preludes. One way is to speak in terms of antecedent and consequent phrases; many of the preludes would then be seen to feature expanded consequents. I have opted for the Basic Model because it makes explicit the functions (melodic, harmonic, and proportional) that define a given prelude in a way that the antecedent-consequent grid does not.

















Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1 Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1 Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1 Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1 Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1 Example 2. Melodic contour of Prelude 1

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

Phrase 1

Phrase 2

f 0 G J J r r fr r r ,

A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "

4- al 7J etr # of j cL


A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "



A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "



A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "



A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "



A -UZLL.13

'9 g n JT ^, , "^ z "


A 25 A 25 A 25 A 25 A 25 A 25 29-34 29-34 29-34 29-34 29-34 29-34

Phrase 3 Phrase 3 Phrase 3 Phrase 3 Phrase 3 Phrase 3

tures that comprise the piece. The close in mm. 28-29 is a global one for structural-melodic rather than structural- harmonic reasons (this point is taken up in note 24 below). Lo- cal closes occur in mm. 8-9 and 24-25 to seal the joints between gestures 1 and 2, and between gestures 2 and 3.

It is in the execution of global closure, however, that this prelude is unique, and nowhere is this better revealed than in the melodic process (see Ex. 2). In phrase 1, a diatonic idea (5- 6) and its inversion (3-2) are juxtaposed to provide an initial premise, while at the same time establishing a potential con- flict. Phrase 2 expands this idea by the addition of chromatic sub-units to lead to the high point, marked by an arrow in Ex-

ample 2 (m. 15 is the special case of the momentary intrusion of the inverted form of the idea). Once the high point is reached, it is the inverted form that releases the tension. The drama of

phrase 3 thus grows organically out of the action in phrases 1 and 2. Both prime (5-6) and inversion (3-2) are juxtaposed in





















a spectacular balancing procedure in this third phrase. Stated differently, the closing melodic profile, 5-6-3-2 (mm. 25- 28), temporally compresses the melodic process of phrases 1 and 2 before supplying the crucial 1 in m. 29. In retrospect, we see that what Chopin presents us with at the beginning of this prelude is its imminent closure or, to stretch a metaphor, the fact of the prelude's mortality.24

24This analysis concentrates on melody because that dimension, although by no means independent, is complete, and can therefore be relied on to map out the dominant course of the prelude. The harmonic dimension is no less functional, however. In particular, my analysis notes a displacement between the global melodic resolution in m. 29 and the global harmonic one in m. 25. Felix Salzer, in Structural Hearing: Tonal Coherence in Music (New York: Dover, 1962), Fig. 492, analyzes this prelude, placing the global resolution of the harmony in bar 25; that of the melody, though occurring later according to his graph, is unspecified, but it surely could not be m. 34 as his graph suggests. Allen Forte and Steven Gilbert also cite this prelude as an instance of interrup-











e -i d r r' 11 e -i d r r' 11 e -i d r r' 11 e -i d r r' 11 e -i d r r' 11 e -i d r r' 11

5 r-- I I 5 r-- I I 5 r-- I I 5 r-- I I 5 r-- I I 5 r-- I I


The workings of closure in Prelude 1 also endow it with a different musical utterance from that of Prelude 22. Recall that in Prelude 22, closure was foregrounded because the weight of its modus operandi was tilted, by virtue of rhetorical exaggera- tion (in the form of insistent repetition and rhythmic syncopation), in the direction of the music's utterance, rather than its

syntax. In Prelude 1 on the other hand structural procedures exert a tighter control on utterance, yielding a near-perfect balance between the syntactic and semantic domains. And it is within the mechanism of closure that this conceptual balance is most readily perceived.

Preludes 3 and 13: The Subdominant as Signifier of Closure

Just as Bach's preludes, by the uniformity of their surface

designs, set the underlying harmonic motion in relief, so some of Chopin's preludes, by their uniform surfaces, elevate the harmonic mode to a position of prominence among the works' dimensions. And wherever the harmonic mode is thus fore-

grounded, the subdominant (or subdominant-functioning) chord assumes primary responsibility for the articulation of closure. Preludes 3 and 13 illustrate this well.

The closural mechanism in Prelude 3 may be understood with reference to the Basic Model, which it modifies somewhat:

introduction, mm. 1-2; phrase 1, mm. 3-11; phrase 2, mm.

