Week #3 - Ah, there's the lightbulb! Hegel, Kant, Sonata No.1 & The Age of Enlightenment...
Playlist:
Pretty much everything from the last list...
Ives, Janacek, and Scriabin basically on repeat while writing/analyzing!
Sigur Ros - Takk, ( ), Agaetis Byrjun
Beethoven - Piano Sonata No.1
Orchestra Pieces etc...
On Monday we were joined by Jonathan Cohen, distinguished professor of philosophy, to talk about the connection between Beethoven and the philosophy of the time and its effect on the composer. One of the first statements Cohen made was that Beethoven possibly misunderstood philosophy. Beethoven was a student of philosophy, he studied it when he went to Bonn university. There is a certain mystique about Beethoven, a great mind with revolutionary ideas, and music. But as I read more about his life, about his emotions, troubles, general living situation I feel as if Beethoven is becoming more humanized to my perspective. Society always throws some sort of greatness onto celebrities or people who stand out of the crowd. Who couldn't over exaggerate the writer of the great nine symphonies. Much like any composer or person, the more one gains knowledge of them the more real they become.
Cohen began with the major Enlightenment thinkers to set the stage and the later connections. Hegel came first with the idea he stole from Schelling of Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis. With the thesis an idea is presented or thought or whatever. Then at one point we will go against this thought to have the antithesis. I will get to the musical connection in a second but first I would like to talk a little about the idea of This Here Now. All three are different and were thought to be very specific, through Hegel they became abstract. This Here Now is basically being in the moment completely where specificity becomes abstraction and vise versa. This is basically what the synthesis is. It hit me in class that basically this process can be placed on anything, situations, ideas, anything! It seems like it fits the idea of learning to a T. In my perspective when one learns something they agree with its idea, but then as the brain processes it the idea progresses to the point of disagreement. After some time and full understanding is gained will the person reach the synthesis where both sides are fully understood. Perspective can still be made, but to understand both sides of anything at the same time is true understanding.
And now for the connection! Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis is to Exposition, Development, Recapitulation. At first I wanted to believe this idea as much as possible it seems like the Hegelian Dialect fits the Sonata form perfectly, or does it! Exposition is the thesis the presentation of the main themes to set the rest of the work. Development tends to stray from its counterpart of Antithesis. The Antithesis is the opposite of the thesis something that is diametrically opposed. I do not feel as if the Development is opposed to the Exposition, it has more or less changed, but has changed with connection. The degree of change matters in the key signatures used in the Development. Yes, there has to be modulation, there has to be change in the development, there just can't be two Expositions! However, through modulation we have scale degrees that connect to the new key. Depending on the two keys the relationship can be close or far. Even though there is change in the new key both keys are connected but the scale degrees they both share. Where is the opposition in that!? The Synthesis does work with Recapitulation but it still doesn't embody the true meaning of both ideas. The Recapitulation would have to have a balance of the Exposition and the Development. So, then I pose the question how does this correlation work? For all intents and purposes it does fit the form in ways but strays after the Exposition. Very interesting connection, especially for the time period, but I question it.
Next, we had Kant and his disagreement with Hume. Kant said that Causation is built like a sandwich in-between Apriori and Aposterior. To Hume it was cause the effect and the after effect, to Kant it was the cause effect and after effect are all one process together as one. After this point there was the debate of Freedom vs. Determinism and how causation leaves no room for freedom. I got confused here, I guess with two structured events such as the cause then the effect and the after effect it is so structured that there can't be any freedom involved it is just those events. Having all those processes as one unified process leaves more room for freedom of other things to happen. With that thought I think of the symphonies and how each of them are one one unified concept with many entities within them.
Last class on Wednesday we looked at Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 1. Here Beethoven is in a way Kant-ian by using motifs instead of full themes, transitory themes instead of just a normal theme. In the first movement it is incredible how he skirts normal form. The first theme uses more motifs than true melodies. It dances upwards and doesn't hold a full melody but rather uses foreshorten phrases the entire way through. The second theme is a transitional theme that is chromatic. The second theme is something that would be found in the development, but no Beethoven uses it in the Exposition to create drama and tension at the same time. In this first movement alone some 40 sforzandos are used along with accents off the beat to create a sense of aggression throughout the whole piece which makes the rhythm the main focus. The second movement finally has a melody. It is a pretty little movement that could be something Mozart wrote contrasting highly from the previous movement. The third movement is a Minuet but it is a somber one in minor and in ABA. At the very end we get something happy to pick us up again in the Trio back to major. The fourth movement is probably the centerpiece here. Here we have the first Sturm und Drang movement from the master of Storm and Stress. Beethoven uses an odd variation of the sonata form with themes that really have nothing to do with the main theme. Beethoven also uses repetition to the point where it becomes irritating and then changes. Beethoven the first minimalist... HA! Far from but we can always joke. When the piece is broken down like we did it in class or when you do it on your own while listening it is absolutely amazing how all the the puzzle pieces come together. I keep on thinking of Hegelian Dialect and the comparison to the Sonata (though still questioning that one) or even to Beethoven himself and how in the end specificity is just abstraction and the reverse. Very interesting...