12-27; coda, mm. 28-end. An intermediate close is first signalled by the usual half cadence in m. 8. In this case, however, the close is immediately repeated to "correct" the previously tonicized dominant chord, thus lowering slightly its significance within the hierarchy of closes. The effect of this preliminary cadence pales, however, in comparison with the subsequent toni-

tion. Because theirs is a background graph, however, they note no displacement between melody and harmony (see Allen Forte and Steven E. Gilbert, Introduction to Schenkerian Analysis [New York: W. W. Norton, 1982], 201-

2).











2).











2).











2).











2).











2).

cization and prolongation of the subdominant (mm. 16-23). Only in retrospect do we learn that although this tonicization is

necessarily accomplished by a local close, its function belongs to the global level. This is because within the macrostructure, the subdominant (mm. 18-23), in literal conjunction with the dominant (mm. 24-25), engineers the global cause of the prelude (mm. 25-26). Here again we have another example of the distinction between cadence and closure: the actual cadence occurs in mm. 25-26, but the elements of closure embrace the extensive pre-cadential tonicization of the subdominant.

Because of its clearly articulated distinction between a formal "frame" (mm. 1-2 and 28-end) and its "contents" (mm. 3-27), Prelude 3 raises pertinent questions about closure.25 The prelude begins with a two-measure vamp on the tonic which stands apart from the main process initiated in m. 3. Al-

though these bars contain the seeds of the thematic process in the prelude, they are not introductory in the sense of prophesy- ing harmonic-structural procedure.26 Rather, they function as

pacesetters, easily dispensable as far as the essential structural

procedure is concerned.27 That is why I have described them as

part of a "frame." Once global closure is attained in mm. 25-

27, the other portion of the frame is activated (mm. 28-end). It is with regard to this frame-contents grid that the conceptual

25Cf. Edward Cone's distinction between the "internal" and "external" en- vironments of a musical composition in Musical Form and Musical Perform- ance, 14-16.

26The adumbration of the main theme in the accompaniment figuration of the opening bars is a point made by Carl Schachter in his analysis of the rhythmic structure of this prelude ("Rhythm and Linear Analysis: Durational Re- duction," The Music Forum 5 [1980]: 202-10). Forte and Gilbert also circle the relevant notes of the main theme in their analysis of mm. 1-11 of the piece (Introduction to Schenkerian Analysis, 203).

27This interpretation of the process of the piece has been influenced by Schenker's succinct middleground reduction, where the kopfton is located in m. 5, while the final descent is completed by m. 27 (Heinrich Schenker, Free Composition, trans. E. Oster [New York: Longmann, 1979], Fig. 76/2).

























































distinction between structure and rhetoric takes on particular significance. Each portion of the frame serves a purely rhetorical function, while their contents develop structural procedure. The frame is static, while its contents are dynamic. Closure, then, is primarily a function of the contents, not the frame, a function of structure, not of rhetoric. And this is an important distinction, for it provides yet another illustration of the differ- ence between the mechanism of closure and the familiar concept of coda. The coda of this prelude (mm. 28-end) has little to do with the actual mechanism of closure except by providing it with a normative durational balance.28

Prelude 13 provides another vivid illustration of the subdominant as signifier of closure. Its first twenty measures, which form a closed tonal unit, comprise two phrases (mm. 1-8 and 9-20) in which the structural functions of the Basic Model are compressed. Phrase 1 (mm. 1-8) opens out on to the usual dominant, ending with an intermediate close. Phrase 2 (mm. 9- 20) repeats, with slight modifications, the first four measures- mm. 9-12 are equivalent to mm. 1-4--and then introduces the crucial > 7 (Et in mm. 13-14), which effects a tonicization of the subdominant. A further applied dominant tonicizes the super- tonic in m. 16, thereby prolonging the "subdominant area" of mm. 13-16. The global close follows in mm. 17-18. As with Prelude 3, the subdominant functions in literal conjunction with the dominant to signify closure.

Although mm. 1-20 can be understood with respect to the Basic Model, the other sections of the prelude (mm. 21-28 and mm. 29-end) cannot, either individually or summarily. This is because, having established a self-contained opening section in which no tonal tensions are left unresolved (mm. 1-20), the

28It would be wrong to infer from this analysis a disjunction between frame and contents. Not only are they not disjunct with each other, but they are inte-

grated thematically. This does not alter their gestural functions, however. Note also how the piece continues after the completion of the structural process.


























prelude is unable to provide a raison d'etre for the middle section (mm. 21-28), except as provider of thematic contrast and a semblance of harmonic activity (this takes the form of a two- bar sequence, mm. 21-22 and 23-24). The effect of this middle section on the reprise (mm. 29-end) is most significant with respect to closure. Chopin returns to the closing passage of the first section (mm. 13-20), promising implicitly to transform that passage in order to secure global closure. This is because non-contiguous repetition necessarily confers on the earlier passage the status of either a local close or an intermediate one. The composer adopts a fairly simple solution: he adds an oblig- atory melodic line above the previous passage (compare mm. 29-36 with mm. 13-20), achieving global closure in mm. 33- 34 and emphasizing it, as before, in mm. 35-36. But that is not the end of the story, for the prelude's tonal redundancy has apparently spilled over, calling for a rhetorical event to contain it. The necessary poetic sense is injected into the last two measures by way of an inconclusive tonic chord, that is, the tonic scored with 3 in the upper voice, creating the so-called poetic third effect (see also Preludes 3, 5, 11, 15 and 19).

Prelude 23: Local Closure Versus Global Closure

Because of the extraordinary way in which Prelude 23 ends, we are obliged to deal first with the question of global closure; we may then turn to the local level, which is itself remarkable in its saturation with closural tendencies.

Global closure can be followed in the harmonic synopsis given in Example 3. The overall progression we recognize immediately as a cadential progression; the prelude may therefore be heard simply as an expanded cadence in F major. As with Preludes 3 and 13, the subdominant plays an important role in the articulation of closure, for it is the chord that flattens harmonic orientation in mm. 12-13 to signal home-going. This signalling property of mm. 12-13 is, however, of a different order from that which we encountered in Preludes 3 and 13. In






















Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23 Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23 Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23 Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23 Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23 Example 3. Synopsis of harmonic structure of Prelude 23

meas. 1 5 meas. 1 5 meas. 1 5 meas. 1 5 meas. 1 5 meas. 1 5 13 16 17

2 1

13 16 17

2 1

13 16 17

2 1

13 16 17

2 1

13 16 17

2 1

13 16 17

2 1

I V I - IV V-- I I V I - IV V-- I I V I - IV V-- I I V I - IV V-- I I V I - IV V-- I I V I - IV V-- I

this context, the subdominant is "non-transferrable," for al-

though it retains an invariant intervallic identity, none of its other occurrences have the same closing tendency as this one. The point can be understood by comparing mm. 12-13 with two functionally analogous moments: mm. 8-9 and mm. 21- 22. Measures 12-13 most obviously echo mm. 8-9, where , 7 was added to a previously tonicized dominant, C, to make it diatonic to the home key, F. Or, to describe it the other way around and in simpler terms, mm. 8-9 are prophetic of mm. 12-13. Measures 8-9, however do not carry the same closural

tendency as mm. 12-13, first, because they are part of a larger I-V-I progression spanning the first nine measures, and second, because within the macrostructure, mm. 12-13 are retro-

spectively perceived as having a more decisive closural function. More astonishing is the nonparallel between mm. 12 and 21. Whereas in m. 12 the Fb7 chord functioned as an applied dominant to the subdominant (Bl ) in m. 13, the same chord in m. 21 functions, by virtue of the approach to it and its terminal

position, as the tonic (with 1 7) in the home key, F. The identity of the F67 sonority is, in other words, transferrable, but not its

syntactical property. The effect of this transfer on global closure is remarkable: the chord that signalled home-going in mm.































12-13 acquires a forced contextual stability at the end of the

prelude. As the terminal sonority, it pushes the mechanism of closure outwards only to nullify it. In this it differs from the other preludes we have looked at, where closural indicators occur within the closed tonal frame and never at the outer extrem- ity.29

While global closure in Prelude 23 thus reaches beyond itself, local closure is carefully contained and executed with such conciseness and with so much emphasis that it compensates for the disturbance in the global procedure. Each phrase of the

prelude has an inherent closing tendency, which may be heard

typically in the 3-2-i and accompanying I-V-I progression of the first four measures. A voice-leading graph of these measures (Ex. 4) shows that the structural-melodic descent initiated in m. 2 (3-2) is repeated in rhythmic diminution in m. 3 and brought to full closure on the downbeat of m. 4. The 3-2-i

pattern is, of course, the archetypal closing gesture, and it is

29Because of the radical nature of this ending, there is a temptation to mod- ernize Chopin and describe it as an instance of "anti-closure" (Smith, Poetic Closure, 234-240).





































Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23 Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23 Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23 Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23 Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23 Example 4. Voice leading in mm. 1-4 of Prelude 23

meas. 1 2

n .A

meas. 1 2

n .A

meas. 1 2

n .A

meas. 1 2

n .A

meas. 1 2

n .A

meas. 1 2

n .A

3 3 3 3 3 3

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

A A 3 A

3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1

4 .- - -.- - J J J J =

-

6 4

-

6 4

-

6 4

-

6 4

-

6 4

-

6 4

5 7 3 5 7 3 5 7 3 5 7 3 5 7 3 5 7 3

I I r I rIV I- V7-I I -V7 1I






V V V V V V

heard in mm. 1-4 as a motivic unit as well as a larger, structural one.30

Although the closural tendency of melody in Example 4 is

easily heard, the attendant voice-leading processes are rather

complex, and demand further explication of their inner work-

ings. The foreground of mm. 1-4 conceals a set of closural lines

30I have isolated mm. 1-4 of this prelude for analysis because they com-

plete a progression in the home key; this makes the passage segmentable. It

may be argued that the progression is really from F major to its dominant, C, in m. 5, and therefore that the analysis must be carried on to the downbeat of m. 5. But if segmentation is based on such progressions, then one might argue that the return to the tonic in m. 9 makes of the first nine measures a I-V-I progression. And we could continue to isolate the elements of the global progression by following such a method. Ultimately, it is the single-mindedness of the

large-scale harmonic progression that strikes us most forcibly. I have isolated the first four measures, therefore, simply to show a slice of this indivisible progression.














































that unfold at different paces. Because the r.h. of m. 1 seems concerned with passage work or figuration, we locate the first structural pitch (Schenker's kopfton) in the "tenor" voice, A3. But, as so often happens in Chopin, the r.h. part is not mere figuration. By the downbeat of m. 4, the repeated and stressed A's in the r.h. of mm. 3 and 4 have begun to usurp the priority of the l.h. voice. On one level, then-here an implied middleground-the pitch A, arrived at from a descent through C(5) and Bbl(4) (mm. 1-2) is prolonged through its upper neighbor- note, Bbl, from the downbeat of m. 3 to that of m. 4, all this unfolding while the tenor delivers the archetypal 3-2-1 closing gesture.

The role of registral transfer adds another dimension to these voice-leading events. The goal of the first 3-2 descent in m. 2 would seem to be the bass F on the downbeat of m. 3 (by octave displacement). The two diminutive forms of this descent (mm. 3 and 4) can then be explained similarly. But the direction











w w -\~~I w w -\~~I w w -\~~I w w -\~~I w w -\~~I w w -\~~I

w w w w w w

I I I I I I

N N

P f N N

P f N N

P f N N

P f N N

P f N N

P f


of G(2) in m. 2 could just as plausibly be the A(3) on the downbeat of m. 3 (r.h.), also by octave transference, rather than F(i). G(2) would then be heard as a neighbor note to A. The main beats of m. 3 (counting in quarter notes) can therefore be heard as prolonging A, first in the r.h., then by a shift of register in the l.h., and so on. The net effect of all this is a subtle expression of various closing lines, veiling the distinction between melody and accompaniment.31 This material (mm. 1-4) is repeated in transposed form in mm. 5-11, in its original form in mm. 9-12, and again in mm. 18-20, this last extending the number of 3-2- gestures from three to five, thereby heightening their rhetorical effect. Through the repetition, coordinated with the accessible but unique global progression (Ex. 3), Chopin makes of this prelude a subtle essay in closure.