Pretty much everything from the last list...
Ives, Janacek, and Scriabin basically on repeat while writing/analyzing!
Sigur Ros - Takk, ( ), Agaetis Byrjun
Beethoven - Piano Sonata No.1
Orchestra Pieces etc...
On Monday we were joined by Jonathan Cohen, distinguished professor of philosophy, to talk about the connection between Beethoven and the philosophy of the time and its effect on the composer. One of the first statements Cohen made was that Beethoven possibly misunderstood philosophy. Beethoven was a student of philosophy, he studied it when he went to Bonn university. There is a certain mystique about Beethoven, a great mind with revolutionary ideas, and music. But as I read more about his life, about his emotions, troubles, general living situation I feel as if Beethoven is becoming more humanized to my perspective. Society always throws some sort of greatness onto celebrities or people who stand out of the crowd. Who couldn't over exaggerate the writer of the great nine symphonies. Much like any composer or person, the more one gains knowledge of them the more real they become.
Cohen began with the major Enlightenment thinkers to set the stage and the later connections. Hegel came first with the idea he stole from Schelling of Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis. With the thesis an idea is presented or thought or whatever. Then at one point we will go against this thought to have the antithesis. I will get to the musical connection in a second but first I would like to talk a little about the idea of This Here Now. All three are different and were thought to be very specific, through Hegel they became abstract. This Here Now is basically being in the moment completely where specificity becomes abstraction and vise versa. This is basically what the synthesis is. It hit me in class that basically this process can be placed on anything, situations, ideas, anything! It seems like it fits the idea of learning to a T. In my perspective when one learns something they agree with its idea, but then as the brain processes it the idea progresses to the point of disagreement. After some time and full understanding is gained will the person reach the synthesis where both sides are fully understood. Perspective can still be made, but to understand both sides of anything at the same time is true understanding.
And now for the connection! Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis is to Exposition, Development, Recapitulation. At first I wanted to believe this idea as much as possible it seems like the Hegelian Dialect fits the Sonata form perfectly, or does it! Exposition is the thesis the presentation of the main themes to set the rest of the work. Development tends to stray from its counterpart of Antithesis. The Antithesis is the opposite of the thesis something that is diametrically opposed. I do not feel as if the Development is opposed to the Exposition, it has more or less changed, but has changed with connection. The degree of change matters in the key signatures used in the Development. Yes, there has to be modulation, there has to be change in the development, there just can't be two Expositions! However, through modulation we have scale degrees that connect to the new key. Depending on the two keys the relationship can be close or far. Even though there is change in the new key both keys are connected but the scale degrees they both share. Where is the opposition in that!? The Synthesis does work with Recapitulation but it still doesn't embody the true meaning of both ideas. The Recapitulation would have to have a balance of the Exposition and the Development. So, then I pose the question how does this correlation work? For all intents and purposes it does fit the form in ways but strays after the Exposition. Very interesting connection, especially for the time period, but I question it.
Next, we had Kant and his disagreement with Hume. Kant said that Causation is built like a sandwich in-between Apriori and Aposterior. To Hume it was cause the effect and the after effect, to Kant it was the cause effect and after effect are all one process together as one. After this point there was the debate of Freedom vs. Determinism and how causation leaves no room for freedom. I got confused here, I guess with two structured events such as the cause then the effect and the after effect it is so structured that there can't be any freedom involved it is just those events. Having all those processes as one unified process leaves more room for freedom of other things to happen. With that thought I think of the symphonies and how each of them are one one unified concept with many entities within them.
Last class on Wednesday we looked at Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 1. Here Beethoven is in a way Kant-ian by using motifs instead of full themes, transitory themes instead of just a normal theme. In the first movement it is incredible how he skirts normal form. The first theme uses more motifs than true melodies. It dances upwards and doesn't hold a full melody but rather uses foreshorten phrases the entire way through. The second theme is a transitional theme that is chromatic. The second theme is something that would be found in the development, but no Beethoven uses it in the Exposition to create drama and tension at the same time. In this first movement alone some 40 sforzandos are used along with accents off the beat to create a sense of aggression throughout the whole piece which makes the rhythm the main focus. The second movement finally has a melody. It is a pretty little movement that could be something Mozart wrote contrasting highly from the previous movement. The third movement is a Minuet but it is a somber one in minor and in ABA. At the very end we get something happy to pick us up again in the Trio back to major. The fourth movement is probably the centerpiece here. Here we have the first Sturm und Drang movement from the master of Storm and Stress. Beethoven uses an odd variation of the sonata form with themes that really have nothing to do with the main theme. Beethoven also uses repetition to the point where it becomes irritating and then changes. Beethoven the first minimalist... HA! Far from but we can always joke. When the piece is broken down like we did it in class or when you do it on your own while listening it is absolutely amazing how all the the puzzle pieces come together. I keep on thinking of Hegelian Dialect and the comparison to the Sonata (though still questioning that one) or even to Beethoven himself and how in the end specificity is just abstraction and the reverse. Very interesting...