Prelude 4: Disjunction Caused by Formal Closure

In Prelude 4, the formality of closure is projected in such a way that the music's utterance (or rhetorical dimension) is not just elevated above, but is dislodged from its syntactic counter- part. This process is best understood in reference to the formal process enshrined in the Basic Model. There are two large phrases, mm. 1-12 and mm. 13-25. The first phrase ends in the usual intermediate close, while the second takes the initial

premises of the first phrase, intensifies them through an expressive high point in mm. 16-17, and leads to global closure in mm. 24-25.

Evidence for the formality of closure may be found among the events of the last three measures. First, the eighth-note motion that has been present throughout the prelude stops, but does not conclude, in m. 23; it is followed by a fermata over a half rest. Then, a V-I cadential progression (complete with a

31Abraham describes this distinction as "significant line" and defines it as

"something between melody and passage-work, but originating in the embroi-

dery of a harmonic background" (Chopin's Musical Style, p. 72).




































4-3 suspension) secures global closure. Now, Chopin need not have introduced these "physical" dimensions-texture, tempo/ pulse, and duration-in order to secure closure (witness the effect of my recomposition of mm. 23-25 in Example 5). But by thus arresting the motion in the manner of Prelude 22, he presents the listener with a palpable sign that announces closure.

Example 5. Recomposition of mm. 22-25 of Prelude 4

-l o I I II I I I



-l o I I II I I I



-l o I I II I I I



-l o I I II I I I



-l o I I II I I I



-l o I I II I I I

smorz. - - .

I) r z -- -- " 2 L: L.... . ' I-E):a, ? . I F .-p. smorz. - - .





I) r z -- -- " 2 L: L.... . ' I-E):a, ? . I F .-p. ) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F

It is ironic, however, that the conventional cadence with which the piece ends is no more assuring of stability than the hypothetical completion offered in Example 5. Partly, it is because m. 23 is a decidedly "hopeless" measure, one that ac- knowledges its powerlessness to close the piece. Measures 24- 25 are therefore "added on" to fulfill a syntactic function. What has happened in this closing section, then, is that by introducing a stock cadential figure in the last two measures, Chopin creates a gestural discontinuity on the surface of the piece while main- taining a syntactic continuity in the background. The logic of utterance is thus dislodged from that of syntax.

Prelude 2: The Disintegration of Global Closure

In striking contrast to Prelude 4's single, overall gesture, Prelude 2 presents a highly fragmented musical discourse in which the effect of local closure is maximized, while global clo-

) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F




) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F




) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F




) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F




) ! _ _ r I I I Ir F





sure is treated as an imposition from without, a sort of disso- nant appendage to the prelude. The legitimacy of global closure is attacked in great style, leaving in its wake a functionally unstable piece in which closure is made almost redundant.

Because of the complexity of the harmonic language of this prelude, we need to rehearse one preliminary issue before looking at the closural mechanism. The one truth that has emerged from the numerous attempts to explain the logic of this prelude is the elusiveness of its tonal structure.32 In place of a straightforward harmonic progression in A minor-indeed the sort of expression of key that we have seen in each of the preludes examined so far-Chopin presents us with a set of harmonic fragments. As Rose Rosengard Subotnik has shown, the prelude may be heard as a set of discrete subuniverses related only by contiguity.33

The approach to closure follows from the fragmentary nature of the discourse. The first seven measures comprise a progression in G major, notable for its beginning in medias res, and concluding with a contextually stable cadence in mm. 5-6. This phrase constitutes a fragment because it offers only a portion of a paradigmatic progression in G major. Then the phrase is transposed up a fifth beginning in m. 8. This next fragment, however, revises the first fragment's precedent regarding closure, offering melodic closure in m. 11 but not harmonic clo-

320f particular relevance to the present study are: Lonard B. Meyer, Emo- tion and Meaning in Music (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956), 93- 97; Rose Rosengard Subotnik, "Romantic Music as Post-Kantian Critique: Classicism, Romanticism, and the Concept of the Semiotic Universe," in

Kingsley Price, ed., On Criticising Music (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univer-

sity Press, 1981), 87-95; and Lawrence Kramer, "Romantic Meaning in Chop- in's Prelude in A minor," 19th-Century Music 9/2 (Fall 1985): 145-155. Kra- mer's essay unfortunately appeared after the research for mine was completed.

33"(Prelude No. 2) projects the sense of being a harmonic fragment, a sense that is in one way confirmed by its extreme brevity, which seems to acknowl-

edge renunciation of any large-scale constructive force inherent in tonality" (Subotnik, "Romantic Music as Post-Kantian Critique," 92).









































sure. This is the first sign that the melodic and harmonic dimensions may not be functioning synchronically in this prelude. The dislocation soon proves to have strong tendencies, for beginning in m. 11, the two hands begin to lose themselves in ap- parent soliloquy, whose point of arrival (but not goal) is the retrospectively-perceived dominant-functioning harmony reached in m. 15 and prolonged through mm. 18-19. It is a mighty retrospective effort here, for when the melody reenters in m. 14, it offers no concessions for a reconciliation between melody and harmony. Instead, it proclaims its own indepen- dence by entering on the second beat of the measure (instead of the first as before), and then losing itself in a semiprivate, quasi- improvisatory world (mm. 17-21). By the second beat of m. 21, we have reached the limits of this awry procedure. Chopin now has to perform an incredible rescue operation in order to salvage what is left of a "Prelude in A minor." His solution is as incredible as it is brutal: he inserts a five-chord progression (mm. 21-23) in which E, the dominant, is first tonicized then immediately reread as dominant seventh in A, leading to the tonic of A minor.

It is clear that closure in this prelude takes a very unusual course. Seen in terms of a harmonic-melodic referential axis, the prelude may be said to proceed from synchronicity in the first phrase (mm. 5-7), through a displacement at the end of the second phrase (m. 11), through independent unfoldings within the two dimensions in the third phrase (mm. 12-21), and finally, to an overtly formal final close (mm. 22-23). The final close, while apparently reconciling the melodic and harmonic processes, sets itself apart from the prevailing utterance of the piece by virtue of its "excessive rightness." The formality of the final cadence makes it practically disjunct with the prevailing process. The stability guaranteed by a global close is threatened to the point of disintegration, and the internal mechanisms of the piece lead in different directions from the outer, tonality-oriented one. The last three measures, to put it












plainly, do not follow from the piece, making of closure a non- issue.

It is therefore not just the issue of tonality as controlling factor that is under siege in this prelude, but the attendant issue of closure as well. And it is for reasons such as these that I find Schenker's analysis of the prelude especially problematic.34 Schenker postulates E as V of A minor from the beginning of the piece. Yet the course followed by E is not oriented to the final A in view of the fragmentary nature of the musical discourse. Schenker also extracts a 5-4-3-2-1- structural motion from the "melody." Here too, the representation of 4 (an inner voice) and 3 (a neighbor note) are rather obscure. Such a reading rides roughshod over those very aspects of closure that I have argued are important to the effect and identity of this piece.35

Prelude 6: A Summary Example

Prelude 6 exemplifies many of the aspects of closure we have been discussing in this essay. It may therefore serve as a summary example.

In formal organization the prelude is paradigmatic with re-

spect to the Basic Model; closure may therefore be understood within the framework of that model. There are three phrases: mm. 1-8, 9-22, and 22-26 (m. 22 serves a double function as the conclusion of phrase 2 and the beginning of phrase 3). Phrase 1 presents an extended idea, an initial premise. This is then elaborated in phrase 2, whose other function is to with- hold the tonic. Phrase 3 restores and concludes the initial premises. Phrase 1 concludes with the usual half cadence that func-

34Schenker, Free Composition, p. 89 and Figure 110a3. 35The view of this prelude developed by both Subotnik and Kramer (see

note 32) is not dissimilar to the one developed here. In "Romantic Meaning" Kramer speaks of an "antithesis" between melody and harmony (p. 148), of a

"feeling of forced termination" (p. 148), and of "dialectical reversal" replacing "symmetrical resolution as the dynamic principle of the music" (p. 150).














































tions as an intermediate close. The progression that tonicizes the Neapolitan in mm. 11-12 is of local significance only, serv- ing to introduce a harmonic plateau. The global close is the V-I succession in mm. 21-22.

As in Prelude 22, the mechanism of closure is foregrounded in this prelude, but where Prelude 22 presents, in near- exaggerated fashion, the matter of avoidance of closure, thereby making the rhetorical mode dominant, Prelude 6 essays its course with a balance between the rhetorical and syntactical modes. Phrase 1 offers a gestural microcosm for the prelude, since its three utterances-mm. 1-2, 3-4, and 5-8- grow in intensity before subsiding on the dominant in m. 8. Within the tonally static environment of utterances 1 and 2-an environment, that is, in which the issue of closure is suppressed-a pair of waves propels the dynamic motion until the r.h. takes the melody and leads the way to the intermediate close.36 Another way of putting this is to say that closural tendencies are first minimized and then gradually made explicit in this opening phrase.

In phrase 2, more prominence is given to closure. Part of the phrase's function of suppressing the tonic is fulfilled by a striking tonicization of the Neapolitan in mm. 11-12. In addition to the local close that engineers this tonicization, there is, in the preparation for the reprise (m. 15 following), considerable emphasis on closure, although there are no further cadences within this section until the decisive one in mm. 21-22. We might describe the process in the latter part of phrase 2 as closure by association (with earlier events). First, in m. 15 (l.h.), a melodic segment from m. 7 returns. By virtue of its earlier function (i.e. leading to an intermediate close), this segment carries a closural association. Second, the segment is repeated in m. 16, thereby heightening the listener's expectation for change

36For further explication of this process, see Charles Burkhart, "The Poly- phonic Melodic Line of Chopin's B minor Prelude," in Thomas Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28 (New York: Norton, 1973), 80-88.






















and ultimate closure. Measures 17-18 become all the more significant for withholding a close by means of a deceptive cadence. The entire process from mm. 15-17 is resumed in mm. 19-21, leading this time to a cadence in mm. 21-22, thus grounding the work securely by means of the only authentic cadence in the prelude. The dynamic of this second phrase is therefore best heard within the framework of rhetorical repeti- tions and suppressed syntax.

Phrase 3 functions more decisively than an ordinary coda by generously amplifying the sense of global closure attained in mm. 21-22. In other words, it neutralizes earlier tensions by means of a functional tonal stasis that not only recalls the opening of the prelude, but also serves to balance out the wide- ranging activity in the second phrase. Questions of balance, of course, speak less to the syntactic category than to the rhetorical, and it is not surprising that such questions are made an issue of in this third phrase. After all, the syntactical dimension has already exerted its influence in earlier portions of the prelude, leaving the conclusion to bring a notional equilibrium to this play of dimensions.

Conclusion

It is time for my global close. This essay has drawn attention to various methods of closure in Chopin's Preludes as the first step in a larger study of closure in nineteenth-century music. The closural mechanism, I have argued, acts as a reliable indicator of a composition's dynamic motion or "driving force"; it can therefore provide a useful explanatory tool for an aspect of this music that remains under-explained. Certainly, the specific methods encountered here can be found in much other music of Chopin. They can also serve as a point of departure for investi- gating closural methods in Schumann, Liszt, Bruckner,



Conclusion




Conclusion




Conclusion




Conclusion




Conclusion


Wagner, and Mahler, to name only those composers in whose works I have informally studied such methods. Although the theoretical foundations of a proper theory of closure remain to be formalized, I believe that the approach developed here can go a long way towards supplying some of its fundamental tenets. Of particular relevance to that theory are three proposi- tions: (1) the syntax-semantics (or structure-utterance, or structure-rhetoric) grid developed by analogy with the analysis of poetry; (2) the constraints posed by formal models such as the Basic Model; and (3) the contextuality of closure-determining dimensions (i.e. allowing for the possibility of foregrounding different dimensional modes at different points in the musical discourse).

If it is true that nineteenth-century composers invest the ending of a work (and with it the larger mechanism of closure) with particular significance, and if Chopin's example is suf- ficiently persuasive, then I believe that one way forward in our attempts to understand this vast and richly ambiguous period of music history is to take advantage of the extensive research on narrative and poetic endings that literary theory has produced, and selectively apply some of its more powerful tenets to music. The implicit assumption for the music analyst is that the questions raised by nineteenth-century musical structure are not only musical, but "literary" as well. Franz Liszt captured this literary-poetic sense when he wrote that Chopin's Preludes are "not merely . . . introductions to other morceaux-they are

preludes instinct with poesy, analogous to those of another great contemporary poet, who cradles the soul in golden dreams, and elevates it to the regions of the ideal."37
















37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3. 37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3. 37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3. 37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3. 37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3. 37Quoted in Higgins, ed., Chopin, Preludes, Op. 28, 92-3.

Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28

Documents

Transcript of Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28